Prognostic value of plasma MR-proADM vs NT-proBNP for heart failure in people with type 2 diabetes: the SURDIAGENE prospective study

Fraty, M.; Gand, Elise; Fumeron, Frédéric; Ragot, Stéphanie; Sosner, P.; Mohammedi, Kamel; Gellen, Barnabas; Saulnier, Pierre‐Jean; Montaigne, David; Ducrocq, Grégory; Rehman, Michaela B.; Marre, Michel; Roussel, Ronan; Hadjadj, Samy

doi:10.1007/s00125-018-4727-7

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After screening, a total of 18 studies 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 published between 2008 and 2021 were included in the review, with data from 999 167 unique patients with T2D. Of these 18 studies, 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 2 were identified by screening reference lists 20 and conference abstracts, 30 respectively. A flow diagram of study selection is shown in Figure 1 and the list of excluded full‐text citations is available in Table S2 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Together 15 multivariable prediction models 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 were assessed as 3 studies 30 , 31 , 32 exclusively performed external validation. Most modeling studies used randomized controlled trials (9 of 15) 15 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 28 for model development, 3 of which were the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) trial. 20 , 21 , 33 The median number of participants and events used for model development was 8756 (interquartile range, 5184‒16 013) and 258 (interquartile range, 223‒420), respectively (Table 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 15 multivariable models, 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 7 were presented in a useful manner (eg, risk score, online calculator). 17 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 25 , 27 , 28 Of these, 5 had their performance evaluated in external validation (Table 3 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 10 remaining clinical prediction models either never underwent external validation (9 of 10) 15 , 16 , 19 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 29 or were externally validated but not presented in a clinically practical form (1 of 10; Table 1 ). 18 Therefore, these models' clinical utility was judged as less applicable for the review.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinical Prediction Models for Heart Failure Hospitalization in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Razaghizad

Oulousian

Randhawa

et al. 2022

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Clinical prediction models have been developed for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes. However, a systematic evaluation of these models’ performance, applicability, and clinical impact is absent. Methods and Results We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Tufts’ clinical prediction registry through February 2021. Studies needed to report the development, validation, clinical impact, or update of a prediction model for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes with measures of model performance and sufficient information for clinical use. Model assessment was done with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and meta‐analyses of model discrimination were performed. We included 15 model development and 3 external validation studies with data from 999 167 people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 15 models, 6 had undergone external validation and only 1 had low concern for risk of bias and applicability (Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes). Seven models were presented in a clinically useful manner (eg, risk score, online calculator) and 2 models were classified as the most suitable for clinical use based on study design, external validity, and point‐of‐care usability. These were Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes (meta‐analyzed c‐statistic, 0.76) and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (meta‐analyzed c‐statistic, 0.78), which was the simplest model with only 5 variables. No studies reported clinical impact. Conclusions Most prediction models for hospitalization for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes have potential concerns with risk of bias or applicability, and uncertain external validity and clinical impact. Future research is needed to address these knowledge gaps.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinical Prediction Models for Heart Failure Hospitalization in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Razaghizad

Oulousian

Randhawa

et al. 2022

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Otro biomarcador pronóstico evaluado en el estudio Suivi Rénal, DIAbète de type 2 et GENEtique (SURDIAGENE) fue la región media-adrenomodulina (MR-proADM), pero en DM no aportó información predictiva significativa comparada con el NT-pro BNP, al igual que la troponina de alta sensibilidad 79,70 .…”

Section: B) Laboratoriounclassified

Mesa 2: Insuficiencia cardíaca y diabetes mellitus tipo 2

Méndez

Martı́n²,

Remón

et al. 2020

Rev. Soc. Argent. Diabetes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Desde que el estudio Framingham en 1974 reportó un aumento de dos a cinco veces en el riesgo de desarrollar insuficiencia cardíaca (IC) en pacientes con diabetes mellitus (DM), otros estudios observacionales confirmaron esta asociación que ha tomado gran visibilidad en los últimos años a partir de los resultados de los estudios de seguridad cardiovascular de las drogas antidiabéticas.La IC se define como un síndrome clínico que resulta del deterioro funcional o estructural del llenado ventricular o la eyección de sangre. Puede clasificarse según la fracción de eyección, la presencia de síntomas y la limitación de la actividad física.Existen distintos factores asociados a la IC en personas con DM como la edad, la antigüedad de la enfermedad, la utilización de insulina, la enfermedad coronaria, la hipertensión arterial, la enfermedad arterial periférica, el aumento de creatinina, el escaso control glucémico, la albuminuria y la obesidad. A su vez la IC se asocia a insulinorresistencia y a estados disglucémicos que se consideran de riesgo para el desarrollo de DM.

show abstract

Increased serum S100A12 levels are associated with higher risk of acute heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims The hyperglycaemic stress induces the release of inflammatory proteins such as S100A12, one of the endogenous ligands of the receptors for advanced glycation end products (RAGE). Chronic activation of RAGE has multiple deleterious effects in target tissues such as the heart and the vessels by promoting oxidative stress, inflammation by the release of cytokines, macrophages infiltration, and vascular cell migration and proliferation, causing ultimately endothelial cell and cardiomyocyte dysfunction. The aim of our study was to investigate the prognostic value of circulating S100A12 beyond established cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) for heart failure (HF) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in a cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods and results Serum S100A12 concentrations were measured at baseline in 1345 type 2 diabetes patients (58% men, 64 ± 11 years) recruited in the SURDIAGENE prospective cohort. Endpoints were the occurrence of acute HF requiring hospitalization (HHF) and MACE. We used a proportional hazard model adjusted for established CVRF (age, sex, duration of diabetes, estimated glomerular filtration rate, albumin/creatinine ratio, history of coronary artery disease) and serum S100A12. During the median follow‐up of 84 months, 210 (16%) and 505 (38%) patients developed HHF and MACE, respectively. Baseline serum S100A12 concentrations were associated with an increased risk of HHF [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval) 1.28 (1.01–1.62)], but not MACE [1.04 (0.90–1.20)]. After adjustment for CVRF, S100A12 concentrations remained significantly associated with an increased risk of HHF [1.29 (1.01–1.65)]. In a sub‐analysis, patients with high probability of pre‐existing HF [N terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) >1000 pg/mL, n = 87] were excluded. In the remaining 1258 patients, the association of serum S100A12 with the risk of HHF tended to be more pronounced [1.39 (1.06–1.83)]. When including the gold standard HF marker NT‐proBNP in the model, the prognostic value of S100A12 for HHF did not reach significance. Youden method performed at 7 years for HHF prediction yielded an optimal cut‐off for S100A12 concentration of 49 ng/mL (sensitivity 53.3, specificity 52.2). Compared with those with S100A12 ≤ 49 ng/mL, patients with S100A12 > 49 ng/mL had a significantly increased risk of HHF in the univariate model [HR = 1.58 (1.19–2.09), P = 0.0015] but also in the multivariate model [HR = 1.63 (1.23–2.16), P = 0.0008]. After addition of NT‐proBNP to the multivariate model, S100A12 > 49 ng/mL remained associated with an increased risk of HHF [HR = 1.42 (1.07–1.90), P = 0.0160]. However, the addition of S100A12 categories on top of multivariate model enriched by NT‐pro BNP did not improve the ability of the model to predict HHF (relative integrated discrimination improvement = 1.9%, P = 0.1500). Conclusions In patients with type 2 diabetes, increased serum S100A12 concentration is independently associated with risk of HHF, but not with risk of MACE. Compared...

show abstract

Prognostic value of plasma MR-proADM vs NT-proBNP for heart failure in people with type 2 diabetes: the SURDIAGENE prospective study

Abstract: MR-proADM is a prognostic biomarker for heart failure in people with type 2 diabetes but gives no significant complementary information on prediction of heart failure compared with NT-proBNP.

Cited by 18 publications

References 44 publications

Clinical Prediction Models for Heart Failure Hospitalization in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Clinical Prediction Models for Heart Failure Hospitalization in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Mesa 2: Insuficiencia cardíaca y diabetes mellitus tipo 2

Increased serum S100A12 levels are associated with higher risk of acute heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About