Evolving role for mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The majority of randomized clinical trials in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have failed to show meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes. Recent randomized trials have shown benefits from mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in the management of HFpEF. This review will focus on new evidence for MRA therapy in patients with HFpEF. RECENT FINDINGS: Three randomized trials were reviewed: the Effect of spironolactone on diastolic function and exercise capacity in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the Aldo-DHF randomized controlled trial; the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist trial; and its echocardiography substudy. The Aldo-DHF trial showed improvements in echocardiographic measures of diastolic function. In the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist trial, hospitalization for heart failure was significantly reduced with MRA therapy with no difference in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization. In patients with high risk, however, there may be a reduction in cardiovascular mortality. We will also briefly discuss finerenone, a new generation MRA associated with a lower incidence of hyperkalemia. SUMMARY: New evidence shows that MRA therapy decreases left ventricular mass and left atrial size, reduces hospitalization, and may reduce cardiovascular mortality in patients with high risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".