Evidence mapPaperPMID 40528106Full record

ReviewHeart failure reviews2025

Targeting inflammation in heart failure: evolving insights and future directions from randomized clinical trials.

Reina Nagasaka, Ellis Kim, Andrew P Ambrosy, Matthew J Feinstein

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heart failure reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Reina NagasakaThe Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Ellis KimThe Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Andrew P AmbrosyDepartment of Cardiology, Kaiser Permanente San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Matthew J FeinsteinThe Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. matthewjfeinstein@northwestern.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, with inflammation recognized as a key cause and byproduct. Despite observational studies linking elevated indices of inflammation with HF severity, as well as experimental models highlighting the centrality of inflammation to the pathogenesis of various types of HF, clinical trials of anti-inflammatory therapies in HF have produced inconsistent results. This variability may relate to the substrate included - differences in HF stage and/or clinical phenotype - as well as the mechanisms and target of therapeutics, whether aimed at preventing new-onset HF or treating established disease. This review evaluates clinical trials directly targeting inflammation in HF, with a focus on disease stage and symptomatology. Ultimately, by highlighting the importance of HF staging and the timing of therapeutics in prior inflammation-targeted interventions, we aim to inform more precise targets from a disease substrate perspective when designing trials of inflammation-modulating therapies in HF.

Indexed as

Anti-Inflammatory AgentsHeart FailureInflammationHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Inflammatory AgentsAnti-inflammatory therapiesClinical trialsHeart failureInflammation

Identifiers

PMID40528106
PMCPMC12618419

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.