Effects of Semaglutide in Obesity-Related Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Across the Age Spectrum: Findings from the STEP-HFpEF Programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) increases with age, and older adults with HFpEF have worse physical function, quality of life, and clinical outcomes. Semaglutide demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of obesity-related HFpEF in the STEP-HFpEF trials. Some have speculated that older patients may have less to gain from incretin therapies (and perhaps more to lose) than younger patients. AIMS: In this pre-specified pooled subanalysis of the STEP-HFpEF trials, we evaluated the efficacy of semaglutide across the age spectrum. METHODS: The STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials enrolled participants with obesity-related HFpEF and randomized them to semaglutide 2.4 mg once weekly (n = 573) or placebo (n = 572) for 52 weeks. Dual primary outcomes (change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score [KCCQ-CSS] and change in body weight) and secondary outcome measures (6-minute walk distance [6MWD], C-reactive protein, hierarchical composite endpoint containing all-cause death, heart failure events, changes in KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD) were compared across specific age groups; <55 years, 55-64 years, 65-74 years and ≥75 years. RESULTS: Among 1145 randomized participants, 8.8% (N = 101) were <55, 23.3% (N = 267) were aged between 55-64, 42.4% (N = 485) were between 65-74, and 25.5% (N = 292) were 75 years or over. The efficacy of semaglutide on the dual primary endpoints was consistent across the age spectrum, KCCQ-CSS (p-interaction = 0.80), and body weight (p-interaction = 0.41). Similar benefits were observed for the key secondary endpoints, with no treatment effect heterogeneity across age groups. Moreover, the safety of semaglutide was consistent across age groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with HFpEF enrolled across the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, treatment with semaglutide improved disease-specific symptoms, physical function and reduced body weight across the age spectrum. The safety profile of semaglutide was consistent in older and younger patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".