Sex Differences in Characteristics and Outcomes in Elderly Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Post-hoc Analysis From TOPCAT

Jiaxing Sun, Shi Tai, Yanan Guo, Liang Tang, Hui Yang, Xuping Li, Zhenhua Xing, Liyao Fu, Shenghua Zhou, Jiaxing Sun, Shi Tai, Yanan Guo, Liang Tang, Hui Yang, Xuping Li, Zhenhua Xing, Liyao Fu, Shenghua Zhou

Abstract

Introduction: Although the impact of sex on patient outcomes for heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has been reported, it is still unclear whether this impact is applicable for elderly patients with HFpEF. This study was conducted as a secondary analysis from a large randomized controlled trial-The Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist Trial (TOPCAT)-to evaluate the impact of sex differences on the baseline characteristics and outcomes of HFpEF patients who were older than 70 years. Methods: Baseline characteristic of elderly patients were compared between men and women. Primary outcomes were cardiovascular (CV) mortality and HF-related hospitalization, whereas secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization. Cox regression models were used to determine the effect of sex differences on patient outcomes. Results: A total of 1,619 patients were included in the study: 898 (55.5%) women and 721 (44.5%) men. Age was similar between women and men. Women had fewer comorbidities but worse cardiac function than men. The rate of primary outcomes was lower in women than in men (18.4 vs. 27.5%; p < 0.001), including rate of CV mortality (8.9 vs. 14.8%; p < 0.001) and HF-related hospitalization (13.4 vs. 18.2%; p = 0.008). All-cause mortality was also lower in women than in men (15.6 vs. 25.4%; p < 0.001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, Cox regression analysis showed that female sex was a protective factor for CV mortality [hazard ratio (HR): 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40-0.73], HF-related hospitalization (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55-0.93), and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.47-0.75). Although spironolactone significantly reduced the rate of all-cause mortality in women even after adjusting for baseline characteristics (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028), no significant multivariate association was noted between sex and treatment effects (p = 0.190). Conclusion: Among elderly patients with HFpEF, women had worse cardiac function but better survival and lower HF-related hospitalization rate than men. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT00094302 (TOPCAT). Registered October 15, 2004, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00094302.

Keywords: HF-related hospitalization; HFpEF; baseline characteristics; elderly patients; mortality; sex differences.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2021 Sun, Tai, Guo, Tang, Yang, Li, Xing, Fu and Zhou.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Kaplana–Meier survival curves for primary outcomes and components stratified by sex according to treatment. There was a significant association between sex and the primary outcome, CV mortality in either placebo arm or spironolactone arm. Women had a significantly lower rate of all the primary outcomes in all patients. (A–C) Primary outcome in placebo arm, spironolactone arm, all patients; (D–F) CV mortality in placebo arm, spironolactone arm, all patients; (G–I) HF-related hospitalization in placebo arm, spironolactone arm, all patients. CV, cardiovascular diseases; HF, heart failure; HR, hazard ratio.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplana–Meier survival curves for secondary outcomes and components stratified by sex according to treatment. Women were associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of all-cause mortality in the placebo arm, spironolactone arm, and all patients. No significant result was observed for all-cause hospitalization. (A–C) All-cause mortality in placebo arm, spironolactone arm, all patients; (D–F) All-cause hospitalization in placebo arm, spironolactone arm, all patients.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Multivariate hazard ratios for primary and secondary outcomes according to treatment arm and stratified by sex. #p < 0.05, ##p < <0.01, ###p < 0.001. ACM, all-cause mortality; CVH, cardiovascular hospitalization; CVM, cardiovascular mortality; HFH, heart failure hospitalization; ACH, all-cause hospitalization.

References

    1. Dunlay SM, Roger VL, Redfield MM. Epidemiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Nat Rev Cardiol. (2017) 14:591–602. 10.1038/nrcardio.2017.65
    1. Tromp J, MacDonald MR, Tay WT, Teng TK, Hung CL, Narasimhan C, et al. . Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in the young. Circulation. (2018) 138:2763–73. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034720
    1. Lam CSP, Arnott C, Beale AL, Chandramouli C, Hilfiker-Kleiner D, Kaye DM, et al. . Sex differences in heart failure. Eur Heart J. (2019) 40:3859–68c. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz835
    1. Savarese G, D'Amario D. Sex differences in heart failure. Adv Exp Med Biol. (2018) 1065:529–44. 10.1007/978-3-319-77932-4_32
    1. López-Vilella R, Marqués-Sulé E, Laymito Quispe RDP, Sánchez-Lázaro I, Donoso Trenado V, Martínez Dolz L, et al. . The female sex confers different prognosis in heart failure: same mortality but more readmissions. Cardiovasc Med. (2021) 8:618398. 10.3389/fcvm.2021.618398
    1. Gomez-Soto FM, Andrey JL, Garcia-Egido AA, Escobar MA, Romero SP, Garcia-Arjona R, et al. . Incidence and mortality of heart failure: a community-based study. Int J Cardiol. (2011) 151:40–5. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2010.04.055
    1. Brouwers FP, de Boer RA, van der Harst P, Voors AA, Gansevoort RT, Bakker SJ, et al. . Incidence and epidemiology of new onset heart failure with preserved vs. reduced ejection fraction in a community-based cohort: 11-year follow-up of PREVEND. Eur Heart J. (2013) 34:1424–31. 10.1093/eurheartj/eht066
    1. Lam CS, Carson PE, Anand IS, Rector TS, Kuskowski M, Komajda M. Sex differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes in elderly patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: the irbesartan in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (I-PRESERVE) trial. Circ Heart Fail. (2012) 5:571–8. 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.112.970061
    1. Pitt B, Pfeffer MA, Assmann SF, Boineau R, Anand IS, Claggett B. Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. (2014) 370:1383–92. 10.1056/NEJMoa1313731
    1. Dewan P, Rorth R, Raparelli V, Campbell RT, Shen L, Jhund PS, et al. . Sex-related differences in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circ Heart Fail. (2019) 12:e006539. 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.006539
    1. Desai AS, Lewis EF, Li R, Solomon SD, Assmann SF, Boineau R, et al. . Rationale and design of the treatment of preserved cardiac function heart failure with an aldosterone antagonist trial: a randomized, controlled study of spironolactone in patients with symptomatic heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. Am Heart J. (2011) 162:966–72.e10. 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.09.007
    1. Vidán MT, Blaya-Novakova V, Sánchez E, Ortiz J, Serra-Rexach JA, Bueno H. Prevalence and prognostic impact of frailty and its components in non-dependent elderly patients with heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. (2016) 18:869–75. 10.1002/ejhf.518
    1. Gironés R. Desire for information in the elderly: interactions with patients, family, and physicians. J Cancer Educ. (2015) 30:766–73. 10.1007/s13187-014-0760-5
    1. Chen J, Dharmarajan K, Wang Y, Krumholz HM. National trends in heart failure hospital stay rates, 2001 to 2009. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2013) 61:1078–88. 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.11.057
    1. Mozaffarian D, Benjamin EJ, Go AS, Arnett DK, Blaha MJ, Cushman M, et al. . heart disease and stroke statistics-2016 update: a report from the American heart association. Circulation. (2016) 133:e38–360. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000350
    1. Campbell RT, Jhund PS, Castagno D, Hawkins NM, Petrie MC, McMurray JJ. What have we learned about patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction from DIG-PEF, CHARM-preserved, and I-PRESERVE? J Am Coll Cardiol. (2012) 60:2349–56. 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.04.064
