Risk of adverse events with liraglutide in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A post hoc analysis of the FIGHT trial

Aim To perform a post hoc analysis of the FIGHT trial, evaluating the effect of liraglutide (vs. placebo) on the totality of events in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Materials and Methods FIGHT was a double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) that studied liraglutide versus placebo in 300 recently hospitalized patients with HFrEF followed for 180 days. The main outcome of the present analysis was total events of hospitalizations for heart failure (HF) or all-cause death. Secondary outcomes included total arrhythmic events and prespecified total events of interest (arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death, acute coronary syndrome, worsening HF, cerebrovascular event, venous thromboembolism, lightheadedness, presyncope/syncope or worsening renal function). Treatment effect was evaluated with negative binomial regression. Results Compared to placebo, there was a trend towards increased risk with liraglutide of total HF hospitalizations or all-cause deaths (96 vs. 143 events, incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-2.04; P = 0.064) and total arrhythmias (21 vs. 39, IRR 1.76, 95% CI 0.92-3.37; P = 0.088). Total prespecified events of interest were increased with liraglutide compared to placebo (196 vs. 295, IRR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06-1.92; P = 0.018). The risk of HF hospitalizations or all-cause deaths with liraglutide was higher among patients in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III to IV (IRR 1.86, 95% CI 1.21-2.85) than in those in NYHA Class I to II (IRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.31-1.23; interaction P = 0.008), and among patients with diabetes (interaction P = 0.051). The risk of arrhythmic events was higher among those without an implanted cardiac device (interaction P = 0.047). Conclusions In patients with HFrEF, liraglutide might increase the risk of cardiovascular adverse effects, an effect possibly driven by excess risk of arrhythmias and worsening HF events. As this was a post hoc analysis, these results should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis-generating. Further RCTs must be conducted before drawing definitive conclusions.