| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1379-1381 |
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Journal | European Journal of Heart Failure |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Oct 2018 |
Funding
The traditional characterization of HF phenotypes to date has relied on markers that have either been used variably or are prone to challenges with designation or interpretation. We herein discuss a few of these traditional terminologies, while the field is fraught with other examples, e.g. ‘idiopathic’ or ‘dilated’ cardiomyopathy. This historical set of terms and classification schema have been widely applied in clinical trials defining current evidence-based HF therapies, and thus will continue to remain important in determining treatment eligibility in practice. However, the development of future HF therapies depends on identification and characterization of cohorts who are most likely to derive benefit. To this aim, utilization of novel biomarker-or imaging-based signatures of HF or robust clinical risk scores may translate to improved clinical trial selection criteria and classification of HF. There is an unmet need for precise, objective, and reproducible metrics to define HF. Conflict of interest: M.V. is supported by the NHLBI T32 postdoctoral training grant (T32HL007604). S.J.G. is supported by the NHLBI T32 postdoctoral training grant (T32HL069749-14) and a Heart Failure Society of America/Emergency Medicine Foundation Acute Heart Failure Young Investigator Award funded by Novartis. J.B. has received research support from the National Institutes of Health and European Union; and has been a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CVRx, Janssen, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, StealthPeptide, Vifor, and ZS Pharma. R.B.P. has no conflicts of interest to disclose.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
