Registry-based prospective randomized clinical trials in heart failure offer opportunities for efficient recruitment and generalizable findings at low cost, though none have been conducted to date.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in heart failure (HF) are becoming increasingly complex and expensive to conduct and if positive deliver expensive therapy tested only in selected populations. RECENT FINDINGS: Electronic health records and clinical cardiovascular quality registries are providing opportunities for pragmatic and registry-based prospective randomized clinical trials (RRCTs). Simplified regulatory, ethics, and consent procedures; recruitment integrated into real-world care; and simplified or automated baseline and outcome collection allow assessment of study power and feasibility, fast and efficient recruitment, delivery of generalizable findings at low cost, and potentially evidence-based and novel use of generic drugs with low costs to society. There have been no RRCTs in HF to date. Major challenges include generating funding, international collaboration, and the monitoring of safety and adherence for chronic HF treatments. Here, we use the Spironolactone Initiation Registry Randomized Interventional Trial in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (SPIRRIT-HFpEF), to be conducted in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry, to exemplify the advantages and challenges of HF RRCTs.
Lund et al. (Tue,) conducted a review in Heart Failure. Registry-based prospective randomized clinical trials in heart failure offer opportunities for efficient recruitment and generalizable findings at low cost, though none have been conducted to date.