Why the study?
METS-IR is a validated surrogate marker for insulin resistance, but its utility for evaluating HFpEF prognosis remains to be elucidated.
Does an elevated metabolic score for insulin resistance (METS-IR) predict all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction?
Does an elevated metabolic score for insulin resistance (METS-IR) predict all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Elevated METS-IR is an independent predictor of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients with HFpEF, and its addition to baseline risk models improves prognostic accuracy.
BACKGROUND: The metabolic score for insulin resistance (METS-IR) has been validated as a novel, simple, and reliable surrogate marker for insulin resistance; however, its utility for evaluating the prognosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains to be elucidated. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the association between METS-IR and the long-term prognosis of HFpEF. METHODS: We enrolled a total of 4,702 participants with HFpEF in this study. The participants were divided into three groups according to METS-IR tertiles: (Ln [2 × fasting plasma glucose + fasting triglycerides] × body mass index) / (Ln [high-density lipoprotein cholesterol]). The occurrence of primary endpoints, including all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CV) death, was documented. RESULTS: There were 3,248 participants with HFpEF (mean age, 65.7 ± 13.8 years; male, 59.0%) in total who were included in the final analysis. The incidence of primary outcomes from the lowest to the highest METS-IR tertiles were 46.92, 86.01, and 124.04 per 1000 person-years for all-cause death and 26.75, 49.01, and 64.62 per 1000 person-years for CV death. The multivariate Cox hazards regression analysis revealed hazard ratios for all-cause and CV deaths of 2.48 (95% CI 2.10-2.93; P < 0.001) and 2.29 (95% CI 1.83-2.87; P < 0.001) when the highest and lowest METS-IR tertiles were compared, respectively. In addition, the predictive efficacy of METS-IR remained significant across various comorbidity subgroups (all P < 0.05). Further, adding the METS-IR to the baseline risk model for all-cause death improved the C-statistic value (0.690 for the baseline model vs. 0.729 for the baseline model + METS-IR, P < 0.01), the integrated discrimination improvement value (0.061, P < 0.01), the net reclassification improvement value (0.491, P < 0.01), and the clinical net benefit. CONCLUSIONS: An elevated METS-IR, which is associated with an increased mortality risk, is a potential valuable prognostic marker for individuals with HFpEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: