Association of Novel Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Stress With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Dysfunction: Implications for Screening

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Association of Novel Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Stress With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Dysfunction: Implications for Screening

Citable link to this page

 

 
Title: Association of Novel Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Stress With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Dysfunction: Implications for Screening
Author: Xanthakis, Vanessa; Larson, Martin G.; Wollert, Kai C.; Aragam, Jayashri; Cheng, Susan; Ho, Jennifer; Coglianese, Erin; Levy, Daniel; Colucci, Wilson S.; Michael Felker, G.; Benjamin, Emelia J.; Januzzi, James L.; Wang, Thomas J.; Vasan, Ramachandran S.

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Xanthakis, V., M. G. Larson, K. C. Wollert, J. Aragam, S. Cheng, J. Ho, E. Coglianese, et al. 2013. “Association of Novel Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Stress With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Dysfunction: Implications for Screening.” Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease 2 (6): e000399. doi:10.1161/JAHA.113.000399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.113.000399.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Background: Currently available screening tools for left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy (LVH) and systolic dysfunction (LVSD) are either expensive (echocardiography) or perform suboptimally (B‐type natriuretic peptide [BNP]). It is unknown whether newer biomarkers are associated with LVH and LVSD and can serve as screening tools. Methods and Results: We studied 2460 Framingham Study participants (mean age 58 years, 57% women) with measurements of biomarkers mirroring cardiac biomechanical stress (soluble ST‐2 [ST2], growth differentiation factor‐15 [GDF‐15] and high‐sensitivity troponin I [hsTnI]) and BNP. We defined LVH as LV mass/height2 ≥the sex‐specific 80th percentile and LVSD as mild/greater impairment of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) or a fractional shortening <0.29. Adjusting for standard risk factors in logistic models, BNP, GDF‐15, and hsTnI were associated with the composite echocardiographic outcome (LVH or LVSD), odds ratios (OR) per SD increment in log‐biomarker 1.29, 1.14, and 1.18 (95% CI: 1.15 to 1.44, 1.004 to 1.28, and 1.06 to 1.31), respectively. The C‐statistic for the composite outcome increased from 0.765 with risk factors to 0.770 adding BNP, to 0.774 adding novel biomarkers. The continuous Net Reclassification Improvement was 0.212 (95% CI: 0.119 to 0.305, P<0.0001) after adding the novel biomarkers to risk factors plus BNP. BNP was associated with LVH and LVSD in multivariable models, whereas GDF‐15 was associated with LVSD (OR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.70), and hsTnI with LVH (OR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.36). ST2 was not significantly associated with any outcome. Conclusions: Our community‐based investigation suggests that cardiac stress biomarkers are associated with LVH and LVSD but may have limited clinical utility as screening tools.
Published Version: doi:10.1161/JAHA.113.000399
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3886765/pdf/
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11879589
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters