Abstract:Aims: Heart failure (HF) with supranormal ejection fraction (HFsnEF) represents a distinct clinical entity characterized by limited treatment options and an unfavourable prognosis. Revealing its phenotypic diversity is crucial for understanding disease mechanism and optimizing patient management. We aim to identify phenotypic subgroups in HFsnEF using unsupervised clustering analysis. Methods: Consecutive hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of HF and a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥65% at baseline echocardiographic evaluations were included for analysis. We conducted unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis on principal components (HCPC) to identify HFsnEF phenogroups using mixed data variables including demographics, HF duration, vital signs, anthropometrics, smoking/drinking status, HF aetiology, comorbid diseases, laboratory tests and echocardiographic parameters. We then employed decision tree modelling to identify parameters capable of distinguishing distinct clusters. Clinical outcomes, including all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death and CV readmission for different clusters, were examined. Results: Three mutually exclusive clusters were identified from the cohort of 221 HFsnEF patients. Cluster 1 (52.5%) predominantly consisted of patients with valvular heart disease, who had larger cardiac chambers and a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter. Cluster 2 (26.2%) primarily comprised older ischaemic patients with a higher prevalence of metabolic comorbidities. Cluster 3 (21.3%) were mainly hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients. Two clinical variables were identified that could be used to group all HFsnEF patients into one of the clusters; they were HF aetiology and comorbid diabetes. During the median follow-up of 53.4 months, 46 (20.8%) all-cause deaths occurred, among them 39 of CV causes. Seventy (31.7%) patients experienced CV readmissions. Three clusters showed distinct differences in mortality outcomes, with Cluster 1 exhibiting the highest risk of all-cause mortality [Cluster 1 vs. Cluster 2: adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 3.32, P = 0.022; Cluster 1 vs. Cluster 3: aHR = 3.81, P = 0.036; Cluster 2 vs. Cluster 3: aHR = 1.15, P = 0.865] and CV mortality (Cluster 1 vs. Cluster 2: aHR = 3.73, P = 0.022; Cluster 1 vs. Cluster 3: aHR = 4.27, P = 0.020; Cluster 2 vs. Cluster 3: aHR = 1.15, P = 0.870). CV readmission risk was comparable among the three clusters (Cluster 1 vs. Cluster 2: aHR = 0.82, P = 0.590; Cluster 1 vs. Cluster 3: aHR = 1.04, P = 0.900; Cluster 2 vs. Cluster 3: aHR = 1.28, P = 0.580). Conclusions: In a heterogeneous HFsnEF cohort, three clusters were identified by unsupervised HCPC with distinct clinical characteristics and outcomes.

Medications for specific phenotypes of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction classified by a machine learning-based clustering model

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction phenogroup classification using machine learning

A Phenotyping of Diastolic Function by Machine Learning Improves Prediction of Clinical Outcomes in Heart Failure

Phenogrouping heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction using electronic health record data

Efficacy of Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system inhibitors for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and left ventricular hypertrophy -from the KUNIUMI Registry Acute Cohort

Using Model‐Based Analysis and Physiology‐Informed Machine Learning to Refine the Stratification of Phenotypes in Heart Failure

Association between class of foundational medication for heart failure and prognosis in heart failure with reduced/mildly reduced ejection fraction

Phenogroups and Their Prognosis of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Machine learning based on biomarker profiles identifies distinct subgroups of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Abstract 4129533: Phenotypes and Clinical Outcome of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (hfpef) Patients in China: Findings from the Chinese Cardiovascular Association Database-Heart Failure Center Registry

Clinical phenogroups are more effective than left ventricular ejection fraction categories in stratifying heart failure outcomes

High-Risk Morphological and Physiological Coronary Disease Attributes As Outcome Markers after Medical Treatment and Revascularization.

Comparative Analysis of Heart Failure with Preserved Vs Reduced Ejection Fraction: Patient Characteristics, Outcomes, Mortality Prediction, and Machine Learning Model Development in the JoHFR

Distinct Profiles and New Pharmacological Targets for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Multi‐modality machine learning approach for risk stratification in heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 45%

Comparison of Unsupervised Machine Learning Approaches for Cluster Analysis to Define Subgroups of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction with Different Outcomes

Exercise Stress Echocardiography-Based Phenotyping of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Machine Learning for Predicting Heart Failure Progression in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Variation in clinical and patient‐reported outcomes among complex heart failure with preserved ejection fraction phenotypes

Real-world evidence for patient phenotypes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Clinical phenotypes of heart failure patients with supranormal ejection fraction