Why the study?
Anti-inflammatory trials in HF have shown inconsistent results, and clinical implementation requires larger and longer trials along with novel or more specific drugs.
Inflammation is a major contributor to heart failure, but clinical trials of anti-inflammatory therapies have been inconsistent, suggesting future approaches should focus on tailored treatments and resolution pharmacology.
Anti-inflammatory strategies lack consistent benefit in HF; leaves open the value of tailored trials with novel agents.
Inflammation has been recognized as a major pathophysiological contributor to the entire spectrum of human heart failure (HF), including HF with reduced ejection fraction, HF with preserved ejection fraction, acute HF and cardiogenic shock. Nevertheless, the results of several trials attempting anti-inflammatory strategies in HF patients have not been consistent or motivating and the clinical implementation of anti-inflammatory treatments for HF still requires larger and longer trials, as well as novel and/or more specific drugs. The present work reviews the different inflammatory mechanisms contributing to each type of HF, the major inflammatory mediators involved, namely tumor necrosis factor alpha, the interleukins 1, 6, 8, 10, 18, and 33, C-reactive protein and the enzymes myeloperoxidase and inducible nitric oxide synthase, and their effects on heart function. Furthermore, several trials targeting these mediators or involving other anti-inflammatory treatments in human HF are also described and analyzed. Future therapeutic advances will likely involve tailored anti-inflammatory treatments according to the patient's inflammatory profile, as well as the development of resolution pharmacology aimed at stimulating resolution of inflammation pathways in HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reina‐Couto et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: