ReviewDiagnostic and prognostic research2025
Natriuretic peptides testing and survival prediction models for chronic heart failure: a systematic review of added prognostic value.
Review in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh natriuretic peptide levels are associated with a poor outcome in adults with chronic heart failure (CHF). However, the incremented prediction accuracy of multivariable prognostic models after adding B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and/or N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) remains unclear.
methodsWe carried out a systematic review narrative analysis of added-value studies of BNP and NT-proBNP in CHF prognostication. Primary clinical studies investigating prognostic model development or validation in adult participants with CHF were included. Any studies of individual factors' association with patient outcomes, treatment efficacy, or those using patients with transplant/ventricular assist devices, ≥ 10% of patients with advanced HF, or significant comorbidities, HF secondary to congenital/reversible conditions, or ≥ 33% of patients with valvular HF were excluded. The databases MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Prognosis Methods Group Database were searched from January 1990 to February 2024. Predictive performance was measured in terms of discrimination and calibration, the added value in terms of the c-statistic difference before and after adding BNP and/or NT-proBNP to a base model, and the risk reclassification, namely, net reclassification index (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). Risk of bias assessment used the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST).
resultsFourteen added-value studies comprising a total of 50,949 individuals were included. Both BNP and NT-proBNP consistently improved mortality prediction performance, but studies only presented separately before and after c-statistics, without formally testing for statistically significant differences. Meta-analysis was impossible due to missing data on the change in predictive performance and data heterogeneity. All studies reported discrimination. Few reported calibration, NRI, and IDI. All studies except one were deemed to be at high risk of bias, whereas 50% showed high applicability to the review question, with only 14% scoring high for applicability concern, and the rest were unclear.
conclusionsImproving consistency in researching and reporting the added value of natriuretic peptide testing to predict mortality in chronic heart failure patients could facilitate summarizing and interpreting the results more meaningfully. REGISTRATION: This review is a refinement of the methods and a search update of the review of added-value biomarkers in HF prognosis (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019086993).
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.