ReviewProgress in cardiovascular diseases
Clinical adoption of prognostic biomarkers: the case for heart failure.
Review in Progress in cardiovascular diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increased Plasma Concentrations of Extracellular Vesicles Are Associated with Pro-Inflammatory and Pro-Thrombotic Characteristics of Left and Right Ventricle Mechanical Support Devices.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
- Serum syndecan-1 concentration in hospitalized patients with heart failure may predict readmission-free survival.PloS one · 2021Article
- miR-129-5p improves cardiac function in rats with chronic heart failure through targeting HMGB1.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2019Article
- Ischemic biomarker heart-type fatty acid binding protein (hFABP) in acute heart failure - diagnostic and prognostic insights compared to NT-proBNP and troponin I.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2015Article
- Oxidative stress and inflammatory markers - the future of heart failure diagnostics?Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2015Article
- Beyond the Limits: Clinical Utility of Novel Cardiac Biomarkers.BioMed research international · 2015Review
- A prediction model for 5-year cardiac mortality in patients with chronic heart failure using ¹²³I-metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2014Article
- Left ventricular dysfunction with pulmonary hypertension: part 2: prognosis, noninvasive evaluation, treatment, and future research.Circulation. Heart failure · 2013Review
- The Indian Consensus Document on cardiac biomarker.Indian heart journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The recent explosion of scientific knowledge and technological progress has led to the discovery of a large array of circulating molecules commonly referred to as biomarkers. Biomarkers in heart failure (HF) research have been used to provide pathophysiologic insights, aid in establishing the diagnosis, refine prognosis, guide management, and target treatment. However, beyond diagnostic applications of natriuretic peptides, there are currently few widely recognized applications for biomarkers in HF. This represents a remarkable discordance considering the number of molecules that have been shown to correlate with outcomes, refine risk prediction, or track disease severity in HF in the past decade. In this article, we use a broad framework proposed for cardiovascular risk markers to summarize the current state of biomarker development for patients with HF. We use this framework to identify the challenges of biomarker adoption for risk prediction, disease management, and treatment selection for HF and suggest considerations for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.