search
Back to results

Optimising Pacing for Contractility 2 (OPT-cont 2)

Primary Purpose

Heart Failure, Systolic, Pacemaker

Status
Recruiting
Phase
Phase 2
Locations
United Kingdom
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Heart rate optimisation using force frequency data
Sponsored by
University of Leeds
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Heart Failure, Systolic

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF<50%),
  • Cardiac pacemaker,
  • Able to perform a peak exercise test,
  • Willing and able to give informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Angina pectoris symptoms limiting exercise tolerance,
  • Unstable heart failure symptoms (medical therapy changes in last three months), Poor image quality,
  • Calcium channel blockers (CCBs).

Sites / Locations

  • Leeds General InfirmaryRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm Type

No Intervention

Active Comparator

Experimental

Arm Label

Standard rate-response settings

Rate-response settings off

Optimized rate-response settings

Arm Description

Patients allocated to standard rate-response settings.

Patients allocated to deactivated rate-response settings.

Patients allocated to optimised rate-response settings.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Treadmill walk time
Time walked during a standard incremental treadmill test

Secondary Outcome Measures

Quality of life 1
EQ5D-5L score
Quality of life 2
KCCQ score
Clinical composite score
Clinical outcomes combined (death, hospitalisation, NYHA symptom level, diuretic dose
Cardiac function during exercise measured by LVEF on echocardiogrpahy
As assessed on a cycle ergometer
Wall stress by cardiac MRI
Wall stress assessed by cardiac MRI
Autonomic dysfunction
Measures of Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity
Autonomic dysfunction
Heart rate variability

Full Information

First Posted
December 11, 2019
Last Updated
January 25, 2023
Sponsor
University of Leeds
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04201015
Brief Title
Optimising Pacing for Contractility 2
Acronym
OPT-cont 2
Official Title
Mechanisms, Safety and Efficacy of Optimising Pacemaker Heart Rate for Contractility: Effects on Walk Time, Cardiac Remodelling and Quality of Life
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
January 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
June 1, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
December 31, 2023 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
December 31, 2023 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Leeds

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The investigators have demonstrated that they can reliably identify an optimum heart rate range for contractility of the left ventricle in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). They have also demonstrated in an acute cross-over and a small parallel group feasibility study that keeping the heart rate in this range (versus standard rate-response programming) in patients with CHF is associated with increased exercise time on a treadmill (around 60s or 10%). They now want to explore in a randomised, placebo-controlled 3-arm parallel group trial whether optimal programming versus standard rate-response programming versus no rate-response programming for 6 months leads to appreciable improvements in exercise time and quality of life, while having no adverse effects on left ventricular function and battery longevity and what the mechanisms of this might be. 400 patients with CHF and a pacemaker will undergo the non-invasive echocardiographic assessment to establish the force frequency relationship and the optimal heart rate for contractility. They will then perform a treadmill walk test, complete quality of life questionnaires and be offered the opportunity to participate in a series of mechanistic substudies. They will then be randomised to optimal rate-response settings, standard rate response settings or no rate-response settings and followed up at 6 months at which point the tests will be repeated.
Detailed Description
Detailed Description: Design: This will be a randomised, double-blind 'placebo' controlled trial of optimised programming versus standard rate-response settings, aiming to determine whether the short term improvements translate into longer term benefits. Study participants: 400 adult patients (>18years). Study Procedures: Patients attending the heart failure clinic, the pacemaker clinic or previous research participants will be approached with a standard letter and information sheet and then a telephone call to make sure any remaining questions are answered. Patients agreeing to participate will attend the clinical research facility (CRF) and will be asked to sign a consent form. Each patient will have a standard device check, check of their demographic data, and co-morbidities. The investigators will record a resting cardiac ultrasound, and measure the force frequency relationship (FFR) to determine critical heart rate (HR), and the optimal range of HR rise. All images will be stored for offline analysis. Participants will then be asked to do a symptom-limited walk test on the treadmill (until they cannot do any more). At this first visit, participants will also complete quality of life questionnaires and be invited to participate in substudies including cardiac magnetic resonance, blood tests, tests of autonomic dysfunction. All of these activities will take place in the Clinical Research Facility at Leeds General Infirmary. Randomisation: Each patient will then be randomised to either optimised programming (n=200) as predicted by their force-frequency curve (n=200), standard settings (n=100) or no rate response programming (n=100). In the optimised group, programming will keep heart rates below the critical HR. Randomisation will be by a random number generator and programming will be undertaken by one of my colleagues to maintain blinding. Follow-up: Each patient will be called at one month to check that they are tolerating any changes and will then be invited back at 6 months for a repeat resting echocardiogram, treadmill walk test and quality of life assessment. Data: All data will be stored on a bespoke Excel spreadsheet on an LTHT server in a password-protected folder. Primary Endpoint: The effects of heart rate programming that optimises heart rate for contractility on change in treadmill-based walk distance over six months in patients with heart failure and a pacemaker. Secondary endpoints: 1) the safety of pacemaker programming optimised for heart rate in patients with heart failure and a pacemaker, 2) the effect of this programming on change of quality of life at 6 months 3) the effect of this programming on change in cardiac function at 6 months. Mechanistic endpoints: 1) The effect of heart rate programming on measures of autonomic function, 2) Changes in cardiac function during exercise, 3) The effect of optimised heart rate programming on strain, wall stress and perfusion by cardiac magnetic resonance, 4) changes in biomarkers associated with heart failure

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Heart Failure, Systolic, Pacemaker

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Phase 2, Phase 3
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
ParticipantCare ProviderInvestigatorOutcomes Assessor
Masking Description
Only the technician doing the programming will know how the pacemaker has been set.
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
400 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Standard rate-response settings
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Patients allocated to standard rate-response settings.
Arm Title
Rate-response settings off
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Patients allocated to deactivated rate-response settings.
Arm Title
Optimized rate-response settings
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Patients allocated to optimised rate-response settings.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Heart rate optimisation using force frequency data
Intervention Description
Programming heart rate rise according to the force frequency relationship
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Treadmill walk time
Description
Time walked during a standard incremental treadmill test
Time Frame
6 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Quality of life 1
Description
EQ5D-5L score
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Quality of life 2
Description
KCCQ score
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Clinical composite score
Description
Clinical outcomes combined (death, hospitalisation, NYHA symptom level, diuretic dose
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Cardiac function during exercise measured by LVEF on echocardiogrpahy
Description
As assessed on a cycle ergometer
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Wall stress by cardiac MRI
Description
Wall stress assessed by cardiac MRI
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Autonomic dysfunction
Description
Measures of Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Autonomic dysfunction
Description
Heart rate variability
Time Frame
6 months

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF<50%), Cardiac pacemaker, Able to perform a peak exercise test, Willing and able to give informed consent. Exclusion Criteria: Angina pectoris symptoms limiting exercise tolerance, Unstable heart failure symptoms (medical therapy changes in last three months), Poor image quality, Calcium channel blockers (CCBs).
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Klaus K Witte, MD
Phone
01133926642
Email
k.k.witte@leeds.ac.uk
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Leeds General Infirmary
City
Leeds
Country
United Kingdom
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Klaus K Witte, MD
Email
k.k.witte@leeds.ac.uk
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Klaus K Witte, MD

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Time Frame
after initial analysis

Learn more about this trial

Optimising Pacing for Contractility 2

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs