TY - JOUR
T1 - Physical Activity, Quality of Life, and Biomarkers in Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (from the NEAT-HFpEF Trial)
AU - Patel, Ravi B.
AU - Vaduganathan, Muthiah
AU - Felker, G. Michael
AU - Butler, Javed
AU - Redfield, Margaret M.
AU - Shah, Sanjiv J.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Javed Butler has received research support from the NIH and European Union, and has been a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CVRx, Janssen, Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Vifor Pharma, and ZS Pharma.
Funding Information:
Funding: Research reported in this manuscript was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number U10 HL084904 and award numbers U10 HL110297, U10 HL110342, U10 HL110309, U10 HL110262, U10 HL110338, U10 HL110312, U10 HL110302, U10 HL110336, U10 HL110337, and T32HL069771. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2019/5/15
Y1 - 2019/5/15
N2 - Although atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexist, the influence of AF/AFL on physical activity, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and quality of life in HFpEF is unclear and could have relevance to HFpEF trial design. We evaluated the association between AF/AFL and volitional physical activity, functional performance, NT-proBNP, and quality of life in patients with HFpEF in the Nitrate's Effect on Activity Tolerance (NEAT)-HFpEF trial. Of 99 patients with accelerometer data, 35 (35%) had AF/AFL. There were no differences between AF/AFL versus no AF/AFL in baseline average daily accelerometer units (ADAUs; 9.06 ± 0.54 vs 9.06 ± 0.48, p = 0.75), hours active per day (9.7 ± 2.3 vs 9.2 ± 2.2, p = 0.86), or 6-minute walk distance (6MWD; 307 ± 136m vs 321 ± 110m, p = 0.85). AF/AFL status was associated with higher baseline NT-proBNP (586 [25th to 75th percentile: 291 to 1254] pg/ml vs 154 [25th to 75th percentile: 92 to 288] pg/ml, p <0.001) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores (69 [25th to 75th percentile: 46 to 88] vs 48 [25th to 75th percentile: 37 to 70], p = 0.01). Although treatment responses to isosorbide mononitrate measured by change in ADAUs, hours active per day, or 6MWD did not vary by AF/AFL status (interaction p >0.05 for all), AF/AFL patients had greater reductions in NT-proBNP after isosorbide mononitrate than patients without AF/AFL (interaction p <0.001), possibly due to regression to the mean. In conclusion, baseline measures and treatment-related changes in volitional physical activity (ADAUs) and functional performance (6MWD) did not differ by AF/AFL in NEAT-HFpEF, whereas NT-proBNP did. In HFpEF—where AF/AFL prevalence is high—functional measures may be superior to natriuretic peptides as trial endpoints.
AB - Although atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexist, the influence of AF/AFL on physical activity, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and quality of life in HFpEF is unclear and could have relevance to HFpEF trial design. We evaluated the association between AF/AFL and volitional physical activity, functional performance, NT-proBNP, and quality of life in patients with HFpEF in the Nitrate's Effect on Activity Tolerance (NEAT)-HFpEF trial. Of 99 patients with accelerometer data, 35 (35%) had AF/AFL. There were no differences between AF/AFL versus no AF/AFL in baseline average daily accelerometer units (ADAUs; 9.06 ± 0.54 vs 9.06 ± 0.48, p = 0.75), hours active per day (9.7 ± 2.3 vs 9.2 ± 2.2, p = 0.86), or 6-minute walk distance (6MWD; 307 ± 136m vs 321 ± 110m, p = 0.85). AF/AFL status was associated with higher baseline NT-proBNP (586 [25th to 75th percentile: 291 to 1254] pg/ml vs 154 [25th to 75th percentile: 92 to 288] pg/ml, p <0.001) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores (69 [25th to 75th percentile: 46 to 88] vs 48 [25th to 75th percentile: 37 to 70], p = 0.01). Although treatment responses to isosorbide mononitrate measured by change in ADAUs, hours active per day, or 6MWD did not vary by AF/AFL status (interaction p >0.05 for all), AF/AFL patients had greater reductions in NT-proBNP after isosorbide mononitrate than patients without AF/AFL (interaction p <0.001), possibly due to regression to the mean. In conclusion, baseline measures and treatment-related changes in volitional physical activity (ADAUs) and functional performance (6MWD) did not differ by AF/AFL in NEAT-HFpEF, whereas NT-proBNP did. In HFpEF—where AF/AFL prevalence is high—functional measures may be superior to natriuretic peptides as trial endpoints.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062590872&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062590872&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.02.025
DO - 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.02.025
M3 - Article
C2 - 30876658
AN - SCOPUS:85062590872
SN - 0002-9149
VL - 123
SP - 1660
EP - 1666
JO - American Journal of Cardiology
JF - American Journal of Cardiology
IS - 10
ER -