Efficacy and Safety of Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction According to N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide: Insights From the DAPA-HF Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Effective therapies for HFrEF usually reduce NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) levels, and it is important to establish whether new treatments are effective across the range of NT-proBNP. Methods: We evaluated both these questions in the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) trial. Patients in New York Heart Association functional class II to IV with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% and a NT-proBNP level ≥600 pg/mL (≥600 ng/L; ≥400 pg/mL if hospitalized for HF within the previous 12 months or ≥900 pg/mL if atrial fibrillation/flutter) were eligible. The primary outcome was the composite of an episode of worsening HF or cardiovascular death. Results: Of the 4744 randomized patients, 4742 had an available baseline NT-proBNP measurement (median, 1437 pg/mL [interquartile range, 857–2650 pg/mL]). Compared with placebo, treatment with dapagliflozin significantly reduced NT-proBNP from baseline to 8 months (absolute least-squares mean reduction, −303 pg/mL [95% CI, −457 to −150 pg/mL]; geometric mean ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88–0.96]). Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF or cardiovascular death, irrespective of baseline NT-proBNP quartile; the hazard ratio for dapagliflozin versus placebo, from lowest to highest quartile was 0.43 (95% CI, 0.27–0.67), 0.77 (0.56–1.04), 0.78 (0.60–1.01), and 0.78 (0.64–0.95); P for interaction=0.09. Consistent benefits were observed for all-cause mortality. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin increased the proportion of patients with a meaningful improvement (≥5 points) in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score ( P for interaction=0.99) and decreased the proportion with a deterioration ≥5 points ( P for interaction=0.87) across baseline NT-proBNP quartiles. Conclusions: In patients with HFrEF, dapagliflozin reduced NT-proBNP by 300 pg/mL after 8 months of treatment compared with placebo. In addition, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF and death, and improved symptoms, across the spectrum of baseline NT-proBNP levels included in DAPA-HF. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03036124.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".