ArticleClinical proteomics2023
Are the results from a multiplex proteomic assay and a conventional immunoassay for NT-proBNP and GDF-15 comparable?
Article in Clinical proteomics, 2023. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Significant correlations between blood lipids, cytokines, and C-reactive protein in healthy humans.Lipids in health and disease · 2026Article
- Growth differentiation factor-15 improves long-term mortality risk prediction beyond the GRACE 2.0 score after acute coronary syndrome.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Genetic Architecture of N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide in a Multiancestry Study Population.Circulation. Genomic and precision medicine · 2026Article
- Discovery of novel biomarkers associated with myocardial fibrosis in chimpanzees (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Mapping Interactions Between Cytokines, Chemokines, Growth Factors, and Conventional Biomarkers in COVID-19 ICU-Patients.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Significant Interplay Between Lipids, Cytokines, Chemokines, Growth Factors, and Blood Cells in an Outpatient Cohort.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Current Prognostic Biomarkers for Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Comprehensive Systematic Review of the Literature.Metabolites · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare absolute plasma concentrations of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) obtained by a conventional immunoassay with the corresponding relative concentrations from a proximity extension assay (PEA) and compare the prognostic impact of the protein levels obtained from these assays.
methodsWe evaluated 437 patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and a population-based cohort of 643 individuals without PAD. Correlations were calculated using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (rho). The discriminatory accuracy of the protein levels to predict future cardiovascular events was analyzed with Cox regression and presented as time-dependent areas under the receiver-operator-characteristic curves (tdAUCs).
resultsFor NT-proBNP, the two assays correlated with rho 0.93 and 0.93 in the respective cohort. The PEA values leveled off at higher values in both cohorts. The corresponding correlations for GDF-15 were 0.91 and 0.89. At 5 years follow-up, the tdAUCs in the patient cohort were similar for NT-proBNP and GDF-15 regardless of assay used (0.65-0.66). The corresponding tdAUCs in the population-based cohort were between 0.72 and 0.77.
conclusionExcept for the highest levels of NT-proBNP, we suggest that PEA data for NT-proBNP and GDF-15 reliably reflects absolute plasma levels and contains similar prognostic information.
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.