Why the study?
While many blood biomarkers have been identified for iPAH and hPAH, their clinical utility often remains unclear.
Do blood biomarkers accurately detect idiopathic and hereditary pulmonary arterial hypertension compared to non-PH controls?
Do blood biomarkers accurately detect idiopathic and hereditary pulmonary arterial hypertension compared to non-PH controls?
NT-proBNP is a highly sensitive but poorly specific biomarker for detecting pulmonary arterial hypertension, while most other proposed biomarkers lack sufficient diagnostic accuracy data.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
NT-proBNP aids ruling out but not confirming PAH; extends evidence that most other biomarkers require diagnostic accuracy validation.
Rationale: The blood is a rich source of potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of idiopathic and hereditary pulmonary arterial hypertension (iPAH and hPAH, referred to as "PAH"). While a lot of biomarkers have been identified for PAH, the clinical utility of these biomarkers often remains unclear. Here, we performed an unbiased meta-analysis of published biomarkers to identify biomarkers with the highest performance for detection of PAH. Methods: asymptomatic controls or patients suspected of pulmonary hypertension (PH) with proven normal haemodynamic profiles. Results: 149 articles were identified by the literature search. Meta-analysis of 26 biomarkers yielded 17 biomarkers that were differentially expressed in PAH and non-PH control subjects. Red cell distribution width, low density lipid-cholesterol, d-dimer, N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic protein (NT-proBNP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and uric acid were biomarkers with the largest observed differences, largest sample sizes and a low risk of publication bias. Receiver operating characteristic curves and sensitivity/specificity analyses demonstrated that NT-proBNP had a high sensitivity, but low specificity for PAH. For the other biomarkers, insufficient data on diagnostic accuracy with receiver operating characteristic curves were available for meta-analysis. Conclusion: This meta-analysis validates NT-proBNP as a biomarker with high sensitivity for PAH, albeit with low specificity. The majority of biomarkers evaluated in this meta-analysis lacked either external validation or data on diagnostic accuracy. Further validation studies are required as well as studies that test combinations of biomarkers to improve specificity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smits et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: