Back to Authors

Solomon, Scott

Mayo Clinic

Brigham and Women's Hospital

Citations 3

Vaccination as a new form of cardiovascular prevention: a European Society of Cardiology clinical consensus statement
Heidecker, Bettina , Libby, Peter , Vassiliou, Vassilios S. , Vardeny, Orly , Hassager, Christian , Gatzoulis, Michael Α. , Metra, Marco , Amir, Offer , Solomon, Scott, Landmesser, Ulf, Lüscher, Thomas F. , Vardeny, Orly , Gatzoulis, Michael A , Mamas, Mamas , Cooper, Leslie T , Metra, Marco , Amir, Offer , Libby, Peter , Heidecker, Bettina , Hassager, Christian , Vassiliou, Vassilios , Roubille, François , Mamas, Mamas A. , Cooper, Leslie T. , Schoenrath, Felix , Landmesser, Ulf

European Heart Journal | May 27, 2025 | Volume: 46 | Issue: 36 | Pages: 3518-3531

10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf384 Get It

Abstract Vaccination is increasingly acknowledged as an effective preventive measure not only against specific infections, but also for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in high-risk patients. Specifically, a growing body of evidence suggests that vaccines against influenza, SARS-CoV-2, respiratory syncytial virus, herpes zoster, and other viruses significantly reduce infection and for influenza the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in vaccinated individuals. This clinical consensus statement examines the existing literature and accumulated evidence and offers practical clinical advice on vaccination timing and target demographics, specifically addressing complex clinical scenarios with a focus on cardiovascular conditions. It includes guidelines for vaccinating vulnerable populations such as immunosuppressed individuals, patients with congenital heart disease, and pregnant women as well as safety and potential complications of the procedure.
Clinical correlates and prognostic impact of cognitive decline in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: insights from PARAGON-HF
Shen, Li , Dewan, Pooja , Jhund, P S, Lam, C S P, Packer, Milton, Redfield, Margaret M. , Rouleau, Joëlle, Veldhuisen, Dirk J. van , Zannad, F., Solomon, Scott, Ferreira, João Pedro , Jhund, Pardeep S. , Desai, Akshay S , Lam, C S P, Martinez, F, Packer, Milton , Rouleau, J L, Zannad, Faı̈ez , Zile, Michael R. , McMurray, John J.V.

European Heart Journal | October 28, 2024 | Volume: 45 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.944 Get It

Abstract Background Cognitive decline is common in patients with heart failure (HF), but its clinical correlates and prognostic impact are not well understood in this population. Purpose To examine the baseline variables associated with cognitive decline and the associations between cognitive decline and HF outcomes in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods We analyzed cognitive function, as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), in 2895 patients with HFpEF enrolled in a pre-specified sub-study of PARAGON-HF. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with cognitive decline i.e., a decrease in MMSE score of ≥3 points by 48 weeks. Time-updated Cox proportional hazards regressions and semiparametric proportional rates models were used to examine the subsequent risk of clinical outcomes after a decline in MMSE scores of ≥1-, 2- and 3-points during follow-up respectively, adjusted for known prognostic variables including NT-proBNP and baseline MMSE. Results A total of 450 (15.5% of the population) patients experienced a decrease in MMSE score of ≥3 points from baseline, at any follow-up visit. The corresponding number for a decrease in MMSE score of ≥2 points and ≥1 point was 755 (26.1%) and 1231 (42.5%), respectively. Independent predictors of cognitive decline at 48 weeks included older age, living in Latin America or the Asia/Pacific region, ischemic etiology, prior HF hospitalization, history of stroke/TIA, and lower serum albumin level (Figure 1). There was a graded relationship between the size of the decrease in MMSE score from baseline and the subsequent risk of mortality. Notably, a decrease of ≥3 points was associated with a 50% increase in the subsequent risk of death from any cause (adjusted HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.10-2.11) and a 90% elevation in risk of death from cardiovascular causes (1.89, 1.25-2.86), respectively, after extensive adjustment for known prognostic variables and baseline MMSE score. By contrast, cognitive decline during follow-up was not associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization or the composite of HF hospitalization or CV death (Figure 2). Conclusions In patients with HFpEF, a decline in MMSE score during follow-up is independently associated with a graded increase in the risk for mortality, but not of HF hospitalization.The predictors for cognitive declineRisk of outcomes after a decline in MMSE
Beta-Blocker Use and Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure and Mildly Reduced and Preserved Ejection Fraction
Henderson, Alasdair D , Shen, Li , Campbell, Ross T. , Boer, Rudolf A. de , Lam, Carolyn S.P., Maggioni, Aldo P. , Martínez, Felipe A. , Redfield, Margaret M. , Rouleau, Jean L. , Veldhuisen, Dirk Jan van, Zannad, Faı̈ez , Solomon, Scott, de Boer, Rudolf A , Maggioni, Aldo P , Matsumoto, Shingo , Kondo, Toru , Yang, Mingming , Anand, Inder S. , Desai, Akshay S , Lam, Carolyn S.P. , Packer, Milton , Veldhuisen, Dirk J. van , Vaduganathan, Muthiah , Zile, Michael R. , Jhund, Pardeep S. , McMurray, John J.V.

European Journal of Heart Failure | August 31, 2024 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 124-139

10.1002/ejhf.3383 Get It

ABSTRACT Aims In the absence of randomized trial evidence, we performed a large observational analysis of the association between beta-blocker (BB) use and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) and mildly reduced (HFmrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and results We pooled individual patient data from four large HFmrEF/HFpEF trials (I-Preserve, TOPCAT, PARAGON-HF, and DELIVER). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Among the 16 951 patients included, the mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 56.8%, and 13 400 (79.1%) had HFpEF (LVEF ≥50%). Overall, 12 812 patients (75.6%) received a BB. The median bisoprolol-equivalent dose of BB was 5.0 (Q1–Q3: 2.5–5.0) mg with BB continuation rates of 93.1% at 2 years (in survivors). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not differ between BB users and non-users (HR 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–1.05), but the adjusted HR was lower in BB users than non-users (0.81, 95% CI 0.74–0.88), and this association was maintained across LVEF (pinteraction = 0.88). In subgroup analyses, the adjusted risk of the primary outcome was similar in BB users and non-users with or without a history of myocardial infarction, hypertension, or a baseline heart rate <70 bpm. By contrast, a better outcome with BB use was seen in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to those without atrial fibrillation (pintreraction = 0.02). Conclusions In this observational analysis of non-randomized BB treatment, there was no suggestion that BB use was associated with worse HF outcomes in HFmrEF/HFpEF, even after extensive adjustment for other prognostic variables.