ArticleESC heart failure2021
Multiplexed measurement of candidate blood protein biomarkers of heart failure.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary Proteomics and Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Trial
- Circulating biomarkers for management of cancer therapeutics-related cardiac dysfunction.Cardiovascular research · 2023Review
- FK506-Binding Protein like (FKBPL) Has an Important Role in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Pathogenesis with Potential Diagnostic Utility.Biomolecules · 2023Article
- LRG1: an emerging player in disease pathogenesis.Journal of biomedical science · 2022Review
- Screening of Lipid Metabolism-Related Gene Diagnostic Signature for Patients With Dilated Cardiomyopathy.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Multiplexed measurement of candidate blood protein biomarkers of heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2021Article
- Research Progress on Leucine-Rich Alpha-2 Glycoprotein 1: A Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThere is a critical need for better biomarkers so that heart failure can be diagnosed at an earlier stage and with greater accuracy. The purpose of this study was to design a robust mass spectrometry (MS)-based assay for the simultaneous measurement of a panel of 35 candidate protein biomarkers of heart failure, in blood. The overall aim was to evaluate the potential clinical utility of this biomarker panel for prediction of heart failure in a cohort of 500 patients. METHODS AND
resultsMultiple reaction monitoring (MRM) MS assays were designed with Skyline and Spectrum Mill PeptideSelector software and developed using nanoflow reverse phase C18 chromatographic Chip Cube-based separation, coupled to a 6460 triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. Optimized MRM assays were applied, in a sample-blinded manner, to serum samples from a cohort of 500 patients with heart failure and non-heart failure (non-HF) controls who had cardiovascular risk factors. Both heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients were included in the study. Peptides for the Apolipoprotein AI (APOA1) protein were the most significantly differentially expressed between non-HF and heart failure patients (P = 0.013 and P = 0.046). Four proteins were significantly differentially expressed between non-HF and the specific subtypes of HF (HFrEF and HFpEF); Leucine-rich-alpha-2-glycoprotein (LRG1, P < 0.001), zinc-alpha-2-glycoprotein (P = 0.005), serum paraoxanse/arylesterase (P = 0.013), and APOA1 (P = 0.038). A statistical model found that combined measurements of the candidate biomarkers in addition to BNP were capable of correctly predicting heart failure with 83.17% accuracy and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90. This was a notable improvement on predictive capacity of BNP measurements alone, which achieved 77.1% accuracy and an AUC of 0.86 (P = 0.005). The protein peptides for LRG1, which contributed most significantly to model performance, were significantly associated with future new onset HF in the non-HF cohort [Peptide 1: odds ratio (OR) 2.345 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.456-3.775) P = 0.000; peptide 2: OR 2.264 95% CI (1.422-3.605), P = 0.001].
conclusionsThis study has highlighted a number of promising candidate biomarkers for (i) diagnosis of heart failure and subtypes of heart failure and (ii) prediction of future new onset heart failure in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. Furthermore, this study demonstrates that multiplexed measurement of a combined biomarker signature that includes BNP is a more accurate predictor of heart failure than BNP alone.
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.