Quality of Life and Prognosis in Heart Failure: Results of the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST)

Charles W. Tate, Alastair D. Robertson, Ronald Zolty, Simon F. Shakar, Joann Lindenfeld, Eugene E. Wolfel, Michael R. Bristow, Brian D. Lowes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Quality of life (QOL) was a prespecified secondary end point in the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial. The Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial used four QOL questionnaires to evaluate patient health status over time in response to treatment with placebo or bucindolol. The goal of the current study was to determine the relationship between the different questionnaires, assess the effect of treatment on health status, and evaluate the association between changes in health status and prognosis. Methods: The San Diego Heart Failure (SDHF), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF), Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and Physician Global Assessment (PhyGA) questionnaires were measured at baseline through 48 months of follow-up. For SDHF and MLHF, changes from baseline were calculated. Spearman correlation was used to assess relationships, and Cox Proportional Hazards regression was used to predict time to all-cause mortality, and mortality or heart failure hospitalization, bivariately and multivariately. To determine whether beta-blocker treatment affected QOL, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare treatment groups. Results: At 12 months, SDHF (r = +0.56, P = .0001), PGA (r = +0.36, P = .0001), and PhyGA (r = +0.37, P = .0001) correlated with MLHF. SDHF (P = .0001), MLHF (P = .0004), PGA (P = .0001), and PhyGA (P = .0001) were all strongly associated with all-cause mortality, with low values of each associated with a lower hazard. For the combined end point of all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization, change in QOL with each instrument had a P value of .0001. At 12 months, bucindolol-treated patients had improvement in both PhyGA and PGA compared with placebo; neither the SDHF nor the MLWF instrument distinguished between the two treatment groups unless a worst-rank assignment was used for patients who died. Conclusion: The four instruments correlate with each other and predict clinical end points, suggesting that each is a valid measure of health status. According to the PGA and the PhyGA, bucindolol improves QOL.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)732-737
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Cardiac Failure
Volume13
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2007

Fingerprint

Heart Failure
Quality of Life
Survival
Health Status
Physicians
Mortality
Nonparametric Statistics
Hospitalization
Placebos
Therapeutics
Surveys and Questionnaires
bucindolol

Keywords

  • Quality
  • beta-blockers
  • heart failure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Quality of Life and Prognosis in Heart Failure : Results of the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST). / Tate, Charles W.; Robertson, Alastair D.; Zolty, Ronald; Shakar, Simon F.; Lindenfeld, Joann; Wolfel, Eugene E.; Bristow, Michael R.; Lowes, Brian D.

In: Journal of Cardiac Failure, Vol. 13, No. 9, 01.11.2007, p. 732-737.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tate, Charles W. ; Robertson, Alastair D. ; Zolty, Ronald ; Shakar, Simon F. ; Lindenfeld, Joann ; Wolfel, Eugene E. ; Bristow, Michael R. ; Lowes, Brian D. / Quality of Life and Prognosis in Heart Failure : Results of the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST). In: Journal of Cardiac Failure. 2007 ; Vol. 13, No. 9. pp. 732-737.
@article{a86c6e29744345ee95014bf555f90a80,
title = "Quality of Life and Prognosis in Heart Failure: Results of the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST)",
abstract = "Background: Quality of life (QOL) was a prespecified secondary end point in the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial. The Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial used four QOL questionnaires to evaluate patient health status over time in response to treatment with placebo or bucindolol. The goal of the current study was to determine the relationship between the different questionnaires, assess the effect of treatment on health status, and evaluate the association between changes in health status and prognosis. Methods: The San Diego Heart Failure (SDHF), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF), Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and Physician Global Assessment (PhyGA) questionnaires were measured at baseline through 48 months of follow-up. For SDHF and MLHF, changes from baseline were calculated. Spearman correlation was used to assess relationships, and Cox Proportional Hazards regression was used to predict time to all-cause mortality, and mortality or heart failure hospitalization, bivariately and multivariately. To determine whether beta-blocker treatment affected QOL, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare treatment groups. Results: At 12 months, SDHF (r = +0.56, P = .0001), PGA (r = +0.36, P = .0001), and PhyGA (r = +0.37, P = .0001) correlated with MLHF. SDHF (P = .0001), MLHF (P = .0004), PGA (P = .0001), and PhyGA (P = .0001) were all strongly associated with all-cause mortality, with low values of each associated with a lower hazard. For the combined end point of all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization, change in QOL with each instrument had a P value of .0001. At 12 months, bucindolol-treated patients had improvement in both PhyGA and PGA compared with placebo; neither the SDHF nor the MLWF instrument distinguished between the two treatment groups unless a worst-rank assignment was used for patients who died. Conclusion: The four instruments correlate with each other and predict clinical end points, suggesting that each is a valid measure of health status. According to the PGA and the PhyGA, bucindolol improves QOL.",
keywords = "Quality, beta-blockers, heart failure",
author = "Tate, {Charles W.} and Robertson, {Alastair D.} and Ronald Zolty and Shakar, {Simon F.} and Joann Lindenfeld and Wolfel, {Eugene E.} and Bristow, {Michael R.} and Lowes, {Brian D.}",
year = "2007",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cardfail.2007.07.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "732--737",
journal = "Journal of Cardiac Failure",
issn = "1071-9164",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality of Life and Prognosis in Heart Failure

T2 - Results of the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST)

AU - Tate, Charles W.

AU - Robertson, Alastair D.

AU - Zolty, Ronald

AU - Shakar, Simon F.

AU - Lindenfeld, Joann

AU - Wolfel, Eugene E.

AU - Bristow, Michael R.

AU - Lowes, Brian D.

PY - 2007/11/1

Y1 - 2007/11/1

N2 - Background: Quality of life (QOL) was a prespecified secondary end point in the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial. The Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial used four QOL questionnaires to evaluate patient health status over time in response to treatment with placebo or bucindolol. The goal of the current study was to determine the relationship between the different questionnaires, assess the effect of treatment on health status, and evaluate the association between changes in health status and prognosis. Methods: The San Diego Heart Failure (SDHF), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF), Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and Physician Global Assessment (PhyGA) questionnaires were measured at baseline through 48 months of follow-up. For SDHF and MLHF, changes from baseline were calculated. Spearman correlation was used to assess relationships, and Cox Proportional Hazards regression was used to predict time to all-cause mortality, and mortality or heart failure hospitalization, bivariately and multivariately. To determine whether beta-blocker treatment affected QOL, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare treatment groups. Results: At 12 months, SDHF (r = +0.56, P = .0001), PGA (r = +0.36, P = .0001), and PhyGA (r = +0.37, P = .0001) correlated with MLHF. SDHF (P = .0001), MLHF (P = .0004), PGA (P = .0001), and PhyGA (P = .0001) were all strongly associated with all-cause mortality, with low values of each associated with a lower hazard. For the combined end point of all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization, change in QOL with each instrument had a P value of .0001. At 12 months, bucindolol-treated patients had improvement in both PhyGA and PGA compared with placebo; neither the SDHF nor the MLWF instrument distinguished between the two treatment groups unless a worst-rank assignment was used for patients who died. Conclusion: The four instruments correlate with each other and predict clinical end points, suggesting that each is a valid measure of health status. According to the PGA and the PhyGA, bucindolol improves QOL.

AB - Background: Quality of life (QOL) was a prespecified secondary end point in the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial. The Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial used four QOL questionnaires to evaluate patient health status over time in response to treatment with placebo or bucindolol. The goal of the current study was to determine the relationship between the different questionnaires, assess the effect of treatment on health status, and evaluate the association between changes in health status and prognosis. Methods: The San Diego Heart Failure (SDHF), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF), Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and Physician Global Assessment (PhyGA) questionnaires were measured at baseline through 48 months of follow-up. For SDHF and MLHF, changes from baseline were calculated. Spearman correlation was used to assess relationships, and Cox Proportional Hazards regression was used to predict time to all-cause mortality, and mortality or heart failure hospitalization, bivariately and multivariately. To determine whether beta-blocker treatment affected QOL, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare treatment groups. Results: At 12 months, SDHF (r = +0.56, P = .0001), PGA (r = +0.36, P = .0001), and PhyGA (r = +0.37, P = .0001) correlated with MLHF. SDHF (P = .0001), MLHF (P = .0004), PGA (P = .0001), and PhyGA (P = .0001) were all strongly associated with all-cause mortality, with low values of each associated with a lower hazard. For the combined end point of all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization, change in QOL with each instrument had a P value of .0001. At 12 months, bucindolol-treated patients had improvement in both PhyGA and PGA compared with placebo; neither the SDHF nor the MLWF instrument distinguished between the two treatment groups unless a worst-rank assignment was used for patients who died. Conclusion: The four instruments correlate with each other and predict clinical end points, suggesting that each is a valid measure of health status. According to the PGA and the PhyGA, bucindolol improves QOL.

KW - Quality

KW - beta-blockers

KW - heart failure

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35748981779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35748981779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cardfail.2007.07.001

DO - 10.1016/j.cardfail.2007.07.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 17996821

AN - SCOPUS:35748981779

VL - 13

SP - 732

EP - 737

JO - Journal of Cardiac Failure

JF - Journal of Cardiac Failure

SN - 1071-9164

IS - 9

ER -