PROVIDE-HF primary results: Patient-Reported Outcomes inVestigation following Initiation of Drug therapy with Entresto (sacubitril/valsartan) in heart failure

We compared the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 with enalapril in patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. In previous studies, enalapril improved survival in such patients. In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 8442 patients with class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either LCZ696 (at a dose of 200 mg twice daily) or enalapril (at a dose of 10 mg twice daily), in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial was designed to detect a difference in the rates of death from cardiovascular causes. The trial was stopped early, according to prespecified rules, after a median follow-up of 27 months, because the boundary for an overwhelming benefit with LCZ696 had been crossed. At the time of study closure, the primary outcome had occurred in 914 patients (21.8%) in the LCZ696 group and 1117 patients (26.5%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio in the LCZ696 group, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87; P<0.001). A total of 711 patients (17.0%) receiving LCZ696 and 835 patients (19.8%) receiving enalapril died (hazard ratio for death from any cause, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.93; P<0.001); of these patients, 558 (13.3%) and 693 (16.5%), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.89; P<0.001). As compared with enalapril, LCZ696 also reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure by 21% (P<0.001) and decreased the symptoms and physical limitations of heart failure (P=0.001). The LCZ696 group had higher proportions of patients with hypotension and nonserious angioedema but lower proportions with renal impairment, hyperkalemia, and cough than the enalapril group. LCZ696 was superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of death and of hospitalization for heart failure. (Funded by Novartis; PARADIGM-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01035255.).

Acute decompensated heart failure accounts for more than 1 million hospitalizations in the United States annually. Whether the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy is safe and effective among patients who are hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure is unknown.

To create a valid, sensitive, disease-specific health status measure for patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). Quantifying health status is becoming increasingly important for CHF. The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) is a new, self-administered, 23-item questionnaire that quantifies physical limitations, symptoms, self-efficacy, social interference and quality of life. To establish the performance characteristics of the KCCQ, two distinct patient cohorts were recruited: 70 stable and 59 decompensated CHF patients with ejection fractions of <40. Upon entry into the study, patients were administered the KCCQ, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire and the Short Form-36 (SF-36). Questionnaires were repeated three months later. Convergent validity of each KCCQ domain was documented by comparison with available criterion standards (r = 0.46 to 0.74; p < 0.001 for all). Among those with stable CHF who remained stable by predefined criteria (n = 39), minimal changes in KCCQ domains were detected over three months of observation (mean change = 0.8 to 4.0 points, p = NS for all). In contrast, large changes in score were observed among patients whose decompensated CHF improved three months later (n = 39; mean change = 15.4 to 40.4 points, p < 0.01 for all). The sensitivity of the KCCQwas substantially greater than that of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure and the SF-36 questionnaires. The KCCQis a valid, reliable and responsive health status measure for patients with CHF and may serve as a clinically meaningful outcome in cardiovascular research, patient management and quality assessment.