Atrial Fibrillation and the Prognostic Performance of Biomarkers in Heart Failure

BACKGROUND: Consideration of circulating biomarkers for risk stratification in heart failure (HF) is recommended, but the influence of atrial fibrillation (AF) on prognostic performance of many markers is unclear. We investigated the influence of AF on the prognostic performance of circulating biomarkers in HF. METHODS: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), mid-regional-pro-atrial natriuretic peptide, C-type natriuretic peptide (CNP), NT-proCNP, high-sensitivity troponin-T, high-sensitivity troponin-I, mid-regional-propeptide adrenomedullin, co-peptin, growth differentiation factor-15, soluble Suppressor of Tumorigenicitiy (sST2), galectin-3, and procalcitonin plasma concentrations were measured in a prospective, multicenter study of adults with HF. AF was defined as a previous history of AF, and/or presence of AF/flutter on baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram. The primary outcome was the composite of HF-hospitalization or all-cause mortality at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 1099 patients (age 62 +/- 12years, 28% female), 261(24%) patients had AF. Above-median concentrations of all biomarkers were independently associated with increased risk of the primary outcome. Significant interactions with AF were detected for galectin-3 and sST2. In considering NT-proBNP for additive risk stratification, sST2 (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]1.85, 95%confidence interval [C.I.] 1.17-2.91) and galectin-3 (AHR1.85, 95%C.I. 1.09-2.45) were independently associated with increased primary outcome only in the presence of AF. The prognostic performance of sST2 was also stronger in AF for all-cause mortality (AF: AHR2.82, 95%C.I. 1.26-6.21; non-AF: AHR1.78, 95% C.I. 1.14-2.76 without AF), while galectin-3 predicted HF-hospitalization only in AF (AHR1.64, 95%C.I. 1.03-2.62). CONCLUSIONS: AF modified the prognostic utility of selected guideline-endorsed HF-biomarkers. Application of markers for prognostic purposes in HF requires consideration of the presence or absence of AF

ISO 9000: in construction/ Lam Siew Wah

xiii, 239 hal.: ill.; 25 cm

ISO 9000 in construction

xiii, 239 p. : il.; 24 cm

Iso 9000 in construction

xiii+239hlm.;23c

Differential Associations of A-/B-Type Natriuretic Peptides With Cardiac Structure, Function, and Prognosis in Heart Failure

Background: Natriuretic peptide (NP) elevations are prognostic in heart failure (HF), but relative atrial NP deficiency in acute HF has been suggested. Objectives: The authors compared plasma concentrations and relative strength of associations of A- and B-type NPs with cardiac structure/function and clinical outcomes in HF. Methods: Midregional pro–atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP), B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), and N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were measured in patients with compensated HF in a prospective, multicenter study. The primary outcome was a composite of HF-hospitalization or all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included individual primary outcome components and cardiovascular admission. Results: Among 1,278 patients (age 60.1 ± 12.1 years, 82% men, left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 34% ± 14%), median concentrations of MR-proANP were 990 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 557-1,563 pg/mL), NT-proBNP 1,648 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 652-3,960 pg/mL), and BNP 291 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 103-777 pg/mL). No subpopulation with inappropriately low MR-proANP (relative to BNP/NT-proBNP) was observed. Clinical event rates were similar for biomarker tertiles. Increments in MR-proANP exhibited steeper associations with concurrent shifts in left ventricular size, diastolic indexes and LVEF than BNP/NT-proBNP at baseline and serially (P &lt; 0.05), and lower odds of beneficial left ventricular reverse remodeling: OR: 0.35 (95% CI: 0.18-0.70). In single-biomarker models, MR-proANP(log10) was associated with the highest hazard (4 to 6 times) for each outcome. In multimarker models, independent associations were observed for the primary outcome (MR-proANP and NT-proBNP), HF-hospitalization and cardiovascular admission (MR-proANP only), and all-cause mortality (NT-proBNP only) (P &lt; 0.05). The discriminative value of MR-proANP was superior to BNP/NT-proBNP (HF-hospitalization) and BNP (primary outcome) (P &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: MR-proANP was not inappropriately low relative to concurrent BNP/NT-proBNP values. Proportional increments in MR-proANP were more pronounced than for B-peptides for given decrements in cardiac structure/function. MR-proANP offered greater independent predictive power overall.</p

