Nativi-Nicolau, José

Background Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR‐CM) is a progressive, fatal disease associated with a substantial health care system burden. The aim of this study was to compare health care resource utilization and associated costs among individuals with ATTR‐CM, with non‐amyloid heart failure (HF), and without HF in the United States. Methods Optum's de‐identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (January 2016 to September 2023) was used to identify patients with ATTR‐CM based on HF and/or cardiomyopathy claims within 2 years of the first ATTR diagnosis. Patients with ATTR‐CM were matched to patients with non‐amyloid HF (HF/cardiomyopathy without ATTR) and non‐HF controls using 1:1 propensity score matching. All‐cause and cardiovascular‐related hospitalizations and costs were compared during follow‐up. Results Each matched cohort included 4571 patients (mean age, 75.3–75.5 years; 56.0%–56.6% male; mean follow‐up: 2.9–3.2 years). The ATTR‐CM, non‐amyloid HF, and non‐HF cohorts had 3.3, 2.7, and 1.5 all‐cause hospitalizations per patient during follow‐up, respectively. Compared with non‐amyloid HF, patients with ATTR‐CM had a longer mean length of stay per hospitalization (all‐cause and cardiovascular‐related: 8.0 versus 7.5 days; P <0.001), more mean days hospitalized annually per patient (all‐cause: 10.6 versus 8.4; cardiovascular‐related: 10.5 versus 8.3 [both P <0.001]), and higher mean annual inpatient hospitalization costs per patient (all‐cause: $42 868 versus $36 061; cardiovascular‐related: $42 841 versus $36 027 [both P <0.001]). In ATTR‐CM subgroups, mean cardiovascular‐related length of stay and days hospitalized were higher among patients aged 46 to 64 years and 65 to 80 years (versus >80 years), Black patients (versus White patients), and patients in the Northeast or South US regions (versus West regions). Conclusions ATTR‐CM is associated with a higher health care resource utilization/cost burden than non‐amyloid HF and the general population.

BACKGROUND: Transthyretin amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy is a progressive, fatal disease characterized by deposition of extracellular misfolded transthyretin (TTR) in the myocardium. Eplontersen is an N-acetylgalactosamine ligand–conjugated antisense oligonucleotide targeting hepatocyte TTR messenger RNA to reduce the production of circulating TTR. METHODS: CARDIO-TTRansform is a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of eplontersen in transthyretin amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy. Key inclusion criteria include histological evidence of amyloid deposits or grade 2 to 3 cardiac uptake on cardiac scintigraphy in the absence of plasma cell dyscrasia, New York Heart Association class I–III, and end-diastolic interventricular septum thickness >12 millimeters. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive eplontersen 45 mg or placebo, administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks for up to 140 weeks, followed by a 20-week post-treatment evaluation period or open-label extension. Participants received locally available standard of care, including unrestricted use of TTR stabilizers. The primary end point is a composite of cardiovascular mortality and recurrent clinical cardiovascular events through 140 weeks. Secondary end points, in order of testing hierarchy, include changes from baseline in 6-minute walk distance and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score, recurrent cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, the primary end point in the patient subgroup receiving stabilizers at baseline, and cardiovascular mortality. Echocardiography was performed in all participants, with cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and technetium scintigraphy in a subset. CONCLUSIONS: CARDIO-TTRansform is fully enrolled, with 1432 randomized participants who were dosed with study drug or placebo. As the largest transthyretin amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy study to date, it will evaluate whether eplontersen improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients receiving locally available standard of care, including TTR stabilizers. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT04136171. URL: http://ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu ; Unique identifier: EudraCT number 2019-002835-27.

Objectives: Amyloidosis is a group of rare diseases that often manifest in multi-organ symptoms requiring an effective multidisciplinary team of care providers to manage. This study aimed to identify the best practices and key barriers to patient-centric care at US specialized amyloidosis centers (SACs) which have emerged as central hubs for multidisciplinary amyloidosis care. Methods: We conducted and analyzed interviews with 77 stakeholders of amyloidosis diseases, including specialist physicians from 17 SACs across the US, patients, patient advocacy group representatives, and referring physicians. Results: The most commonly mentioned best practices were patient-centric multidisciplinary care, timely intake of new high-risk patients, and responsiveness to patient questions. Expanding local physician education was noted as critical to earlier diagnosis. Fifteen out of 17 SACs are actively involved in clinical trials for amyloidosis treatments. Key barriers to care identified were patient distance to SACs, limited medical records and data sharing, and insurance hurdles. Most SACs keep track of metrics, such as patient volume, patient demographics, time to first appointment, as part of internal or in external registries to measure progress. Conclusion: These findings offer practical insights for optimizing amyloidosis care and highlight the structural and informational gaps that must be addressed to improve access and outcomes.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) significantly impacts quality of life (QoL) and is often observed in patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM). Acoramidis achieves near-complete (≥90%) transthyretin (TTR) stabilization and is approved in the USA, the UK, Europe and Japan for the treatment of ATTR-CM in adults. In the phase 3 ATTRibute-CM study (NCT03860935), acoramidis treatment significantly reduced the time to all-cause mortality (ACM) or first cardiovascular-related hospitalization (CVH) at Month 30, and resulted in improved 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Summary (KCCQ-OS) scores and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels relative to placebo. The clinical efficacy of acoramidis has not yet been reported in patients with ATTR-CM and with an AF or atrial flutter (AFL) diagnosis at baseline. Research Question: How does acoramidis treatment affect ACM or first CVH, 6MWD, KCCQ-OS scores, and NT-proBNP levels at Month 30 in participants with ATTR-CM with or without AF/AFL diagnosis at baseline? Methods: The ATTRibute-CM study design has been previously published. This post hoc analysis included participants in the modified intention-to-treat population (N=611) grouped by AF/AFL diagnosis at baseline (defined as recorded AF medical history or the presence of AF or AFL on an ECG at enrollment). The rate of ACM or first CVH at Month 30 was compared between groups using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Changes from baseline to Month 30 in 6MWD, KCCQ-OS scores and NT-proBNP levels were summarized descriptively. Results: Overall, 62.8% (384/611) of participants had an AF/AFL diagnosis at baseline (acoramidis: 255/409, placebo: 129/202). These participants had lower mean 6MWD and KCCQ-OS scores and higher median NT-proBNP levels than those without AF/AFL diagnosis at baseline. Treatment with acoramidis reduced ACM or first CVH, slowed the decline in 6MWD and KCCQ-OS scores and blunted the rise in NT-proBNP compared with placebo, regardless of AF/AFL diagnosis at baseline ( Table ). Conclusions: Acoramidis improved clinical outcomes (ACM, CVH), functional status, QoL and NT-proBNP levels relative to placebo in participants with ATTR-CM, regardless of AF/AFL diagnosis at baseline.

Background: Impella 5.5 is a temporary MCS device FDA-approved for use up to 14 days. Limited data suggest it may be safe beyond this. We aim assess outcomes based on the duration of Impella 5.5 support in heart failure cardiogenic shock (HFCS) patients at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all HFCS patients supported with Impella 5.5 at our institution between 2020-2024. Patients supported for >14 days were compared with those supported for ≤14 days. Categorical variables were analyzed with chi-square tests, continuous variables with t-tests or Mann-Whitney U. Logistic regression identified factors linked to clinical outcomes. Results: 154 patients were included: 38 (25%) with support ≤14 days, 116 (75%) with >14 days. Median support duration was 10 (6–12) vs 31 (22–45) days, respectively. Median support duration was 10 (6-12) days for the ≤14 cohort and 31 days (22-45) days for the >14 cohort. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, LVEF 18% (15-23) and hemodynamics show no statistical differences. Patients supported for >14 days were more likely to undergo heart transplant compared to those supported ≤14 days (91% vs 74%, p=0.009). In contrast, myocardial recovery was more likely in the ≤14 day cohort (8% vs 1%, p=0.018). One patient suffered stroke post-transplant in the ≤14 day group and two had brachial plexus injuries in the >14 days group. Mortality during the impella-supported period was slightly higher in the ≤14 day group (8% vs 5%, p=0.535) but comparable overall, 13% in both groups, p=0.971. Support >14 days was associated with transplant outcome (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.32–8.84, p=0.012), and remained significant after adjusting for age, gender, GFR, and EF (OR 4.05, 95% CI 1.31–12.54, p=0.015). Support duration <14 days was associated with recovery or LVAD outcomes (OR 5.01, 95% CI 1.49–16.89, p=0.009), and remained significant after adjustment (OR 5.43, 95% CI 1.11–26.45, p=0.036). No association was observed between duration of support and LVAD/mortality outcomes or with EcPella use. Conclusion: Shorter Impella support duration was independently associated with early myocardial recovery or LVAD candidacy, likely reflecting rapid clinical decision-making. Prolonged Impella support was associated with increased likelihood of transitioning to heart transplantation, likely reflecting clinical stabilization over time. Our multidisciplinary, single-center data suggests Impella 5.5 can be used beyond FDA-approved 14 days in HFCS patients.

