Citations 297

Biomarker-Based Risk Prediction in the Community

European Journal of Heart Failure | November 4, 2016 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1342-1350

10.1002/ejhf.663 | PMID 27813304

Abstract Aims Guided by predictive characteristics of cardiovascular biomarkers, we explored the clinical implications of a simulated biomarker-guided heart failure (HF) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) prevention strategy in the community. Methods and results In a community cohort (n = 1824), the predictive characteristics for HF and MACE of galectin-3 (Gal-3), ST2, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hscTnI), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) were established. We performed number needed to screen (NNS) and treat (NNT) with the intervention analyses according to biomarker screening strategy and intervention efficacy in persons with at least one cardiovascular risk factor. In the entire cohort, for both HF and MACE, the predictive characteristics of NT-proBNP and hscTnI were superior to other biomarkers; alone, in a multimarker model, and adjusting for clinical risk factors. An NT-proBNP-guided preventative intervention with an intervention effect size (4-year hazard ratio for intervention in biomarker positive cohort) of ≤0.7 would reduce the global burden of HF by ≥20% and MACE by ≥15%. From this simulation, the NNS to prevent one HF event or MACE in 4 years would be ≤100 with a NNT to prevent one HF event of ≤20 and one MACE of ≤10. Conclusions The predictive characteristics of NT-proBNP and hscTnI for HF or MACE in the community are superior to other biomarkers. Biomarker-guided preventative interventions with reasonable efficacy would compare favourably to established preventative interventions. This data provides a framework for biomarker selection which may inform design of biomarker-guided preventative intervention trials.
Variability Of Biomarkers in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure and Healthy Controls

European Journal of Heart Failure | October 21, 2016 | Volume: 19 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 357-365

10.1002/ejhf.669 | PMID 27766733

Abstract Aims Biomarkers can be used for diagnosis, risk stratification, or management of patients with heart failure (HF). Knowledge about the biological variation is needed for proper interpretation of serial measurements. Therefore, we aimed to determine and compare the biological variation of a large panel of biomarkers in healthy subjects and in patients with chronic HF. Methods and results The biological variability of established biomarkers [NT-proBNP and high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT)], novel biomarkers [galectin-3, suppression of tumorigenicity 2 (ST2), and growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15)], and renal/neurohormonal biomarkers (aldosterone, phosphate, parathyroid hormone, plasma renin concentration, and creatinine) was determined in 28 healthy subjects and 83 HF patients, over a period of 4 months and 6 weeks, respectively. The analytical (CVa), intraindividual (CVi), and interindividual (CVg) variations were calculated, as well as the reference change value (RCV), which reflects the percentage of change that may indicate a ‘relevant’ change. All crude biomarker levels were significantly increased or decreased in HF patients compared with controls (all P < 0.01). Variation indices were comparable in healthy individuals and HF patients. CVi was not influenced by the individual levels of the biomarker itself. NT-proBNP and GDF-15 had relatively high CVi (21.8% and 16.6%) and RCV (61.7% and 64.3%), whereas ST2 (CVi, 15.0; RCV, 42.9%), hsTnT (CVi, 11.1; RCV, 31.4%), and galectin-3 (CVi, 8.1; RCV, 25.0%) had lower indices of variation. Conclusion Biological variation indices are comparable between healthy subjects and HF patients for a broad spectrum of biomarkers. NT-proBNP and GDF-15 have substantial variation, with lower variation for ST2, hsTnT, and galectin-3. These data are instrumental in proper interpretation of biomarker levels in HF patients.
Refining the Diagnosis of Type 2 Myocardial Infarction

JAMA Cardiology | October 19, 2016 | Volume: 2 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 106

10.1001/jamacardio.2016.3717 | PMID 27760241

Ruling-In Myocardial Injury and Ruling-Out Myocardial Infarction With the European Society of Cardiology 1-Hour Algorithm

Circulation | October 18, 2016 | Volume: 134 | Issue: 20 | Pages: 1542-1545

10.1161/circulationaha.116.024687 | PMID 27754880

Cardiac Troponin Assays: Guide to Understanding Analytical Characteristics and Their Impact on Clinical Care

Clinical Chemistry | October 11, 2016 | Volume: 63 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 73-81

10.1373/clinchem.2016.255109 | PMID 28062612

Abstract BACKGROUND Cardiac troponin I (cTnI) and cardiac troponin T (cTnT) determinations are fixtures in clinical practice and research. Cardiac troponin testing has been the standard of practice for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), early rule-out, risk stratification, and outcomes assessment in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and non-ACS myocardial injury. We recognize from reading the literature over the past several years how poorly understood the analytical characteristics are for cTnI and cTnT assays by laboratorians, clinicians, and scientists who use these assays. CONTENT The purposes of this mini-review are (a) to define limit of blank, limit of detection, limit of quantification, and imprecision, (b) overview the analytical characteristics of the existing cardiac troponin assays, (c) recommend approaches to define a healthy (normal) reference population for determining the 99th percentile and the appropriate statistic to use for this calculation, (d) clarify how an assay becomes designated as “high sensitivity,” and (e) provide guidance on determining delta (Δ) change values. SUMMARY This review raises important educational information regarding cTnI and cTnT assays, their 99th percentile upper reference limits (URL) differentiated by sex, and specifically addresses high-sensitivity (hs)-assays used to measure low concentrations. Recommendations are made to help clarify the nomenclature and analytical and clinical characteristics to define hs-assays. The review also identifies challenges for the evolving implementation of hs-assays into clinical practice. It is hoped that with the introduction of these concepts, laboratorians, clinicians and researchers can develop a more unified view of how these assays should be used worldwide.
Natriuretic Peptides and Analytical Barriers

Clinical Chemistry | October 11, 2016 | Volume: 63 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 50-58

10.1373/clinchem.2016.254714 | PMID 28062611

Abstract BACKGROUND The natriuretic peptide system is an endocrine, autocrine and paracrine system that plays an important role in the maintenance of cardiovascular homeostasis. Biomarkers based on these peptides are important diagnostic and prognostic tools for myocardial function. CONTENT Although natriuretic peptides were discovered more than 2 decades ago, their intricate and complex biology is associated with important questions not yet elucidated. The diversity of circulating forms of natriuretic peptides, the distinct expression of these forms in particular patients, and the heterogeneity of heart failure forms, along with specific assay-related and preanalytic issues, cause assays to be poorly harmonized. SUMMARY This review presents the relevant issues related to the biology of natriuretic peptides and differences between assays with immediate implications for clinical practice.
Best Practices for Monitoring Cardiac Troponin in Detecting Myocardial Injury

Clinical Chemistry | October 6, 2016 | Volume: 63 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 37-44

10.1373/clinchem.2016.257428 | PMID 28062607

Rapid rule out of acute myocardial infarction: novel biomarker-based strategies

European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care | July 2, 2016 | Volume: 6 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 218-222

10.1177/2048872616653229 | PMID 27370210

Editor’s Choice-Rule-in of acute myocardial infarction: Focus on troponin

European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care | June 3, 2016 | Volume: 6 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 212-217

10.1177/2048872616653228 | PMID 27257262

Should apolipoprotein B replace LDL cholesterol as therapeutic targets are lowered?

Current Opinion in Lipidology | April 19, 2016 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 359-366

10.1097/mol.0000000000000313 | PMID 27389631

Purpose of review The success of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) as a predictor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and a therapeutic target is indisputable. Apolipoprotein B (apoB) is a more contemporary and physiologically relevant measure of atherogenic lipoproteins. This report summarizes recent comparisons of apoB and LDL-C as biomarkers of cardiovascular risk. Recent findings Multiple recent reports have found that LDL-C methods perform poorly at low concentrations (<70 mg/dl). Several meta-analyses from randomized controlled trials and large prospective observational studies have found that apoB and LDL-C provide equivalent information on risk of cardiovascular disease. More innovative analyses have asserted that apoB is a superior indicator of actual risk when apoB and LDL-C disagree. Summary ApoB is more analytically robust and standardized biomarker than LDL-C. Large population studies have found that apoB is at worst clinically equivalent to LDL-C and likely superior when disagreement exists. Realistically, many obstacles prevent the wide spread adoption of apoB and for now providers and their patients must weigh the costs and benefits of apoB.