Trial reportAmerican heart journal2025
Baseline NT-proBNP nonresponse score and health status measures in assessing treatment responses in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
Trial report in American heart journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive utility of systemic inflammatory response index and pan-immune-inflammatory value in assessing myocardial infarction risk among cases with unstable angina.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evolving Decongestion Strategies in the Management of Acute Heart Failure.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe aim to validate NT-proBNP nonresponse score (NNRS) previously derived from the PROTECT and BATTLESCARRED studies in comparison with standard health status measures in predicting natriuretic peptide responses in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
methodsData on the GUIDE-IT trial were used to derive the NNRS based on 4 predictors including baseline NT-proBNP, heart rate, NYHA functional class, and history of atrial fibrillation. The discriminative capacity of the NNRS and health status measures for having NT-proBNP >1,000 pg/mL at 12 months was assessed and compared with baseline or follow-up health status measures including Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OSS), Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), and 6-minute walk distance. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the predictive value of the score and health status measures greater than the median values for NT-proBNP response with adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, baseline creatinine and NT-proBNP levels.
resultsAmong 877 patients, 252 (28.7%) patients had NT-proBNP >1,000 pg/mL at 12 months. The discriminative capacity of the NT-proBNP nonresponse score was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.67-0.77). After adjusting for covariates, only NNRS (P = .044) and KCCQ-OSS (P = .002) remained predictive for NT-proBNP nonresponse at 12 months.
conclusionNT-proBNP nonresponse score and KCCQ-OSS was associated with persistently elevated NT-proBNP 12 months independently of baseline NT-proBNP levels.
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.