Key result
Gene transfer in HFrEF shows acceptable safety but frequently fails to meet efficacy endpoints.
Why the study?
Despite improvements in drug and device therapy for heart failure, hospitalization rates and mortality have changed little in the past decade, motivating trials of gene transfer for HFrEF.
Does gene transfer improve clinical outcomes or cardiac function in patients with stable symptomatic HFrEF?
Does gene transfer improve clinical outcomes or cardiac function in patients with stable symptomatic HFrEF?
Gene transfer for HFrEF appears safe but currently lacks definitive evidence of efficacy, requiring further trials before clinical adoption.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Gene transfer appears safe yet ineffective in symptomatic HFrEF; confirms safety across RCTs while challenging therapeutic efficacy.
Despite improvements in drug and device therapy for heart failure, hospitalization rates and mortality have changed little in the past decade. Randomized clinical trials using gene transfer to improve function of the failing heart are the focus of this review. Four randomized clinical trials of gene transfer in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have been published. Each enrolled patients with stable symptomatic HFrEF and used either intracoronary delivery of a virus vector or endocardial injection of a plasmid. The initial CUPID trial randomized 14 subjects to placebo and 25 subjects to escalating doses of adeno-associated virus type 1 encoding sarcoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase (AAV1.SERCA2a). AAV1.SERCA2a was well tolerated, and the high-dose group met a 6 month composite endpoint. In the subsequent CUPID-2 study, 243 subjects received either placebo or the high dose of AAV1.SERCA2a. AAV1.SERCA2a administration, while safe, failed to meet the primary or any secondary endpoints. STOP-HF used plasmid endocardial injection of stromal cell-derived factor-1 to promote stem-cell recruitment. In a 93-subject trial of patients with ischemic etiology heart failure, the primary endpoint (symptoms and 6 min walk distance) failed, but subgroup analyses showed improvements in subjects with the lowest ejection fractions. A fourth trial randomized 14 subjects to placebo and 42 subjects to escalating doses of adenovirus-5 encoding adenylyl cyclase 6 (Ad5.hAC6). There were no safety concerns, and patients in the two highest dose groups (combined) showed improvements in left ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction and -dP/dt). The safety data from four randomized clinical trials of gene transfer in patients with symptomatic HFrEF suggest that this approach can be conducted with acceptable risk, despite invasive delivery techniques in a high-risk population. Additional trials are necessary before the approach can be endorsed for clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Penny et al. (2017) conducted a review in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Gene transfer vs. Placebo was evaluated. Gene transfer in patients with symptomatic HFrEF demonstrated acceptable safety across four randomized trials, though efficacy endpoints were frequently not met.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: