Retrospective analysis highlights treatment patterns for heart failure in ATTR-CA, indicating evolving use of beta-blockers and MRAs.
Background: Transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CA) results from misfolded transthyretin protein deposition in the myocardium, causing restrictive cardiomyopathy, heart failure (HF), and conduction disorders. Conventional HF treatment in ATTR-CA is debated due to absent trial evidence. Current European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend the use of diuretics and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). However, beta-blockers (BBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ACEi/ARBs) are often discontinued due to hypotension or bradycardia. This study assesses real-world HF treatment patterns and their impact on survival in a multinational ATTR-CA cohort. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 794 ATTR-CA patients examined baseline BB, ACEi/ARB, and MRA prescriptions. The cohort was divided based on guideline publication dates. Results: Patients were predominantly male (73.2%) with a median age of 78 years old. Prescription of diuretics (52.8%) and disease-modifying therapy (44.9%), mostly tafamidis, were common. BBs (43.7%) and ACEi/ARBs (41.2%) were prescribed more often in patients with higher NYHA class, elevated NT-proBNP, and more comorbidities. Blood pressure and heart rate were similar regardless of BB or ACEi/ARB use. BB prescription and combination therapy with BB and ACEi/ARB increased over time. Neither BB nor ACEi/ARB use significantly impacted mortality when analyzed in a multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression. Conclusions: BBs and ACEi/ARBs are more frequently used over time in particular in advanced-stage ATTR-CA patients and although BB and ACEi/ARB appear to be reasonably tolerated in the ones that were prescribed these drugs, survival was not significantly altered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geest et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: