Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35274420›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of heart failure2022

Defining changes in physical limitation from the patient perspective: insights from the VITALITY-HFpEF randomized trial.

Javed Butler, John A Spertus, Luke Bamber, Muhammad Shahzeb Khan, Lothar Roessig, Vanja Vlajnic, Josephine M Norquist, Kevin J Anstrom, Robert O Blaustein, Carolyn S P Lam and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of heart failure, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. 2024 update in heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

Javed ButlerDepartment of Medicine, University of Mississippi, Jackson, MS, USA.
John A SpertusSaint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Luke BamberBayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany.
Muhammad Shahzeb KhanDivision of Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Lothar RoessigBayer AG, Wuppertal, Germany.
Vanja VlajnicBayer U.S., LLC, Whippany, NJ, USA.
Josephine M NorquistCardiovascular Clinical Research, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
Kevin J AnstromDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Robert O BlausteinCardiovascular Clinical Research, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
Carolyn S P LamNational Heart Centre Singapore, Duke-National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Paul W ArmstrongDivision of Cardiology, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
VITALITY-HFpEF Study Group
Bayer (Germany) · DEMerck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) · USBayer (United States) · USCanadian VIGOUR Centre · CAClinical Research Institute · USDuke Medical Center · USNational University Heart Centre Singapore · SGUniversity of Mississippi · USUniversity of Missouri–Kansas City · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsClinically important thresholds in patient-reported outcomes measures like the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) have not been defined for patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The aim of this study was to estimate meaningful thresholds for improvement or worsening in the KCCQ physical limitation score (PLS) in patients with HFpEF. METHODS AND

resultsIn this pre-specified analysis from VITALITY-HFpEF, anchor- and distribution-based approaches were used to estimate thresholds for improvement or worsening in the KCCQ-PLS using Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) as an anchor. The KCCQ-PLS contains six elements, with each increment in response resulting in a change of 4.17 points when converted to a 0-100 scale. The mean change in KCCQ-PLS from baseline to week 12 was calculated for each PGIC group to estimate a meaningful within-patient change. Of 789 patients enrolled, 698 had complete KCCQ-PLS and PGIC data at week 12. The mean (± standard deviation) changes in KCCQ-PLS corresponding to PGIC changes of 'a little better', 'better', and 'much better' were 5.7 ± 18.6, 11.6 ± 19.3, and 18.4 ± 25.3 points, respectively. The scores of patients who responded 'a little better' (n = 177) overlapped substantially with those who reported 'no change' (n = 193; mean change 2.8 ± 18.9). The mean change in KCCQ-PLS for patients responding 'a little worse' (n = 32) was -2.6 ± 18.0 points. The threshold for meaningful within-patient change in KCCQ-PLS based on distribution-based analyses was 12.3 points. Using area under the curve (AUC) analyses of KCCQ-PLS, the sensitivity and specificity of a 4.17-point change were 0.61 and 0.57, for an 8.33-point change they were 0.49 and 0.64, and for a 12.5-point change they were 0.44 and 0.72 for being at least a little better on the PGIC (AUC = 0.54).

conclusionIn the VITALITY-HFpEF trial, a change in KCCQ-PLS of ≥8.33 points (corresponding to an improvement in ≥2 response categories of KCCQ-PLS) may represent the minimal clinically important difference for improvement and a change of ≤ -4.17 points (corresponding to a worsening in ≥1 response category of KCCQ-PLS) may suggest deterioration in patients with HFpEF.

Indexed as

Heart FailureHumansMinimal Clinically Important DifferencePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeStroke VolumeHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionPatient-reported outcomes

Identifiers

PMID35274420
PMCPMC9324829
OpenAlexW4220889425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.