ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Impact of polypharmacy phenogroups on different heart failure phenotypes in patients with chronic heart failure: a retrospective examination of real-world cohort.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Polypharmacy is a rising morbidity amongst patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), with reported prevalence ranging from 70% to 85%. While polypharmacy is essential for managing comorbid conditions, its exact impact on heart failure outcomes is still emerging. This study aims to examine the effects of different polypharmacy phenogroups on mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions across various heart failure phenotypes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study involving 4,902 patients with chronic heart failure treated at Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar, between January 2018 and January 2022. Patients were classified into three polypharmacy groups: no polypharmacy (0-4 medications), major polypharmacy (five to eight medications), and excessive polypharmacy (≥9 medications). Heart failure phenotypes were categorized based on ejection fraction (EF): reduced EF (HFrEF, <40%), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF, 40%-49%), and preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥50%). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes including intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Results: A cohort of 4,902 patients with chronic heart failure, with a mean age of 61.47 years (SD 15.99), was analyzed. Among them, 51.7% had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), 16.2% had mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF), and 32% had preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Major polypharmacy due to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), was associated with a significant improvement in survival. In patients with HFpEF, the hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.75, p < 0.001), while for HFmrEF, it was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.59-0.85, p = 0.001). Conversely, excessive polypharmacy involving non-heart failure medications, was linked to increased ICU admissions (odds ratio [OR]: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.10-1.62, p = 0.02). Cox proportional hazards models demonstrated that excessive polypharmacy was associated with a hazard ratio of 0.11 (95% CI: 0.05-0.23, p < 0.001) for all-cause mortality when the medications were primarily heart failure-specific. Conclusion: In patients with chronic Heart failure, guideline directed polypharmacy was associated with improved survival, particularly in HFpEF and HFmrEF phenotypes. However, non-heart failure-related polypharmacy is associated with worse outcomes including ICU admissions, necessitating need for targeted interventions for this group of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.