Abstract P591: Prevalence and Prognosis Comparing the New vs. Old ACC/AHA/HFSA HF Stage Classification: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study

Abstract

Introduction: New guidelines for the management of heart failure (HF) have now incorporated cardiac biomarkers in the definition of those in pre-clinical HF (Stage B). We sought to compare the prevalence and prognosis according to the new vs. old ACC/AHA/HFSA HF Stage classification using data from the ARIC study visit 5 (2011-2013). Methods: The “old” classification included Stage 0 (no HF risk factors), Stage A (at risk for HF; without structural heart disease or symptoms), Stage B (structural heart disease; without HF signs and symptoms), Stage C1 (current or previous HF symptoms without HF hospitalization); Stage C2 (current or previous HF symptoms with HF hospitalization); Stage D (marked HF symptoms interfering with daily life). The “new” HF Stage classification included elevated NT-proBNP and cardiac troponin as evidence of Stage B. We examined all-cause mortality over five years, using tKaplan Meier method and multivariable Cox models. Results: Among 5,004 participants (mean age 75.3 (SD 5.1) years, 57% women, 22% Black), 28% had diabetes, 74% had hypertension, and 15% had coronary artery disease. With the new HF Stage classification, the prevalence of Stage 0/A decreased from 58% (n=2,887) to 27% (n=1,334), and Stage B increased from 29% (n=1,468) to 60% (n=3,021). The prevalence of Stage C2 and C1 were 7.3% and 5.7%, respectively, regardless of the new or old classification (no individuals had Stage D), with corresponding 5-year cumulative mortality of 33% and 21%. The new classification using cardiac biomarkers newly identified individuals as Stage B with mortality risk similar to those who were originally in Stage B (5-y cumulative mortality 10% and 12%, respectively). This “reclassification” left individuals with lower mortality risk as Stage 0/A (5-year cumulative mortality 5% vs. 8% in the new vs. old classification). When we adjusted for potential confounders, individuals newly classified as Stage B had an elevated mortality compared to those with Stage 0/A (HR 1.32 [0.98-1.77]) but not as high as those in original Stage B (1.83 [1.36-2.45]). Conclusions: The new HF classification newly identified a large number of older adults as Stage B, and they indeed had elevated mortality than those who stayed in Stage 0/A. However, after accounting for potential confounders, individuals newly classified as Stage B had slightly lower mortality than those originally in Stage B. Our findings will guide clinicians as to how to interpret new HF classification in terms of prognosis.