UNASSIGNED: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an often-asymptomatic complication of type 2 diabetes (T2D) that requires annual screening to diagnose. Patient-level factors linked to inadequate screening and treatment can inform implementation strategies to facilitate guideline-recommended CKD care.
UNASSIGNED: To identify risk factors for nonconcordance with guideline-recommended CKD screening and treatment in patients with T2D.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective cohort study was performed at 20 health care systems contributing data to the US National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. To evaluate concordance with CKD screening guidelines, adults with an outpatient clinician visit linked to T2D diagnosis between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, and without known CKD were included. A separate analysis reviewed prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in adults with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] of 30-90 mL/min/1.73 m2 and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio [UACR] of 200-5000 mg/g) and an outpatient clinician visit for T2D between October 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020. Data were analyzed from July 8, 2022, through June 22, 2023.
UNASSIGNED: Demographics, lifestyle factors, comorbidities, medications, and laboratory results.
UNASSIGNED: Screening required measurement of creatinine levels and UACR within 15 months of the index visit. Treatment reflected prescription of ACEIs or ARBs and SGLT2 inhibitors within 12 months before or 6 months following the index visit.
UNASSIGNED: Concordance with CKD screening guidelines was assessed in 316 234 adults (median age, 59 [IQR, 50-67] years), of whom 51.5% were women; 21.7%, Black; 10.3%, Hispanic; and 67.6%, White. Only 24.9% received creatinine and UACR screening, 56.5% received 1 screening measurement, and 18.6% received neither. Hispanic ethnicity was associated with lack of screening (relative risk [RR], 1.16 [95% CI, 1.14-1.18]). In contrast, heart failure, peripheral arterial disease, and hypertension were associated with a lower risk of nonconcordance. In 4215 patients with CKD and albuminuria, 3288 (78.0%) received an ACEI or ARB; 194 (4.6%), an SGLT2 inhibitor; and 885 (21.0%), neither therapy. Peripheral arterial disease and lower eGFR were associated with lack of CKD treatment, while diuretic or statin prescription and hypertension were associated with treatment.
UNASSIGNED: In this cohort study of patients with T2D, fewer than one-quarter received recommended CKD screening. In patients with CKD and albuminuria, 21.0% did not receive an SGLT2 inhibitor or an ACEI or an ARB, despite compelling indications. Patient-level factors may inform implementation strategies to improve CKD screening and treatment in people with T2D.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality in India. CKD often coexists with heart failure (HF), diabetes, and hypertension. All these comorbidities are risk factors for renal impairment. HF and CKD are pathophysiologically intertwined, and the deterioration of one can worsen the prognosis of the other. There is a need for safe renal pharmacological therapies that target both CKD and HF and are also useful in hypertension and diabetes. Neurohormonal activation achieved through the activation of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), and the natriuretic peptide system (NPS) is fundamental in the pathogenesis and progression of CKD and HF. Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNi), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), and selective β1-blocker (B1B) bisoprolol suppress this neurohormonal activation. They also have many other cardiorenal benefits across a wide range of CKD patients with or without concomitant HF, diabetes, or hypertension. This consensus statement from India explores the place of ARNi, SGLT-2i, and bisoprolol in the management of CKD patients with or without HF and other comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Guideline Directed Medical Therapy (GDMT) has been revolutionary in improving outcomes of heart failure patients. However, with the addition of more medication classes, the annual cost of these medications on the US healthcare system needs further evaluation.
OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the trend of annual cost of GDMT from 2013 to 2021 using the Medicare-part D Database.
METHODS: Using Medicare Part D database (2013-2021), we determined the number of beneficiaries receiving these drugs, the total number of 30-day fills for each medication, and the total annual spending on these medications. Linear regression was used to analyze data using Python Programming Language. P value of less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
RESULTS: The estimated annual Medicare- part D spending on empagliflozin had a 50 % increase in cost between 2020 and 2021, which could be attributed to its FDA approval for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Empagliflozin cost Medicare 3.73 billion USD in 2021 alone. In addition, sacubitril-valsartan had a strong trajectory since its introduction to the market in 2015. Since its approval in July 2015, it cost Medicare 4.51 billion USD. The Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist class was the least costly class of GDMT.
