Cross-sectional analysis reveals demographics and clinical factors related to detectable high-sensitivity cardiac troponin in rheumatoid arthritis, suggesting the need for screening in certain individuals.
The objective of this study was to identify factors associated with detectable high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), a marker of subclinical myocardial injury associated with cardiac events in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), among patients with RA at low to intermediate atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. We performed a cross-sectional cohort study among patients with RA, excluding those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease or high estimated 10-year ASCVD risk (>20%). In univariable analysis, we compared demographics, RA clinical factors, markers of inflammation, and routine lipids among patients with and without detectable hs-cTnT. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to determine whether clinical factors and clinically available biomarkers were associated with detectable hs-cTnT, independent of ASCVD risk. We studied 294 patients with RA, of whom 86 (29%) had a detectable hs-cTnT level. Older age; male sex; hypertension; higher levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2; glucocorticoid use; and the absence of methotrexate use were associated with detectable hs-cTnT. Higher 10-year ASCVD risk was associated with detectable hs-cTnT (odds ratio 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.15-1.29); markers of inflammation were not associated with detectable hs-cTnT in multivariable analysis. Among patients with RA in the lowest ASCVD risk category (10-year risk <5%), more than 25% of men and more than 33% of patients aged >60 had detectable hs-cTnT. Detectable hs-cTnT was prevalent among a cohort of patients with RA with low to intermediate ASCVD risk. Patients who were male or aged >60 had the highest rates of detectable hs-cTnT, suggesting a role for additional screening in these individuals regardless of their ASCVD risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Usiskin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: