ArticleBMC medicine2019
NMR-based metabolomics identifies patients at high risk of death within two years after acute myocardial infarction in the AMI-Florence II cohort.
Article in BMC medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The predictive value of machine learning for mortality risk in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2023Pooled it
- The Predictive Value of Fragmented QRS for Cardiovascular Events in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Pooled it
- Recent Trends in Metabolomics by NMR Spectroscopy.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2026Review
- Metabolomic Atlas of Cardiovascular Diseases: Mapping Shared and Specific Signatures.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Early diagnostic biomarkers for acute myocardial infarction unveiled by metabolomics, Mendelian randomization, and machine learning.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Article
- Deriving three one dimensional NMR spectra from a single experiment through machine learning.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Photo-CIDNP for quantification of micromolar analytes in urine.Communications chemistry · 2025Article
- Recent progress in metabolomic analysis of acute coronary syndrome: a narrative review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Review
- Article
- Alterations in bile acid metabolites associated with pathogenicity and IVIG resistance in Kawasaki disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- A microfluidic coculture model for mapping signaling perturbations and precise drug screening against macrophage-mediated dynamic myocardial injury.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024Article
- Lipidomic Profile of Human Sperm Membrane Identifies a Clustering of Lipids Associated with Semen Quality and Function.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Mapping ofMagnetic resonance in chemistry : MRC · 2023Article
- Novel metabolomics-biohumoral biomarkers model for predicting survival of metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas.iScience · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Methods for Precision Cardiovascular Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Progress in the Metabolomics of Acute Coronary Syndrome.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- From multi-omics approaches to personalized medicine in myocardial infarction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Review
- Machine Learning Algorithm to Predict Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from the CorLipid Trial.Metabolites · 2022Article
- Comparison of the modified Singapore myocardial infarction registry risk score with GRACE 2.0 in predicting 1-year acute myocardial infarction outcomes.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk stratification and management of acute myocardial infarction patients continue to be challenging despite considerable efforts made in the last decades by many clinicians and researchers. The aim of this study was to investigate the metabolomic fingerprint of acute myocardial infarction using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy on patient serum samples and to evaluate the possible role of metabolomics in the prognostic stratification of acute myocardial infarction patients.
methodsIn total, 978 acute myocardial infarction patients were enrolled in this study; of these, 146 died and 832 survived during 2 years of follow-up after the acute myocardial infarction. Serum samples were analyzed via high-resolution
resultsIn the training set, metabolomics showed significant differential clustering of the two outcomes cohorts. A prognostic risk model predicted death with 76.9% sensitivity, 79.5% specificity, and 78.2% accuracy, and an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.859. These results were reproduced in the validation set, obtaining 72.6% sensitivity, 72.6% specificity, and 72.6% accuracy. Cox models were used to compare the known prognostic factors (for example, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events score, age, sex, Killip class) with the metabolomic random forest risk score. In the univariate analysis, many prognostic factors were statistically associated with the outcomes; among them, the random forest score calculated from the nuclear magnetic resonance data showed a statistically relevant hazard ratio of 6.45 (p = 2.16×10
conclusionsFor the first time, metabolomic profiling technologies were used to discriminate between patients with different outcomes after an acute myocardial infarction. These technologies seem to be a valid and accurate addition to standard stratification based on clinical and biohumoral parameters.
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.