Introduction: Patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) typically have low serum transthyretin (sTTR) levels, worsening heart failure, and increased mortality. A recent study has shown the association of sTTR levels ≥20mg/dL with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality (CVM). It has also been shown that regardless of baseline sTTR level, greater increases in sTTR levels are associated with greater improvements in cardiovascular outcomes. Acoramidis, a near-complete (≥90%) TTR stabilizer, demonstrated a rapid and sustained increase from baseline in sTTR by Day 28 and reduced risk of cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ATTR-CM. Hypothesis: Acoramidis-mediated early increase in sTTR levels ≥20 mg/dL (lower limit of normal) at Day 28 reduces risks of CVM and cardiovascular-related hospitalizations (CVH) in patients with ATTR-CM. Methods: Analyses were conducted in the ATTRibute-CM modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (acoramidis: 409; placebo: 202). The sTTR concentrations (normal range is 20-40 mg/dL) were assessed using an immunoturbidimetric method (Abbott ARCHITECT system) in a central laboratory. The proportion of participants with sTTR levels below normal at baseline and Day 28 were determined. The relationship between sTTR levels <20 or ≥20 mg/dL, at Day 28 across the pooled acoramidis and placebo treatment groups, and subsequent risk of CVM and of CVH over 30 months were analyzed using a stratified log-rank test. Results: At baseline about 25% of study participants had sTTR levels below normal in both treatment groups. At Day 28, less than 2% of participants had sTTR levels <20 mg/dL in the acoramidis arm compared with 26% in the placebo arm ( Table 1 ). When acoramidis and placebo treatment groups were pooled based on sTTR levels <20 or ≥20 mg/dL at Day 28, participants with sTTR ≥20 mg/dL were associated with a lower risk of the composite endpoint of CVM or first CVH at Month 30 in comparison with <20 mg/dL ( p <0.0001) ( Figure 1A ). Comparable findings were observed for the individual components (CVM, first CVH) ( Figure 1B and C ). Conclusion: Across treatment groups, sTTR levels above normal range (≥20 mg/dL) at Day 28 were associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes at Month 30, when compared with sTTR levels below normal range (<20 mg/dL). Thus, these observations demonstrate that higher sTTR levels over time may have the potential for clinical benefits in both CVM and CVH.

Background: Renal dysfunction is a known prognostic factor in advanced heart failure and among patients receiving temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS). However, the predictive value of post-Impella creatinine in determining healthcare resource utilization in patients bridged to transplant with Impella 5.5 remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between post-Impella creatinine and key hospitalization metrics in this population. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who received Impella 5.5 as a bridge-to-transplant between January 2020 and January 2025. Serum creatinine was collected 72 hours after Impella placement. The primary outcome was device-to-discharge time. Secondary outcomes included transplant-to-discharge time, post-transplant ICU length of stay (LOS), and total LOS (admission-discharge). Univariate and multivariable linear regressions were used to examine the association between post-Impella creatinine and each outcome, adjusting for age, gender, BMI, and LVEF. Results: 133 patients were supported with the Impella 5.5 as BTT and were included (median age 58 years (51–65), 82.7% were male, and 71.4% presented with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. The median BMI was 27.7 (24.3–32.3), LVEF 17% (15–22), and post-Impella creatinine 1.32 mg/dL (0.96–1.71). The median device-to-discharge time was 45 days (29-64), transplant-to-discharge time was 14 days (12–19), ICU LOS post-transplant was 6 days (4–8), and total LOS was 58 days (42–76). Higher post-Impella creatinine was significantly associated with longer device-to-discharge time (β = 6.67, p = 0.004), longer transplant-to-discharge duration (β = 3.42 p = 0.003), longer ICU LOS (β = 2.19, p = 0.007), and longer total LOS (β = 7.24, p = 0.002) on univariate analysis. Post-impella creatinine remained significantly associated with device-to-discharge time in the multivariate model after adjusting for confounders (β = 6.33, p = 0.006). Importantly, this suggests that patients with lower post-Impella creatinine levels may experience shorter hospitalizations and faster recovery trajectories following transplant. Conclusions: Post-Impella creatinine is a significant predictor of prolonged hospitalization in patients supported with Impella 5.5 as a bridge to transplant. These findings emphasize the prognostic importance of early renal function assessment and may guide risk stratification and resource planning in advanced heart failure care.

