Prognostic impact of Clinical Frailty Scale in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Usefulness of Clinical Frailty Scale for Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment of Older Heart Failure Patients

Background: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is a multidisciplinary diagnostic process to identify the physical, psychological, and social functions of patients with frailty. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) might aid in effectively identifying older patients with heart failure (HF) and frailty who would then reap maximum benefits from the CGA. Methods and Results: A single-centre prospective cohort study that enrolled consecutive hospitalised patients (age ≥75 years) with HF was conducted. The Barthel index (BI), Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and the COntrolling NUTritional (CONUT) for CGA was used. Among 190 enrolled patients (mean age, 85.4 years; 47.9% male), all-cause mortality (primary endpoint) occurred in 45 patients and HF-related rehospitalization (secondary endpoint) in 59 patients within 1 year. The cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the high CFS group (low 6.3%, high 30.5%, P<0.001). However, the cumulative incidence of HF-related rehospitalization was not significantly different (low 26.3%, high 32.0%, P=0.304). The multivariable analysis revealed that the CFS group was independently associated with the risk of all-cause mortality. CFS showed a strong correlation with the BI and moderate correlation with the MMSE. Conclusions: The CFS was associated with all-cause mortality within 1 year and was correlated with frailty domains of CGA.

Association between natriuretic peptides and C-reactive protein with frailty in heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) and frailty are accompanied by a bidirectional relationship, sharing common risk factors including elevated levels of natriuretic peptides and inflammation. The aim of this study was to compare biomarkers associated with poor clinical outcomes, that is, plasma brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), N-terminal-pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and C-reactive protein (CRP) in patients with HF and frailty vs. patients with HF without frailty.

METHODS

From inception until July 2023, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library a systematic literature search was conducted. To evaluate whether frailty is linked with greater levels of BNP, NT-proBNP, and CRP, a meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effects (CRD42023446607).

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Patients with HF and frailty displayed significantly higher levels of BNP (k = 11; SMD: 0.53, 95%CI 0.30-0.76, I2 = 86%, P < 0.01), NT-proBNP (k = 23; SMD: 0.33, 95%CI 0.25-0.40, I2 = 72%, P < 0.01), and CRP (k = 8; SMD: 0.30, 95%CI 0.12-0.48, I2 = 62%, P < 0.01) vs. patients with HF without frailty. Using meta-regression, body mass index (BMI) and age were deemed potential moderators of these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty in HF is linked to increased concentrations of BNP, NT-proBNP, and CRP, which have been epidemiologically associated with adverse outcomes. The increased risk of NYHA III/IV classification further emphasizes the clinical impact of frailty in this population.

Pathophysiological insights into machine learning-based subphenotypes of acute heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

OBJECTIVE

The heterogeneous pathophysiology of the diverse heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) phenotypes needs to be examined. We aim to assess differences in the biomarkers among the phenotypes of HFpEF and investigate its multifactorial pathophysiology.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of the PURSUIT-HFpEF Study (N=1231), an ongoing, prospective, multicentre observational study of acute decompensated HFpEF. In this registry, there is a predefined subcohort in which we perform multibiomarker tests (N=212). We applied the previously established machine learning-based clustering model to the subcohort with biomarker measurements to classify them into four phenotypes: phenotype 1 (n=69), phenotype 2 (n=49), phenotype 3 (n=41) and phenotype 4 (n=53). Biomarker characteristics in each phenotype were evaluated.

RESULTS

Phenotype 1 presented the lowest value of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitive C reactive protein, tumour necrosis factor-α, growth differentiation factor (GDF)-15, troponin T and cystatin C, whereas phenotype 2, which is characterised by hypertension and cardiac hypertrophy, showed the highest value of these markers. Phenotype 3 showed the second highest value of GDF-15 and cystatin C. Phenotype 4 presented a low NT-proBNP value and a relatively high GDF-15.

CONCLUSIONS

Distinctive characteristics of biomarkers in HFpEF phenotypes would indicate differential underlying mechanisms to be elucidated. The contribution of inflammation to the pathogenesis varied considerably among different HFpEF phenotypes. Systemic inflammation substantially contributes to the pathophysiology of the classic HFpEF phenotype with cardiac hypertrophy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN-CTR ID: UMIN000021831.

β-blockers may be detrimental in frail patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of β-blocker in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains to be determined. We aimed to clarify the association between the use of β-blocker and prognosis according to the status of frailty.

METHODS

We compared prognosis between HFpEF patients with and without β-blockers stratified with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), using data from the PURSUIT-HFpEF registry (UMIN000021831).

RESULTS

Among 1159 patients enrolled in the analysis (median age, 81.4 years; male, 44.7%), 580 patients were CFS ≤ 3, while 579 were CFS ≥ 4. Use of β-blockers was associated with a worse composite endpoint of all-cause death and heart failure readmission in patients with CFS ≥ 4 (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.43, 95% CI 1.10-1.85, p = 0.007), but was not significantly associated with this endpoint in those with CFS ≤ 3 (adjusted HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71-1.26, p = 0.719) in multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. These results were confirmed in a propensity-matched analysis (HR in those with CFS ≥ 4: 1.42, 95% CI 1.05-1.90, p = 0.020; that in those with CFS ≤ 3: 0.83, 95% CI 0.60-1.14, p = 0.249), and in an analysis in which patients were divided into CFS ≤ 4 and CFS ≥ 5.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of β-blockers was significantly associated with worse prognosis specifically in patients with HFpEF and high CFS, but not in those with low CFS. Use of β-blockers in HFpEF patients with frailty may need careful attention.

Medications for specific phenotypes of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction classified by a machine learning-based clustering model

OBJECTIVE

Our previously established machine learning-based clustering model classified heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) into four distinct phenotypes. Given the heterogeneous pathophysiology of HFpEF, specific medications may have favourable effects in specific phenotypes of HFpEF. We aimed to assess effectiveness of medications on clinical outcomes of the four phenotypes using a real-world HFpEF registry dataset.

METHODS

This study is a posthoc analysis of the PURSUIT-HFpEF registry, a prospective, multicentre, observational study. We evaluated the clinical effectiveness of the following four types of postdischarge medication in the four different phenotypes: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB), beta blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists (MRA) and statins. The primary endpoint of this study was a composite of all-cause death and heart failure hospitalisation.

RESULTS

Of 1231 patients, 1100 (83 (IQR 77, 87) years, 604 females) were eligible for analysis. Median follow-up duration was 734 (398, 1108) days. The primary endpoint occurred in 528 patients (48.0%). Cox proportional hazard models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting showed the following significant effectiveness of medication on the primary endpoint: MRA for phenotype 2 (weighted HR (wHR) 0.40, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.75, p=0.005); ACEi or ARB for phenotype 3 (wHR 0.66 0.48 to 0.92, p=0.014) and statin therapy for phenotype 3 (wHR 0.43 (0.21 to 0.88), p=0.020). No other medications had significant treatment effects in the four phenotypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning-based clustering may have the potential to identify populations in which specific medications may be effective. This study suggests the effectiveness of MRA, ACEi or ARB and statin for specific phenotypes of HFpEF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000021831.

Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Therapy of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in Japan

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a global health care problem, with diagnostic difficulty, limited treatment options and high morbidity and mortality rates. The prevalence of HFpEF is increasing because of the aging population and the increasing burden of cardiac and metabolic comorbidities, such as systemic hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and obesity. The knowledge base is derived primarily from the United States and Europe, and data from Asian countries, including Japan, remain limited. Given that phenotypic differences may exist between Japanese and Western patients with HFpEF, careful characterization may hold promise to deliver new therapy specific to the Japanese population. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology and diagnosis of and the potential therapies for HFpEF in Japan.

Clinical trajectories and outcomes of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction with normal or indeterminate diastolic function

BACKGROUND

We recently reported that nearly half of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) did not show echocardiographic diastolic dysfunction (DD), but had normal diastolic function (ND) or indeterminate diastolic function (ID). However, the clinical course and outcomes of patients with HFpEF with ND or ID (ND/ID) remain unknown.

METHODS

From the PURSUIT-HFpEF registry, we extracted 289 patients with HFpEF with ND/ID at discharge who had echocardiographic data at 1-year follow-up. Patients were classified according to the status of progression from ND/ID to DD at 1 year. Primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death or HF rehospitalization.

RESULTS

Median age was 81 years, and 138 (47.8%) patients were female. At 1 year, 107 (37%) patients had progressed to DD. The composite endpoint occurred in 90 (31.1%) patients. Compared to patients without progression to DD, those with progression had a significantly higher cumulative rate of the composite endpoint (P < 0.001) and HF rehospitalization (P < 0.001) after discharge and at the 1-year landmark (P = 0.030 and P = 0.001, respectively). Progression to DD was independently associated with the composite endpoint (hazard ratio (HR): 2.014, 95%CI 1.239-3.273, P = 0.005) and HF rehospitalization (HR: 2.362, 95%CI 1.402-3.978) after discharge. Age (odds ratio (OR): 1.043, 95%CI 1.004-1.083, P = 0.031), body mass index (BMI) (OR: 1.110, 95%CI 1.031-1.195, P = 0.006), and albumin (OR: 0.452, 95%CI 0.211-0.969, P = 0.041) were independently associated with progression from ND/ID to DD.

CONCLUSIONS

More than one-third of HFpEF patients with ND/ID progressed to DD at 1 year and had poor outcomes. Age, BMI and albumin were independently associated with this progression.

UMIN-CTR ID

UMIN000021831.

The clinical relevance of quality of life in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are gradually being incorporated into daily practice to assess individual health-related quality of life (QOL). However, despite accumulating evidence of the prognostic utility of heart failure (HF)-specific QOL indices, evidence on the generic QOL score is scarce, especially in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patient data were extracted from the Prospective mUlticenteR obServational stUdy of patIenTs with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (PURSUIT HFpEF) study. EuroQol 5 dimensions 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) data were obtained at discharge to evaluate patients' health-related QOL. The study population (n = 864) was divided into tertiles based on their EQ-5D-5L index as follows: low EQ-5D-5L 0.038-0.664 (n = 287), middle EQ-5D-5L 0.665-0.867 (n = 293), and high EQ-5D-5L 0.871-1.000 (n = 284). A total of 206 patients died over a mean follow-up period of 2.0 ± 1.2 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the risk of mortality increased with the tertile of the EQ-5D-5L index (34% vs. 23% vs. 14%, P < 0.001). Cox multivariable analysis revealed that patients with EQ-5D-5L index in the low and middle tertiles had a significantly greater risk of mortality than those with EQ-5D-5L index in the high tertile [low EQ-5D-5L: adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.81 (1.12-2.92), P = 0.002, middle EQ-5D-5L: adjusted HR 1.91 (1.21-3.03), P = 0.006]. Among the dimensions of EQ-5D-5L, mobility (P = 0.014), self-care (P = 0.023) and usual activities (P = 0.008) were significant factors associated with all-cause mortality after multivariable adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

EQ-5D-5L is useful tool for risk stratification in patients with HFpEF.

Zulfiqar Frailty Scale (ZFS): Concordance Study with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS)

Introduction: We designed a new scale for the rapid detection of frailty for use in primary care, referred to as the Zulfiqar Frailty Scale (ZFS). Objective: To evaluate the performance of the “ZFS” tool to screen for frailty as defined in the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) criteria in an ambulatory population of patients at least 75 years old. Method: A prospective study conducted in Alsace, France, for a duration of 6 months that included patients aged 75 and over was judged to be autonomous with an ADL (Activity of Daily Living) > 4/6. Results: In this ambulatory population of 124 patients with an average age of 79 years, the completion time for our scale was less than two minutes, and the staff required no training beforehand. Sensibility was 67%, while specificity was 87%. The positive predictive value was 80%, and the negative predictive value was 77%. The Youden index was 59.8%. In our study, we have a moderate correlation between CFS and ZFS (r = 0.674 with 95%CI = [0.565; 0.760]; p-value < 2.2 × 10−16 < 0.05). The Pearson correlations between these two geriatric scores were all strong and roughly equivalent to each other. The kappa of Cohen (k) = 0.46 (Unweighted), moderate concordance between the ZFS and CFS scales according to Fleiss classification. Conclusion: The “ZFS” tool makes it possible to screen for frailty with a high level of specificity and positive/negative predictive value.

