
Benefits of HF Drug May Weaken Soon After Withdrawal
Finerenone, a third-generation nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, showed promise in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with heart failure (HF). However, its abrupt withdrawal after long-term use was associated with an increased incidence of serious adverse events (related to the heart, leading to death approximately 30 days after withdrawal of treatment.
METHODOLOGY:
Guidelines recommend lifelong use of therapies for HF due to their presumed lasting benefits; however, clinicians and patients frequently question whether such treatments can be safely stopped once the disease becomes stable.
Researchers conducted a secondary analysis of the FINEARTS-HF trial to assess the cardiovascular effects of discontinuing finerenone after long-term use of the drug.
The FINEARTS-HF trial included 6001 patients with symptomatic HF and left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 40% who were randomly assigned to receive either finerenone (mean age, 71.9 years; 45.1% women) or placebo (mean age, 72 years; 45.9% women) for a median duration of 2.6 years.
After the treatment phase ended, 3742 surviving patients (1852 on placebo and 1890 on finerenone) were withdrawn from the interventions; the patients remained blinded to the treatment and withdrawal.
Adverse events were assessed approximately 30 days after the withdrawal, focusing on serious cardiovascular episodes or any event resulting in death.
TAKEAWAY:
Before the withdrawal, patients receiving finerenone vs placebo experienced fewer serious cardiovascular adverse events or adverse events leading to death (6.0 vs 9.2 per 100 patient-years).
The withdrawal of finerenone was associated with a 2.8-fold increase in the incidence of cardiovascular events or adverse leading to death, a pattern not observed after the withdrawal of placebo (time period-treatment P for interaction = .006).
Most of the cardiovascular events in the withdrawal period were related to HF; withdrawal of finerenone vs placebo was associated with more HF-specific serious events or adverse events leading to death (time period-treatment P for interaction = .012).
IN PRACTICE:
'Global implementation efforts are needed to promote long-term MRA [mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist] therapy persistence to maximize treatment potential. Minimal changes in serum potassium or kidney function during MRA therapy should not automatically lead to treatment interruption,' the researchers wrote.
SOURCE:
This study was led by Muthiah Vaduganathan, MD, MPH, of Harvard Medical School in Boston. It was published online on July 28, 2025, in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
LIMITATIONS:
Patients assigned to receive finerenone or placebo may no longer have been directly comparable years after randomization. Clinical events during the withdrawal period relied on reporting of adverse events without adjudication. Fewer than 50 clinical events were recorded during the short withdrawal period, reducing the precision of the estimates.
DISCLOSURES:
The FINEARTS-HF trial was funded by Bayer. Several authors reported serving on advisory boards, having speaker engagements, receiving research support, and having other financial ties with multiple pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and healthcare companies. Three authors reported being employees of Bayer.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
10 minutes ago
- Washington Post
We fact-checked the Trump administration's climate report
The Energy Department released a report this week promising a 'critical review' of climate science, coinciding with the Environmental Protection Agency's move to end climate regulation across the federal government. But scientists say the report, drafted by researchers known for questioning mainstream climate science, is riddled with errors and cherry-picked data.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Alector to Host Second Quarter and Mid-Year 2025 Earnings Conference Call
Call Scheduled for Thursday, August 7, 2025, at 4:30 p.m. ET/1:30 p.m. PT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., July 31, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Alector, Inc. (Nasdaq: ALEC), a late-stage clinical biotechnology company focused on developing therapies to counteract the devastating progression of neurodegeneration, today announced it will host a conference call and webcast on Thursday, August 7, 2025, at 4:30 p.m. ET to discuss results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2025, and provide a mid-year business update. The call will feature remarks from Ryan Darby, M.D., Associate Professor of Neurology and Director of the Frontotemporal Dementia Clinic at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, who will speak on the unmet need in frontotemporal dementia. A press release detailing second quarter results will be issued prior to the call. The event will be webcast live under the investor relations section of Alector's website at and following the event a replay will be archived there for 30 days. Interested parties participating by phone will need to register using this online form. After registering for dial-in details, all phone participants will receive an auto-generated e-mail containing a link to the dial-in number along with a personal PIN number to use to access the event by phone. About