Background: Progressive heart failure cardiogenic shock (HFCS) often requires escalation to temporary or durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as a bridge to transplant (BTT). Following the 2018 UNOS allocation changes, our center revised its BTT strategy to optimize support and shorten wait times. At our institution, the Impella 5.5 with SmartAssist via the axillary approach was selectively used for patients who remained refractory to guideline-directed medical therapy, failed single-inotrope therapy, and were not considered suitable durable LVAD candidates by our multidisciplinary heart team. We compared transplant-related outcomes of BTT patients supported with Impella 5.5 versus durable LVAD. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective review of all heart and heart/kidney transplant candidates at Mayo Clinic Florida from October 2018 to February 2021. INTERMACS profile, baseline characteristics, and perioperative data were collected at the time of device implantation and throughout the transplant hospitalization. Results: A total of 87 heart and 4 heart–kidney transplants were completed. Forty-five patients (49%) required MCS as BTT: 27 (60%) with a durable LVAD and 18 (40%) with an Impella 5.5. All eighteen patients with Impella 5.5 as BTT (100%) were transplanted compared to nineteen patients with durable LVAD (70%), p = 0.001. The median time from listing to transplant was substantially shorter with Impella (32 vs. 696 days, p < 0.001), and this difference persisted across INTERMACS profiles. UNOS status at transplant was more urgent for Impella than LVAD (p < 0.001). Transplant surgery following Impella support required shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time (181 vs. 219 min, p < 0.001) and resulted in lower postoperative vasoactive-inotropic requirements (7.9 vs. 13, p = 0.003). No patients in the Impella group died or were delisted while awaiting transplant, whereas 5 LVAD patients (26%) died or were removed due to LVAD complications (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our data demonstrates that the use of the Impella 5.5 as BTT was associated with significantly shorter waitlist time, higher transplantation rates, reduced perioperative morbidity, and lower postoperative vasoactive support compared with durable LVAD as BTT. These benefits were achieved despite a higher severity of illness at transplantation in the Impella cohort.

e13574 Background: AL (amyloid light chain) amyloidosis is associated with poor prognosis especially if diagnosis occurs with cardiac involvement. Current AL treatments target the plasma cell clone producing the light chains that misfold, aggregate and deposit in various tissues. The multi-organ manifestations of AL amyloidosis require a multidisciplinary care team of hematologist-oncologists, cardiologists, and other healthcare providers (HCPs) for comprehensive, patient-centric management. Since 2022, Amyloidosis Stakeholder Partnerships for Impact, Reach & Equity (ASPIRE), facilitated by Amyloidosis Research Consortium (ARC) has been bringing together biotech and pharmaceutical companies with the shared goal of optimizing amyloidosis patient care. Through this study, ARC-ASPIRE sought to document and share the current best practices and key barriers to patient-centric amyloidosis care at US specialized amyloidosis centers (SACs). A broad range of stakeholders in amyloidosis care – healthcare providers at SACs, patients, referring physicians, and patient advocacy group representatives – were interviewed for this study. This abstract presents findings relevant to the management of patients with AL amyloidosis. Methods: Structured interviews were conducted between December 2023 and February 2024 with 77 amyloidosis stakeholders (physicians, advanced practice providers, registered nurses from 17 SACs, patients, referring physicians, and patient advocacy group representatives), including 12 hematology-oncologists and 8 AL patients. SACs were selected to be representative of current US amyloidosis care, based on geography, amyloidosis patient volume, years since establishment, and types of amyloidosis treated. Results: Three-quarters of participating SACs treat AL patients under a single multidisciplinary amyloidosis program. Multidisciplinary care is facilitated by regular team meetings, dedicated clinic days, and informal communications across specialties. At diagnosis, collaboration between cardiology and hematology-oncology ensures AL patients are accurately diagnosed and promptly treated. Sixty percent of SACs have a centralized intake system, and patients suspected with AL are prioritized to ensure an appointment within 1 week of referral. Key barriers were delayed or missed diagnosis due to low awareness of AL amyloidosis within community oncologists, travel burden to SACs, lack of seamless medical records sharing and telehealth regulations. Conclusions: The best practices outlined in this study serve to educate AL amyloidosis and non-AL amyloidosis HCPs for better multidisciplinary collaboration and early diagnosis. The key barriers identified should be addressed to improve patient care.