Change in Nutritional Status during Hospitalization and Prognosis in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

The impact of changes in nutritional status during hospitalization on prognosis in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains unknown. We examined the association between changes in the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and prognosis during hospitalization in patients with HFpEF stratified by nutritional status on admission. Nutritional status did and did not worsen in 348 and 349 of 697 patients with high GNRI on admission, and in 142 and 143 of 285 patients with low GNRI on admission, respectively. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed no difference in risk of the composite endpoint, all-cause death, or heart failure admission between patients with high GNRI on admission whose nutritional status did and did not worsen. In contrast, patients with low GNRI on admission whose nutritional status did not worsen had a significantly lower risk of the composite endpoint and all-cause death than those who did. Multivariable analysis revealed that worsening nutritional status was independently associated with a higher risk of the composite endpoint and all-cause mortality in patients with low GNRI on admission. Changes in nutritional status during hospitalization were thus associated with prognosis in patients with malnutrition on admission, but not in patients without malnutrition among those with HFpEF.

The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) employment in the frailty assessment of patients suffering from Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs): A systematic review

Background

The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a well-established tool that has been widely employed to assess patients' frailty status and to predict clinical outcomes in the acute phase of a disease, but more information is needed to define the implications that this tool have when dealing with Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs).

Methods

An electronic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases to identify studies employing the CFS to assess frailty in patients with NCDs.

Findings

After database searching, article suitability evaluation, and studies' quality assessment, 43 studies were included in the systematic review. Researches were conducted mostly in Japan (37.5%), and half of the studies were focused on cardiovascular diseases (46.42%), followed by cancer (25.00%), and diabetes (10.71%). Simplicity (39.29%), efficacy (37.5%), and rapidity (16.07%) were the CFS characteristics mostly appreciated by the authors of the studies. The CFS-related results indicated that its scores were associated with patients' clinical outcomes (33.92%), with the presence of the disease (12.5%) and, with clinical decision making (10.71%). Furthermore, CFS resulted as a predictor of life expectancy in 23 studies (41.07%), clinical outcomes in 12 studies (21.43%), and hospital admissions/readmissions in 6 studies (10.71%).

Discussion

CFS was found to be a well-established and useful tool to assess frailty in NCDs, too. It resulted to be related to the most important disease-related clinical characteristics and, thus, it should be always considered as an important step in the multidisciplinary evaluation of frail and chronic patients.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp? PROSPERO 2021, ID: CRD42021224214.

Frailty as Tested by the Clinical Frailty Scale Is a Risk Factor for Hepatorenal Syndrome in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is common in patients with cirrhosis and increases the vulnerability to internal and external stressors. This study aimed to investigate the impact of frailty, as defined by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), on the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS-AKI) in hospitalized patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We analyzed data of 201 nonelectively hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and without higher-grade chronic kidney disease. Patient characteristics were captured within the first 24 hours of hospital admission, and frailty was assessed using the CFS. Patients were followed for the development of AKI and/or HRS-AKI during the hospital stay.

RESULTS

In the total cohort, median CFS was 3 (interquartile range 3-4), and 34 (16.9%) patients were frail (CFS >4). During the hospital stay, 110 (54.7%) and 49 (24.3%) patients developed AKI or HRS-AKI, respectively. Patients with AKI or HRS-AKI had a significantly higher CFS than patients without kidney injury (P < 0.001 each). In multivariable analyses, a higher CFS was independently associated with the development of AKI (odds ratio [OR] 1.467, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.065-2.021) in the total cohort and HRS-AKI (OR 1.809, 95% CI 1.263-2.591) in the subcohort of patients with a history of ascites. In addition, there was a strong association between frailty (OR 3.717, 95% CI 1.456-9.491) and HRS-AKI.

DISCUSSION

Frailty in patients with cirrhosis is associated with AKI and HRS-AKI. In this context, CFS appears to be a reliable tool to identify patients at high risk for developing AKI or HRS-AKI on hospital admission.

Association between prognosis and the use of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors and/or angiotensin II receptor blockers in frail patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Aims

The effectiveness of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE‐I) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) has not been demonstrated in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We recently reported significant interaction between the use of ACE‐I and/or ARB (ACE‐I/ARB) and frailty on prognosis in patients with HFpEF. In the present study, we examined the association between ACE‐I/ARB and prognosis in patients with HFpEF stratified by the presence or absence of frailty.

Methods and results

We examined the association between the use of ACE‐I/ARB and prognosis according to the presence [Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) ≥ 5] or absence (CFS ≤ 4) of frailty in patients with HFpEF in a post hoc analysis of registry data. Primary endpoint was the composite of all‐cause mortality and heart failure admission. Secondary endpoints were all‐cause mortality and heart failure admission. Of 1059 patients, median age was 83 years and 45% were male. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that the risk of composite endpoint (log‐rank P = 0.001) and all‐cause death (log‐rank P = 0.005) in patients with ACE‐I/ARB was lower in those with CFS ≥ 5, but similar between patients with and without ACE‐I/ARB in patients with CFS ≤ 4 (composite endpoint: log‐rank P = 0.830; all‐cause death: log‐rank P = 0.192). In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, use of ACE‐I/ARB was significantly associated with lower risk of the composite endpoint [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.33–0.83, P = 0.005] and heart failure admission (HR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.25–0.83, P = 0.010) in patients with CFS ≥ 5, but not in patients with CFS ≤ 4 (composite endpoint: HR = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.99–2.02, P = 0.059; heart failure admission: HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 0.94–2.18, P = 0.091). The association between ACE‐I or ARB and prognosis did not significantly differ by CFS (CFS ≤ 4: log‐rank P = 0.562; CFS ≥ 5: log‐rank P = 0.100, for with ACE‐I vs. ARB, respectively). Adjusted HRs for CFS 1–4 were higher than 1.0 but were <1.0 at CFS 5.

Conclusions

In patients with HFpEF, use of ACE‐I/ARB was associated with better prognosis in patients with frailty as assessed with the CFS, but not in those without frailty.

Predictors of 1-year outcome in very old patients managed in a Heart Failure Unit after an acute decompensation

PURPOSE

Consensus exits about the clinical benefits of an early referral to multidisciplinary Heart Failure Unit-HFU for old frail patients with HF. Nevertheless, few data are present regarding the prognosis and the predictors of outcome in oldest-old patients managed in this clinical setting. The aim of present study is to identify predictors of 1-year all-cause mortality in very old patients enrolled in our multidisciplinary HFU after an episode of acute decompensated HF.

METHODS

This study is a retro-prospective, single-center cohort analysis of patients managed in our multidisciplinary HFU. Inclusion criterion was diagnosis of HF according to ESC guidelines and age ≥ 85 years, while no exclusion criteria were pre-defined. Baseline clinical and comprehensive geriatric evaluations were recorded during the first visit and follow-up visits were repeated according to our standardized timetable protocol. Primary end-point was 1-year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

We enrolled 75 patients aged 89.2 ± 2.8 years; 39 (52.0%) were females. During 1-year follow-up, seventeen patients (22.7%) died. Residual congestion with higher level (> 4) of EVEREST score (HR 1.24: 95% CI 1.04-1.47) and living alone (HR 3.34: 95% CI 1.16-9.64) resulted the two independent predictors of 1-year all-cause mortality at the multivariate Cox regression model. Finally, patients living alone and with an EVEREST score > 4 experienced a worse prognosis as clearly described by a steeper descendent Kaplan-Meier curve.

CONCLUSION

In a very old population of patients after an acute decompensated HF, residual congestion and social isolation as living alone identify those with high risk of 1-year death.

A Simple Risk Score Based on Routine Clinical Parameters Can Predict Frailty in Hospitalized Heart Failure Patients

Frailty syndrome (FS) has recently attracted attention as one of the major predictors of heart failure (HF) course severity. We aimed to develop a simple tool for predicting frailty in hospitalized HF patients using routine clinical parameters. A total of 153 hospitalized patients diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) were included in the study. Presence of FS was assessed with the SHARE-FI questionnaire. Clinical and biochemical parameters were collected. Using ROC curves and logistic regression analysis, a model predicting FS presence was developed and tested. Proposed model includes five variables with following cut-off values (1 point for each variable): age > 50 years, systolic pressure on admission < 110 mmHg, total cholesterol < 4.85 mmol/L, bilirubin ≥ 15.5 mmol/L, and alanine aminotransferase ≤ 34 U/L. Receiving 5 points was considered a high risk of FS with positive and negative predictive values (NPV), 83% and 72%, respectively, and specificity of 97%. Awarding 2 points or less ruled out FS in the studied group with negative predictive value 94%. The presented novel, simple score predicts FS in HFrEF patients with routine clinical parameters and has good positive and negative predictive values.

A year in heart failure: an update of recent findings

Major changes have occurred in these last years in heart failure (HF) management. Landmark trials and the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF have established four classes of drugs for treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction: angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors or an angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor, beta‐blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium‐glucose co‐transporter 2 inhibitors, namely, dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. These drugs consistently showed benefits on mortality, HF hospitalizations, and quality of life. Correction of iron deficiency is indicated to improve symptoms and reduce HF hospitalizations. AFFIRM‐AHF showed 26% reduction in total HF hospitalizations with ferric carboxymaltose vs. placebo in patients hospitalized for acute HF (P = 0.013). The guanylate cyclase activator vericiguat and the myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil improved outcomes in randomized placebo‐controlled trials, and vericiguat is now approved for clinical practice. Treatment of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was a major unmet clinical need until this year when the results of EMPEROR‐Preserved (EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic HFpEF) were issued. Compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced by 21% (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.90; P < 0.001), the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Advances in the treatment of specific phenotypes of HF, including atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathies, cardiac amyloidosis, and cancer‐related HF, also occurred. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic still plays a major role in HF epidemiology and management. All these aspects are highlighted in this review.

Prognostic impact of Clinical Frailty Scale in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Aims

Frailty is associated with prognosis of cardiovascular diseases. However, the significance of frailty in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains to be elucidated. The purpose of this study was to examine the prognostic significance of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in real‐world patients with HFpEF using data from a prospective multicentre observational study of patients with HFpEF (PURSUIT‐HFpEF study).

Method and Results

We classified 842 patients with HFpEF enrolled in the PURSUIT‐HFpEF study into two groups using CFS. The registry enrolled patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of decompensated heart failure. Median age was 82 [interquartile range: 77, 87], and 45% of the patients were male. Of 842 patients, 406 were classified as high CFS (CFS ≥ 4, 48%) and 436 as low CFS (CFS ≤ 3, 52%). The primary endpoint was the composite of all‐cause mortality and heart failure admission. Secondary endpoints were all‐cause mortality and heart failure admission. Patients with high CFS were older (85 vs. 79 years, P < 0.001), predominantly female (65% vs. 46%, P < 0.001) and more likely to have New York Heart Association (NYHA) ≥ 2 (75% vs. 53%, P < 0.001) and a higher level of NT‐proBNP (1360 vs 838 pg/mL, P < 0.001) than those with low CFS. Patients with high CFS had a significantly greater risk of composite endpoint (Kaplan–Meier estimated 1‐year event rate 39% vs. 23%, log‐rank P < 0.001), all‐cause mortality (Kaplan–Meier estimated 1‐year event rate 17% vs. 7%, log‐rank P < 0.001) and heart failure admission (Kaplan–Meier estimated 1‐year event rate 28% vs. 19%, log‐rank P = 0.002) than those with low CFS. Multivariable Cox regression analysis revealed that high CFS was significantly associated with composite endpoint (adjusted HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.35–2.73, P < 0.001), all‐cause mortality (adjusted HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.39–4.66, P = 0.003) and heart failure admission (adjusted HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.03–2.32, P = 0.035) even after adjustment for covariates. Moreover, change in CFS grade was also significantly associated with composite endpoint (adjusted HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11–1.36, P < 0.001), all‐cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.13–1.55, P = 0.001) and heart failure admission (adjusted HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02–1.30, P = 0.021).

Conclusions

Frailty assessed by the CFS was associated with poor prognosis in patients with HFpEF.