    1. Merrill M, Sweitzer NK, Lindenfeld J, Kao DP. Sex Differences in outcomes and responses to spironolactone in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a secondary analysis of TOPCAT trial. JACC Heart failure. (2019) 7:228–38. 10.1016/j.jchf.2019.01.003
    1. Pepine CJ, Merz CNB, El Hajj S, Ferdinand KC, Hamilton MA, Lindley KJ, et al. . Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: similarities and differences between women and men. Int J Cardiol. (2020) 304:101–8. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.01.003
    1. Green CP, Porter CB, Bresnahan DR, Spertus JA. Development and evaluation of the Kansas city cardiomyopathy questionnaire: a new health status measure for heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2000) 35:1245–55. 10.1016/S0735-1097(00)00531-3
    1. Gori M, Lam CS, Gupta DK, Santos AB, Cheng S, Shah AM, et al. . Sex-specific cardiovascular structure and function in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. (2014) 16:535–42. 10.1002/ejhf.67
    1. Faxén UL, Hage C, Donal E, Daubert JC, Linde C, Lund LH. Patient reported outcome in HFpEF: sex-specific differences in quality of life and association with outcome. Int J Cardiol. (2018) 267:128–32. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.04.102
    1. Beale AL, Nanayakkara S, Segan L, Mariani JA, Maeder MT, van Empel V, et al. . Sex Differences in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction pathophysiology: a detailed invasive hemodynamic and echocardiographic analysis. JACC Heart failure. (2019) 7:239–49. 10.1016/j.jchf.2019.01.004
    1. Redfield MM, Rodeheffer RJ, Jacobsen SJ, Mahoney DW, Bailey KR, Burnett JC, Jr. Plasma brain natriuretic peptide concentration: impact of age and gender. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2002) 40:976–82. 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)02059-4
    1. Harada E, Mizuno Y, Kugimiya F, Shono M, Maeda H, Yano N, et al. . Sex differences in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction reflected by B-type natriuretic peptide level. Am J Med Sci. (2018) 356:335–43. 10.1016/j.amjms.2018.06.009
    1. Israili ZH. Clinical pharmacokinetics of angiotensin II (AT1) receptor blockers in hypertension. J Hum Hypertens. (2000) 14(Suppl.1):S73–86. 10.1038/sj.jhh.1000991
    1. Soldin OP, Mattison DR. Sex differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Clin Pharmacokinet. (2009) 48:143–57. 10.2165/00003088-200948030-00001
    1. Jochmann N, Stangl K, Garbe E, Baumann G, Stangl V. Female-specific aspects in the pharmacotherapy of chronic cardiovascular diseases. Eur Heart J. (2005) 26:1585–95. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi397
    1. Eugene AR. Gender based dosing of metoprolol in the elderly using population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations. Int J Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. (2016) 5:209–15. 10.19070/2167-910X-1600035
    1. Beale AL, Nanayakkara S, Kaye DM. Impact of sex on ventricular-vascular stiffness and long-term outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: TOPCAT trial substudy. J Am Heart Assoc. (2019) 8:e012190. 10.1161/JAHA.119.012190
    1. Ferreira JP, Rossello X, Eschalier R, McMurray JJV, Pocock S, Girerd N, et al. . MRAs in elderly hf patients: individual patient-data meta-analysis of RALES, EMPAHSIS-HF, and TOPCAT. JACC Heart Fail. (2019) 7:1012–21. 10.1016/j.jchf.2019.08.017
    1. Pfeffer MA, Claggett B, Assmann SF, Boineau R, Anand IS, Clausell N. Regional variation in patients and outcomes in the treatment of preserved cardiac function heart failure with an aldosterone antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. Circulation. (2015) 131:34–42. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.013255
    1. Bristow MR, Enciso JS, Gersh BJ, Grady C, Rice MM, Singh S, et al. . Detection and management of geographic disparities in the topcat trial: lessons learned and derivative recommendations. JACC Basic Transl Sci. (2016) 1:180–9. 10.1016/j.jacbts.2016.03.001

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다