ArticleBMC nephrology2020
Association of soluble ST2 with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in renal transplant recipients: a single-centre cohort study.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of soluble suppression of tumorigenicity 2 with mortality and adverse outcomes in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic Value of Soluble Suppression of Tumorigenicity 2 in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients: A Meta-Analysis.Disease markers · 2021Pooled it
- Recent approaches in the sensing strategy for the detection of cardiovascular disease biomarkers.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Growth Differentiation Factor 15: A Biomarker with High Clinical Potential in the Evaluation of Kidney Transplant Candidates.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Role of novel biomarkers in kidney transplantation.World journal of transplantation · 2020Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSoluble ST2 is a novel biomarker of myocardial fibrosis with an established role in prognostication of patients with heart failure. Its role in cardiovascular risk prediction for renal transplant recipients has not been investigated despite promising results for ST2 in other populations with renal disease.
methodsIn this prospective cohort study, 367 renal transplant recipients were followed up for a median of 16.2 years to investigate the association of soluble ST2 concentration with all-cause mortality. Cardiovascular mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events were secondary outcomes. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for ST2 before and after adjustments. ST2 concentration was analysed both as a continuous variable and following categorisation according to the recommended cut-point of 35 ng/ml.
resultsA twofold higher ST2 concentration was associated with a 36% increased risk of all-cause mortality after adjustment for conventional cardiovascular risk factors and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (adjusted hazard ratio 1.36; 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.75; p = 0.016). Associations with ST2 concentration were similar for cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.73; p = 0.054), but were stronger for cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.61; 95% confidence interval 1.07-2.41; p = 0.022). Addition of ST2 to risk prediction models for mortality and cardiovascular events failed to improve their predictive accuracy.
conclusionsST2 is associated with, but does not improve prediction of, adverse outcomes in renal transplant recipients.
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.