Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35388650›Full record

ArticleESC heart failure2022

Biomarker changes as surrogate endpoints in early-phase trials in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Gianluigi Savarese, Alicia Uijl, Wouter Ouwerkerk, Jasper Tromp, Stefan D Anker, Kenneth Dickstein, Camilla Hage, Carolyn S P Lam, Chim C Lang, Marco Metra and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ESC heart failure, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 12 institutions in 9 countries.

Gianluigi SavareseDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Alicia UijlDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Wouter OuwerkerkNational Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Jasper TrompNational Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Stefan D AnkerDepartment of Cardiology (CVK); and Berlin Institute of Health Center for Regenerative Therapies (BCRT); German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK) partner site Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Kenneth DicksteinStavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway.
Camilla HageDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Carolyn S P LamNational Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Chim C LangDivision of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Marco MetraCardiology Unit, ASST Spedali Civili and Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
Leong L NgDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Glenfield Hospital, and NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, UK.
Nicola OrsiniDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Nilesh J SamaniDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Glenfield Hospital, and NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, UK.
Dirk J van VeldhuisenDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
John G F ClelandRobertson Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow and National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK.
Adriaan A VoorsDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Lars H LundDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SEUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Leicester · GBAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLDuke-NUS Medical School · SGGerman Centre for Cardiovascular Research · DEUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Bergen · NOUniversity of Brescia · ITUniversity of Dundee · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

Angiotensin-II, Hypothalamic Inflammation and Neurogenic HypertensionF32HL116074 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI DE KLOET, ANNETTE DIANE · 2012 to 2014
$91k
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsNo biomarker has achieved widespread acceptance as a surrogate endpoint for early-phase heart failure (HF) trials. We assessed whether changes over time in a panel of plasma biomarkers were associated with subsequent morbidity/mortality in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND

resultsIn 1040 patients with HFrEF from the BIOSTAT-CHF cohort, we investigated the associations between changes in the plasma concentrations of 30 biomarkers, before (baseline) and after (9 months) attempted optimization of guideline-recommended therapy, on top of the BIOSTAT risk score and the subsequent risk of HF hospitalization/all-cause mortality using Cox regression models. C-statistics were calculated to assess discriminatory power of biomarker changes/month-nine assessment. Changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and WAP four-disulphide core domain protein HE4 (WAP-4C) were the only independent predictors of the outcome after adjusting for their baseline plasma concentration, 28 other biomarkers (both baseline and changes), and BIOSTAT risk score at baseline. When adjusting for month-nine rather than baseline biomarkers concentrations, only changes in NT-proBNP were independently associated with the outcome. The C-statistic of the model including the BIOSTAT risk score and NT-proBNP increased by 4% when changes were considered on top of baseline concentrations and by 1% when changes in NT-proBNP were considered on top of its month-nine concentrations and the BIOSTAT risk score.

conclusionsAmong 30 relevant biomarkers, a change over time was significantly and independently associated with HF hospitalization/all-cause death only for NT-proBNP. Changes over time were modestly more prognostic than baseline or end-values alone. Changes in biomarkers should be further explored as potential surrogate endpoints in early phase HF trials.

Indexed as

Heart FailureBiomarkersHospitalizationHumansPrognosisStroke VolumeBiomarkersBiomarkersHeart failure with reduced ejection fractionPhase 2Randomized trialSurrogate endpointSurrogate outcome

Identifiers

PMID35388650
PMCPMC9288797
OpenAlexW4225751467

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.