CONCLUSIONS: The rise in the cost of GDMT is not proportionate amongst the different classes of GDMT. Newer classes of medications cast a significant cost on Medicare in recent years.

OBJECTIVE: Reducing sodium intake is necessary for patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Salt substitutes (saltSubs) have become increasingly popular as recommendations by healthcare professionals (HCPs) as well as options for patients and their caregivers. However, their consumption is generally potassium based and remains poorly evaluated in CHF management. Their impact on guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) also remains unknown. The primary objective of this study was to provide a description and estimate of HCP recommendations and reported use of saltSubs in France. Secondary objectives were to identify if there was an association between these recommendations by HCPs and the use of GDMTs.
RESULTS: A nationwide, questionnaire-based, cross-sectional, epidemiological study was conducted from September 2020 to July 2021. Data collection included baseline characteristics, the use and recommendations of saltSubs, and the use of GDMTs, which included (i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNis), (ii) mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and/or (iii) beta-blockers (BBs). In total, 13% of HCPs advised saltSubs and 17% of patients and 22% of caregivers reported their consumption. CHF patients advised to take saltSubs did not differ in terms of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) <40%, ischaemic origin, and New York Heart Association III-IV class, but were more recently hospitalized for acute HF (P = 0.004). HCPs who recommended saltSubs to patients were more likely to advise an anti-diabetic diet (P < 0.001), cholesterol-lowering diet (P < 0.001), and exercise (P = 0.018). In the overall population, ACEi/ARB/ARNi use was less frequent in case of saltSub recommendations (74% vs. 82%, P = 0.012). The concomitant prescription of none, one, two, or three GDMTs was less favourable in case of saltSub recommendations (P = 0.046). There was no significant difference for the presence of MRA (56% vs. 58%) and/or BB (78% vs. 82%). The under-prescription of ACEi/ARB/ARNi was found when patients had EF < 40% (P = 0.029) and/or EF ≥ 40% (P = 0.043). In the subgroup with left ventricular EF ≥ 40%, we found a higher thiazide use (P = 0.014) and a less frequent use of low EF GDMTs (P = 0.044) in case of being recommended saltSubs.
CONCLUSIONS: Beyond the well-established risk for hyperkalaemia, our preliminary results suggest a potentially negative impact of saltSubs on GDMT use, especially for ACEis/ARBs/ARNis in CHF management. saltSub recommendations and their availability from open sale outlets should be considered to avoid possible misuse or deference from GDMTs in the future. Informed advice to consumers should also be considered from HCPs or pharmacists.

UNASSIGNED: Quantifying guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) intensity is foundational for improving heart failure (HF) care. Existing measures discount dose intensity or use inconsistent weighting.
UNASSIGNED: The Kansas City Medical Optimization (KCMO) score is the average of total daily to target dose percentages for eligible GDMT, reflecting the percentage of optimal GDMT prescribed (range, 0-100). In Change the Management of Patients With HF, we computed KCMO, HF collaboratory (0-7), and modified HF Collaboratory (0-100) scores for each patient at baseline and for 1-year change in established GDMT at the time (mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, β-blocker, ACE [angiotensin-converting enzyme] inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor). We compared baseline and 1-year change distributions and the coefficient of variation (SD/mean) across scores.
UNASSIGNED: Among 4532 patients at baseline, mean KCMO, HF collaboratory, and modified HF Collaboratory scores were 38.8 (SD, 25.7), 3.4 (1.7), and 42.2 (22.2), respectively. The mean 1-year change (n=4061) for KCMO was -1.94 (17.8); HF collaborator, -0.11 (1.32); and modified HF Collaboratory, -1.35 (19.8). KCMO had the highest coefficient of variation (0.66), indicating greater variability around the mean than the HF collaboratory (0.49) and modified HF Collaboratory (0.53) scores, reflecting higher resolution of the variability in GDMT intensity across patients.
UNASSIGNED: KCMO measures GDMT intensity by incorporating dosing and treatment eligibility, provides more granularity than existing methods, is easily interpretable (percentage of ideal GDMT), and can be adapted as performance measures evolve. Further study of its association with outcomes and its usefulness for quality assessment and improvement is needed.

BACKGROUND: The use of recommended heart failure (HF) medications has improved over time, but opportunities for improvement persist among women and at rural hospitals.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to characterize national trends in performance in the use of guideline-recommended pharmacologic treatment for HF at U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals, at which medication copayments are modest.
METHODS: Among patients discharged from VA hospitals with HF between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019, receipt of all guideline-recommended HF pharmacotherapy among eligible patients was assessed, consisting of evidence-based beta-blockers; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors; mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists; and oral anticoagulation.
RESULTS: Of 55,560 patients at 122 hospitals, 32,304 (58.1%) received all guideline-recommended HF medications for which they were eligible. The proportion of patients receiving all recommended medications was higher in 2019 relative to 2013 (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.44-1.65). The median of hospital performance was 59.1% (Q1-Q3: 53.2%-66.2%), improving with substantial variation across sites from 2013 (median 56.4%; Q1-Q3: 50.0%-62.0%) to 2019 (median 65.7%; Q1-Q3: 56.3%-73.5%). Women were less likely to receive recommended therapies than men (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.74-0.96). Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive recommended therapies (aOR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.79-0.87). Urban hospital location was associated with lower likelihood of medication receipt (aOR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59-0.92).
CONCLUSIONS: Forty-two percent of patients did not receive all recommended HF medications at discharge, particularly women, minority patients, and those receiving care at urban hospitals. Rates of use increased over time, with variation in performance across hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Recent guidelines recommend four core drug classes (renin-angiotensin system inhibitor/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [RASi/ARNi], beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist [MRA], and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor [SGLT2i]) for the pharmacological management of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We assessed physicians\' perceived (i) comfort with implementing the recent HFrEF guideline recommendations; (ii) status of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) implementation; (iii) use of different GDMT sequencing strategies; and (iv) barriers and strategies for achieving implementation.
RESULTS: A 26-question survey was disseminated via bulletin, e-mail and social channels directed to physicians with an interest in HF. Of 432 respondents representing 91 countries, 36% were female, 52% were aged <50 years, and 90% mainly practiced in cardiology (30% HF). Overall comfort with implementing quadruple therapy was high (87%). Only 12% estimated that >90% of patients with HFrEF without contraindications received quadruple therapy. The time required to initiate quadruple therapy was estimated at 1-2 weeks by 34% of respondents, 1 month by 36%, 3 months by 24%, and ≥6 months by 6%. The average respondent favoured traditional drug sequencing strategies (RASi/ARNi with/followed by beta-blocker, and then MRA with/followed by SGLT2i) over simultaneous initiation or SGLT2i-first sequences. The most frequently perceived clinical barriers to implementation were hypotension (70%), creatinine increase (47%), hyperkalaemia (45%) and patient adherence (42%).
CONCLUSIONS: Although comfort with implementing all four core drug classes in patients with HFrEF was high among physicians, a majority estimated implementation of GDMT in HFrEF to be low. We identified several important perceived clinical and non-clinical barriers that can be targeted to improve implementation.

BACKGROUND: Kidney dysfunction (KD) is a main limiting factor of applying guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and reaching the recommended target doses (TD) in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the success of optimization, long-term applicability, and adherence of neurohormonal antagonist triple therapy (TT:RASi [ACEi/ARB/ARNI] + βB + MRA) according to the KD after a HF hospitalization and to investigate its impact on prognosis.
METHODS: The data of 247 real-world, consecutive patients were analyzed who were hospitalized in 2019-2021 for HFrEF and then were followed-up for 1 year. The application and the ratio of reached TD of TT at hospital discharge and at 1 year were assessed comparing KD categories (eGFR: ≥90, 60-89, 45-59, 30-44, <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 ). Moreover, 1-year all-cause mortality and rehospitalization rates in KD subgroups were investigated.
RESULTS: Majority of the patients received TT at hospital discharge (77%) and at 1 year (73%). More severe KD led to a lower application ratio (p < .05) of TT (92%, 88%, 80%, 73%, 31%) at discharge and at 1 year (81%, 76%, 76%, 68%, 40%). Patients with more severe KD were less likely (p < .05) to receive TD of MRA (81%, 68%, 78%, 61%, 52%) at discharge and a RASi (53%, 49%, 45%, 21%, 27%) at 1 year. One-year all-cause mortality (14%, 15%, 16%, 33%, 48%, p < .001), the ratio of all-cause rehospitalizations (30%, 35%, 40%, 43%, 52%, p = .028), and rehospitalizations for HF (8%, 13%, 18%, 20%, 38%, p = .001) were significantly higher in more severe KD categories.
CONCLUSIONS: KD unfavorably affects the application of TT in HFrEF, however poorer mortality and rehospitalization rates among them highlight the role of the conscious implementation and up-titration of GDMT.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) coexists in up to 50% of heart failure (HF) patients, affecting both those with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and those with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Although the efficacy of several guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) has been well established, the treatment recommendations are similar for those patients with HF with and without CKD. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of GDMT in patients with HF with versus those without CKD.
METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomised controlled trials that compared the efficacy of GDMT (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACE-I], beta blocker, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor) in patients with HF with and without CKD. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalisation. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 19 trials (15 trials in HFrEF and four trials in HFpEF) enrolling 63,677 (38% had CKD) participants were included. Among HFrEF patients, GDMT reduced the primary endpoint in those with CKD (RR 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.82) and without CKD (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.74-0.84). Among HFpEF patients, the pooled summary RR for GDMT reducing the primary endpoint was 0.82 (95% CI 0.74-0.91) among those with CKD and 0.88 (95% CI 0.77-0.99) among those without CKD. There was no significant difference in the efficacy of GDMT in head-to-head comparisons between those with and without CKD in HFrEF (ratio of RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.06) and HFpEF (ratio of RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80-1.11).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HF, GDMT had a consistent effect in reducing adverse cardiovascular events in those with and without CKD. Future studies should investigate the best strategy to ensure patients with HF with CKD receive and tolerate GDMT when indicated.

BACKGROUND: Although several guidelines recommend that patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) be treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ACEIs/ARBs) or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), there are still several gaps in their prescription and dosage in Colombia. This study aimed to describe the use patterns of HFrEF treatments in the Colombian Heart Failure Registry (RECOLFACA).
METHODS: Patients with HFrEF enrolled in RECOLFACA during 2017-2019 were included. Heart failure (HF) medication prescription and daily dose were assessed using absolute numbers and proportions. Therapeutic schemes of patients treated by internal medicine specialists were compared with those treated by cardiologists.
RESULTS: Out of 2,528 patients in the registry, 1,384 (54.7%) had HFrEF. Among those individuals, 88.9% were prescribed beta-blockers, 72.3% with ACEI/ARBs, 67.9% with MRAs, and 13.1% with ARNIs. Moreover, less than a third of the total patients reached the target doses recommended by the European HF guidelines. No significant differences in the therapeutic schemes or target doses were observed between patients treated by internal medicine specialists or cardiologists.
CONCLUSIONS: Prescription rates and target dose achievement are suboptimal in Colombia. Nevertheless, RECOLFACA had one of the highest prescription rates of beta-blockers and MRAs compared to some of the most recent HF registries. However, ARNIs remain underprescribed. Continuous registry updates can improve the identification of patients suitable for ARNI and SGLT2i therapy to promote their use in clinical practice.