Differential Associations of A-/B-Type Natriuretic Peptides With Cardiac Structure, Function, and Prognosis in Heart Failure

Background: Natriuretic peptide (NP) elevations are prognostic in heart failure (HF), but relative atrial NP deficiency in acute HF has been suggested. Objectives: The authors compared plasma concentrations and relative strength of associations of A- and B-type NPs with cardiac structure/function and clinical outcomes in HF. Methods: Midregional pro–atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP), B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), and N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were measured in patients with compensated HF in a prospective, multicenter study. The primary outcome was a composite of HF-hospitalization or all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included individual primary outcome components and cardiovascular admission. Results: Among 1,278 patients (age 60.1 ± 12.1 years, 82% men, left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 34% ± 14%), median concentrations of MR-proANP were 990 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 557-1,563 pg/mL), NT-proBNP 1,648 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 652-3,960 pg/mL), and BNP 291 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 103-777 pg/mL). No subpopulation with inappropriately low MR-proANP (relative to BNP/NT-proBNP) was observed. Clinical event rates were similar for biomarker tertiles. Increments in MR-proANP exhibited steeper associations with concurrent shifts in left ventricular size, diastolic indexes and LVEF than BNP/NT-proBNP at baseline and serially (P &lt; 0.05), and lower odds of beneficial left ventricular reverse remodeling: OR: 0.35 (95% CI: 0.18-0.70). In single-biomarker models, MR-proANP(log10) was associated with the highest hazard (4 to 6 times) for each outcome. In multimarker models, independent associations were observed for the primary outcome (MR-proANP and NT-proBNP), HF-hospitalization and cardiovascular admission (MR-proANP only), and all-cause mortality (NT-proBNP only) (P &lt; 0.05). The discriminative value of MR-proANP was superior to BNP/NT-proBNP (HF-hospitalization) and BNP (primary outcome) (P &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: MR-proANP was not inappropriately low relative to concurrent BNP/NT-proBNP values. Proportional increments in MR-proANP were more pronounced than for B-peptides for given decrements in cardiac structure/function. MR-proANP offered greater independent predictive power overall.</p

Global longitudinal strain and plasma biomarkers for prognosis in heart failure complicated by diabetes: a prospective observational study

Abstract Background Heart failure (HF) and diabetes are associated with increased incidence and worse prognosis of each other. The prognostic value of global longitudinal strain (GLS) measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has not been established in HF patients with diabetes. Methods In this prospective, observational study, consecutive patients (n = 315) with HF underwent CMR at 3T, including GLS, late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), native T1, and extracellular volume fraction (ECV) mapping. Plasma biomarker concentrations were measured including: N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide(NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity troponin T(hs-TnT), growth differentiation factor 15(GDF-15), soluble ST2(sST2), and galectin 3(Gal-3). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalisation. Results Compared to those without diabetes (n = 156), the diabetes group (n = 159) had a higher LGE prevalence (76 vs. 60%, p < 0.05), higher T1 (1285±42 vs. 1269±42ms, p < 0.001), and higher ECV (30.5±3.5 vs. 28.8±4.1%, p < 0.001). The diabetes group had higher NT-pro-BNP, hs-TnT, GDF-15, sST2, and Gal-3. Diabetes conferred worse prognosis (hazard ratio (HR) 2.33 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.43–3.79], p < 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression analysis including clinical markers and plasma biomarkers, sST2 alone remained independently associated with the primary outcome (HR per 1 ng/mL 1.04 [95% CI 1.02–1.07], p = 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression models in the diabetes group, both GLS and sST2 remained prognostic (GLS: HR 1.12 [95% CI 1.03–1.21], p = 0.01; sST2: HR per 1 ng/mL 1.03 [95% CI 1.00-1.06], p = 0.02). Conclusions Compared to HF patients without diabetes, those with diabetes have worse plasma and CMR markers of fibrosis and a more adverse prognosis. GLS by CMR is a powerful and independent prognostic marker in HF patients with diabetes

Combining Circulating MicroRNA and NT-proBNP to Detect and Categorize Heart Failure Subtypes

10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.060JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY73111300-131