ArticlePLoS medicine2025
NT-proBNP testing for heart failure diagnosis in people with atrial fibrillation: A diagnostic accuracy study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Gut Microbiota-Derived Trimethylamine N-Oxide and NT-proBNP in Heart Failure: A Critical Review of Diagnostic and Prognostic Value.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Biomarkers of Cardiac Metabolic Flexibility in Health, HFrEF and HFpEF.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Heart failure diagnosis: Impacts of atrial fibrillation on the diagnostic marker NT-proBNP.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundN-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptides (NT-proBNP) are important in the assessment of suspected heart failure (HF). However, NT-proBNP concentrations are elevated in atrial fibrillation (AF), creating diagnostic uncertainty. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of NT-proBNP for HF in people with AF, overall and by age, sex and BMI. METHODS AND
findingsRetrospective study of all patients with a NT-proBNP test in their primary care electronic health record among English GP practices provided through the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2004-2018) and linked to secondary care data. The accuracy of NT-proBNP for diagnosing HF within six months was assessed for people with and without AF at thresholds of 125, 400, 660 and 2,000 pg/mL, including by age, sex and BMI. Among 155,347 people who had an NT-proBNP test organized in primary care (median age 61 years), 17,403 (11.2%) had pre-existing AF. Of the 155,347 people included, 14,585 (9.4%) were subsequently diagnosed with HF, including 4,168/17,403 (23.9%) people with AF (median NT-proBNP = 1,852 pg/mL, interquartile range (IQR) [974, 3,459] pg/mL) and 10,417/137,944 (7.6%) without AF (1,110 pg/mL, IQR [434, 3,108] pg/mL). NT-proBNP discriminated better overall among people without AF (AUC = 0.877 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.873, 0.881]) than with AF (AUC = 0.743 (95% CI [0.735, 0.751]). Among people with AF, NT-proBNP sensitivity and specificity at a 125 pg/mL threshold was 98.8% (95% CI [98.5%, 99.1]) and 13.2% (95% CI [12.6%, 13.7]) and at 400 pg/mL 93.2% (95% CI [92.4, 93.9]) and 35.5% (95% CI [34.7, 36.3]). Among people without AF the corresponding results were 92.9% (95% CI [92.4, 93.4]) and 53.8% (95% CI [53.6, 54.1]) at 125 pg/mL and 77.1% (95% CI [76.3, 77.9]) and 84.9% (95% CI [84.7, 85.1]) at 400 pg/mL. NT-proBNP discriminated less well among people with AF aged ≥65 years compared to <65years (e.g., AUC in people aged 65-75 years was 0.725, 95% CI [0.712, 0.739]). Increasing the threshold for a positive test among people with AF from 125 pg/mL to 660 pg/mL would reduce the number of false positive results by 26.0%, whilst retaining a negative predictive value of 91.5 (95% CI [90.8, 92.1]), albeit with a 10.6% increase in the proportion of those tested with AF having a missed or delayed HF diagnosis. The main limitation of the study is that it relies on routinely collected primary care data and people with an NT-proBNP result <400 pg/mL may not have been referred for further assessment, impacting upon the diagnostic accuracy below this threshold.
conclusionsNT-proBNP discriminates more accurately for HF among people without AF than with AF. A higher referral threshold could be considered in AF to account for higher median NT-proBNP levels but this would also increase missed HF diagnoses.
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.