Table 1

Effect of kidney function on the efficacy of established treatments for chronic HFrEF

Trial (ref)Intervention (sample size)Main eligibility criteriaFollow-up (years)Primary outcomeOverall treatment effect (95% CI)CKD subgroups (eGFR, mL/min/ 1.73 m2)Treatment effect in CKDP for treatment × CKD interaction
ACEi
SOLVD-TREATMENT [31]Enalapril versus placebo (n = 2569)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA I–IV; creatinine <177 μmol/L3.5All-cause mortality0.84 (0.74–0.95)≥60 (n = 1466)0.82 (0.69–0.98)0.62
<60 (n = 1036)0.88 (0.73–1.06)
β-blocker
CIBIS-II [32]Bisoprolol versus placebo (n = 2647)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine <300 μmol/L1.3All-cause mortality0.66 (0.54–0.81)<45 (n = 450)0.71 (0.48–1.05)0.81
≥45 <60 (n = 669)0.69 (0.46–1.04)
≥60 <75 (n = 640)0.53 (0.34–0.82)
>75 (n = 863)0.64 (0.42–0.99)
MERIT-HF [33, 34]Metoprolol versus placebo (n = 3991)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; ‘significant’ kidney disease1All-cause mortality0.66 (0.53–0.81)<45 (n = 493)0.41 (0.25–0.68)0.095
≥45–≤60 (n = 976)0.68 (0.45–1.02)
>60 (n = 2496)0.71 (0.54–0.95)
SENIORS [35, 36]Nebivolol versus placebo (n = 2128)LVEF <35% or hospitilization for decompensated HF; NYHA II–IV; creatinine <250 μmol/L1.75All-cause mortality or CV hospital admission0.86 (0.74–0.99)<55.5 (n = 704)0.84 (0.67–1.07)0.442
55.5–72.8 (n = 704)0.79 (0.60–1.04)
>72.8 (n = 704)0.86 (0.65–1.14)
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist
RALES [37, 38]Spironolactone versus placebo (n = 1663)LVEF <35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine ≤221 μmol/L2All-cause mortality0.70 (0.60–0.82)<60 (n = 792)0.68 (0.56–0.84)N/A
≥60 (n = 866)0.71 (0.57–0.90)
EMPHASIS-HF [39]Eplerenone versus placebo (n = 2737)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA II; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m21.75CV death or hospitalization for HF0.63 (0.54–0.74)<60 (n = 912)N/A0.50
≥60 (n = 1821)N/A
Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor
PARADIGM-HF [40]Sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril (n = 8442)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m22.25CV death or hospitalization for HF0.80 (0.73–0.87)<60 (n = 3061)N/A0.91
≥60 (n = 5338)N/A
ICD
MADIT II [41]Prophylactic ICD versus conventional medical therapy (n = 1232)LVEF ≤30%; NYHA III; eGFR ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m22.67All-cause mortality0.69 (0.51–0.93)<35 (n = 80)1.09 (0.49–2.43)0.29
35–59 (n = 387)0.74 (0.48–1.15)
≥60 (n = 756)0.66 (0.43–1.02)
CRT
CARE-HF [42]CRT versus conventional medical therapy (n = 813)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV;1.5Death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for a major CV event0.63 (0.51–0.77)<60 (n = 369)0.67 (0.50–0.89)N/A
≥60 (n = 370)0.57 (0.40–0.80)
Trial (ref)Intervention (sample size)Main eligibility criteriaFollow-up (years)Primary outcomeOverall treatment effect (95% CI)CKD subgroups (eGFR, mL/min/ 1.73 m2)Treatment effect in CKDP for treatment × CKD interaction
ACEi
SOLVD-TREATMENT [31]Enalapril versus placebo (n = 2569)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA I–IV; creatinine <177 μmol/L3.5All-cause mortality0.84 (0.74–0.95)≥60 (n = 1466)0.82 (0.69–0.98)0.62
<60 (n = 1036)0.88 (0.73–1.06)
β-blocker
CIBIS-II [32]Bisoprolol versus placebo (n = 2647)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine <300 μmol/L1.3All-cause mortality0.66 (0.54–0.81)<45 (n = 450)0.71 (0.48–1.05)0.81
≥45 <60 (n = 669)0.69 (0.46–1.04)
≥60 <75 (n = 640)0.53 (0.34–0.82)
>75 (n = 863)0.64 (0.42–0.99)
MERIT-HF [33, 34]Metoprolol versus placebo (n = 3991)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; ‘significant’ kidney disease1All-cause mortality0.66 (0.53–0.81)<45 (n = 493)0.41 (0.25–0.68)0.095
≥45–≤60 (n = 976)0.68 (0.45–1.02)
>60 (n = 2496)0.71 (0.54–0.95)
SENIORS [35, 36]Nebivolol versus placebo (n = 2128)LVEF <35% or hospitilization for decompensated HF; NYHA II–IV; creatinine <250 μmol/L1.75All-cause mortality or CV hospital admission0.86 (0.74–0.99)<55.5 (n = 704)0.84 (0.67–1.07)0.442
55.5–72.8 (n = 704)0.79 (0.60–1.04)
>72.8 (n = 704)0.86 (0.65–1.14)
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist
RALES [37, 38]Spironolactone versus placebo (n = 1663)LVEF <35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine ≤221 μmol/L2All-cause mortality0.70 (0.60–0.82)<60 (n = 792)0.68 (0.56–0.84)N/A
≥60 (n = 866)0.71 (0.57–0.90)
EMPHASIS-HF [39]Eplerenone versus placebo (n = 2737)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA II; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m21.75CV death or hospitalization for HF0.63 (0.54–0.74)<60 (n = 912)N/A0.50
≥60 (n = 1821)N/A
Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor
PARADIGM-HF [40]Sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril (n = 8442)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m22.25CV death or hospitalization for HF0.80 (0.73–0.87)<60 (n = 3061)N/A0.91
≥60 (n = 5338)N/A
ICD
MADIT II [41]Prophylactic ICD versus conventional medical therapy (n = 1232)LVEF ≤30%; NYHA III; eGFR ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m22.67All-cause mortality0.69 (0.51–0.93)<35 (n = 80)1.09 (0.49–2.43)0.29
35–59 (n = 387)0.74 (0.48–1.15)
≥60 (n = 756)0.66 (0.43–1.02)
CRT
CARE-HF [42]CRT versus conventional medical therapy (n = 813)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV;1.5Death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for a major CV event0.63 (0.51–0.77)<60 (n = 369)0.67 (0.50–0.89)N/A
≥60 (n = 370)0.57 (0.40–0.80)

Data extracted from large trials where subgroup analysis by kidney function is available. NYHA, New York Heart Association; CV, cardiovascular; N/A, not available.

Table 1

Effect of kidney function on the efficacy of established treatments for chronic HFrEF

Trial (ref)Intervention (sample size)Main eligibility criteriaFollow-up (years)Primary outcomeOverall treatment effect (95% CI)CKD subgroups (eGFR, mL/min/ 1.73 m2)Treatment effect in CKDP for treatment × CKD interaction
ACEi
SOLVD-TREATMENT [31]Enalapril versus placebo (n = 2569)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA I–IV; creatinine <177 μmol/L3.5All-cause mortality0.84 (0.74–0.95)≥60 (n = 1466)0.82 (0.69–0.98)0.62
<60 (n = 1036)0.88 (0.73–1.06)
β-blocker
CIBIS-II [32]Bisoprolol versus placebo (n = 2647)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine <300 μmol/L1.3All-cause mortality0.66 (0.54–0.81)<45 (n = 450)0.71 (0.48–1.05)0.81
≥45 <60 (n = 669)0.69 (0.46–1.04)
≥60 <75 (n = 640)0.53 (0.34–0.82)
>75 (n = 863)0.64 (0.42–0.99)
MERIT-HF [33, 34]Metoprolol versus placebo (n = 3991)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; ‘significant’ kidney disease1All-cause mortality0.66 (0.53–0.81)<45 (n = 493)0.41 (0.25–0.68)0.095
≥45–≤60 (n = 976)0.68 (0.45–1.02)
>60 (n = 2496)0.71 (0.54–0.95)
SENIORS [35, 36]Nebivolol versus placebo (n = 2128)LVEF <35% or hospitilization for decompensated HF; NYHA II–IV; creatinine <250 μmol/L1.75All-cause mortality or CV hospital admission0.86 (0.74–0.99)<55.5 (n = 704)0.84 (0.67–1.07)0.442
55.5–72.8 (n = 704)0.79 (0.60–1.04)
>72.8 (n = 704)0.86 (0.65–1.14)
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist
RALES [37, 38]Spironolactone versus placebo (n = 1663)LVEF <35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine ≤221 μmol/L2All-cause mortality0.70 (0.60–0.82)<60 (n = 792)0.68 (0.56–0.84)N/A
≥60 (n = 866)0.71 (0.57–0.90)
EMPHASIS-HF [39]Eplerenone versus placebo (n = 2737)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA II; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m21.75CV death or hospitalization for HF0.63 (0.54–0.74)<60 (n = 912)N/A0.50
≥60 (n = 1821)N/A
Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor
PARADIGM-HF [40]Sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril (n = 8442)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m22.25CV death or hospitalization for HF0.80 (0.73–0.87)<60 (n = 3061)N/A0.91
≥60 (n = 5338)N/A
ICD
MADIT II [41]Prophylactic ICD versus conventional medical therapy (n = 1232)LVEF ≤30%; NYHA III; eGFR ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m22.67All-cause mortality0.69 (0.51–0.93)<35 (n = 80)1.09 (0.49–2.43)0.29
35–59 (n = 387)0.74 (0.48–1.15)
≥60 (n = 756)0.66 (0.43–1.02)
CRT
CARE-HF [42]CRT versus conventional medical therapy (n = 813)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV;1.5Death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for a major CV event0.63 (0.51–0.77)<60 (n = 369)0.67 (0.50–0.89)N/A
≥60 (n = 370)0.57 (0.40–0.80)
Trial (ref)Intervention (sample size)Main eligibility criteriaFollow-up (years)Primary outcomeOverall treatment effect (95% CI)CKD subgroups (eGFR, mL/min/ 1.73 m2)Treatment effect in CKDP for treatment × CKD interaction
ACEi
SOLVD-TREATMENT [31]Enalapril versus placebo (n = 2569)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA I–IV; creatinine <177 μmol/L3.5All-cause mortality0.84 (0.74–0.95)≥60 (n = 1466)0.82 (0.69–0.98)0.62
<60 (n = 1036)0.88 (0.73–1.06)
β-blocker
CIBIS-II [32]Bisoprolol versus placebo (n = 2647)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine <300 μmol/L1.3All-cause mortality0.66 (0.54–0.81)<45 (n = 450)0.71 (0.48–1.05)0.81
≥45 <60 (n = 669)0.69 (0.46–1.04)
≥60 <75 (n = 640)0.53 (0.34–0.82)
>75 (n = 863)0.64 (0.42–0.99)
MERIT-HF [33, 34]Metoprolol versus placebo (n = 3991)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; ‘significant’ kidney disease1All-cause mortality0.66 (0.53–0.81)<45 (n = 493)0.41 (0.25–0.68)0.095
≥45–≤60 (n = 976)0.68 (0.45–1.02)
>60 (n = 2496)0.71 (0.54–0.95)
SENIORS [35, 36]Nebivolol versus placebo (n = 2128)LVEF <35% or hospitilization for decompensated HF; NYHA II–IV; creatinine <250 μmol/L1.75All-cause mortality or CV hospital admission0.86 (0.74–0.99)<55.5 (n = 704)0.84 (0.67–1.07)0.442
55.5–72.8 (n = 704)0.79 (0.60–1.04)
>72.8 (n = 704)0.86 (0.65–1.14)
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist
RALES [37, 38]Spironolactone versus placebo (n = 1663)LVEF <35%; NYHA III–IV; creatinine ≤221 μmol/L2All-cause mortality0.70 (0.60–0.82)<60 (n = 792)0.68 (0.56–0.84)N/A
≥60 (n = 866)0.71 (0.57–0.90)
EMPHASIS-HF [39]Eplerenone versus placebo (n = 2737)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA II; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m21.75CV death or hospitalization for HF0.63 (0.54–0.74)<60 (n = 912)N/A0.50
≥60 (n = 1821)N/A
Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor
PARADIGM-HF [40]Sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril (n = 8442)LVEF ≤40%; NYHA II–IV; eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m22.25CV death or hospitalization for HF0.80 (0.73–0.87)<60 (n = 3061)N/A0.91
≥60 (n = 5338)N/A
ICD
MADIT II [41]Prophylactic ICD versus conventional medical therapy (n = 1232)LVEF ≤30%; NYHA III; eGFR ≥15 mL/min/1.73 m22.67All-cause mortality0.69 (0.51–0.93)<35 (n = 80)1.09 (0.49–2.43)0.29
35–59 (n = 387)0.74 (0.48–1.15)
≥60 (n = 756)0.66 (0.43–1.02)
CRT
CARE-HF [42]CRT versus conventional medical therapy (n = 813)LVEF ≤35%; NYHA III–IV;1.5Death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for a major CV event0.63 (0.51–0.77)<60 (n = 369)0.67 (0.50–0.89)N/A
≥60 (n = 370)0.57 (0.40–0.80)

Data extracted from large trials where subgroup analysis by kidney function is available. NYHA, New York Heart Association; CV, cardiovascular; N/A, not available.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close