AlectorAlector is a late-stage clinical biotechnology company focused on developing therapies to counteract the devastating progression of neurodegenerative diseases. Leveraging the principles of genetics, immunology, and neuroscience, the company is advancing a portfolio of genetically validated programs that aim to remove toxic proteins, replace missing proteins, and restore immune and nerve cell function. Supported by biomarkers, Alector's product candidates seek to treat a range of indications, such as frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, and Parkinson's disease. The company is also developing Alector Brain Carrier (ABC), a proprietary blood-brain barrier platform, which is being selectively applied to its next-generation product candidates and research pipeline. ABC aims to enhance the delivery of therapeutics, achieve deeper brain penetration and efficacy at lower doses, and ultimately improve patient outcomes while reducing costs. Alector is headquartered in South San Francisco, California. For more information, please visit Alector Contacts: AlectorKatie Argot Partners (media)David Rosen646-461-6387alector@ Argot Partners (investors)Laura Perry212-600-1902alector@


Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Just Seeing A (Fake) Sick Person Can Activate Your Immune System
We have all experienced the phenomena of seeing a disturbing or disgusting image that makes us feel physically ill. When the human brain processes certain types of visual images, it can send neural signals to our bodies that result in us feeling nauseated, light-headed, or shaky. Scientists have now learned that certain types of visual imagery can also turn on our immune systems, even without being physically exposed to an infectious agent. A team of scientists based in Switzerland performed an experiment with 248 healthy adults, in which the subjects were exposed to avatar images of people walking towards them. Some looked healthy with neutral facial expressions, others looked healthy but with fearful expressions, and some looked like they had a contagious illness (indicated by coughing and skin rashes). The subjects wore gaming headsets that created an immersive 3-D virtual reality environment, in which the simulated avatars walked towards them. When the subjects were approached by avatars who looked sick and appeared ready to invade their personal space, the researcher found that subjects activated their innate lymphoid cells, which is part of the 'first responder' arm of the immune system. This was measured by blood sampling of the subjects. In contrast, this cellular response did not occur when the subjects were approached by fearful-looking but non-infected avatars, or by avatars with neutral expressions. In other words, although the test subjects were not exposed to any actual infectious agents, the possibility of a simulated contact with an infected person was enough to trigger a real-world immune response. The fact that this response was elicted only by the 'infected' avatars but not the 'fearful' avatars, suggests that this is a specific response to potential infection, as opposed to a generalized response to a generic threat. The researchers also showed that innate lymphoid cell response caused by simulated exposure to the infected avatars was the same as the response to real-world exposure to flu vaccine (which works by triggering an immune response). The researchers also used functional MRI (fMRI) analysis of brain activation during the simulated exposures, to determine how the brain processed this simulated threat. They found that the simulated exposure increased blood flow in specific portions of the brain known as the 'salience network' which is 'an ensemble of interconnected brain regions whose major role is detecting and filtering salient stimuli, including threats.' The exact mechanism by which the brain then activated the immune system is not fully understood, but likely related to stimulation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal cortex (HPA) axis. From an evolutionary perspective, these results make sense. Being able to anticipate an imminent threat of infection (and act accordingly) would be a pro-survival trait. And if avoidance of an imminent infection isn't always possible, being able to proactively stimulate the immune system before actual contact with a pathogen could offer a survival advantage vs. activating the immune system only after physical contact. The authors also noted that this is an example of the 'smoke detector principle' in biological defenses, which is tuned to be mildly oversensitive to threats. In many contexts, an overly sensitive smoke detector that generated a few occasional false-positives (even if there was no actual fire) might save more lives than an insufficiently sensitive smoke detector that generated too many false negatives (failing to respond to actual fires.) The same applies to biological defenses. This work is very preliminary. But this innovative research sheds light on hitherto unrecognized connections between the brain and the immune system, which could be helpful in developing new treatments against various pathogens. Could appropriate visual imagery help activate the immune system against infections in a way that supplements standard antibiotic therapy? Or stimulate the appropriate immune response to fight cancer cells? I look forward to further investigations along these lines.