Key result
CHF patients positive for anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies had greater improvements in left ventricular remodeling and a higher response rate to target metoprolol dose than negative patients.
Why the study?
Does the presence of anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies improve left ventricular remodeling in response to metoprolol in CHF patients?
Cohort (n=96)
Does the presence of anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies improve left ventricular remodeling in response to metoprolol in CHF patients?
The presence of anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies in CHF patients is associated with greater improvements in left ventricular remodeling and better tolerance to metoprolol therapy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Autoantibody positivity was associated with better metoprolol response in CHF; leaves open predictive utility pending randomized validation.
Autoantibodies specific for the beta(1)-adrenoceptor (beta(1)-AR) have been implicated in the pathology of congestive heart failure (CHF). We hypothesized that the presence of autoantibodies against beta(1)-AR (anti-beta(1)-AR) is associated with left ventricular (LV) remodelling in response to metoprolol. Synthetic beta(1)-AR peptides served as the target antigen in an ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) were used to screen the sera of 106 CHF patients. Patients were separated into positive (+) anti-beta(1)-AR or negative (-) anti-beta(1)-AR groups according to their anti-beta(1)-AR reactivity. Echocardiography (ECG) was performed at baseline and after one year of metoprolol therapy in combination with standard treatment regime for CHF, that is, digoxin, diuretics and an ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor). The dose of metoprolol was doubled on a biweekly basis up to 50 mg x 2 daily (b.i.d./day) or attainment of maximum tolerated dose. Ninety-six patients completed final data analysis. Fifty-four patients with (+) anti-beta(1)-AR had greater improvements than 42 patients with (-) anti-beta(1)-AR in LVEDD (left ventricular end-diastolic dimension) (P < 0.01, from 69 +/- 0.8 to 58.0 +/- 0.5 mm vs. 69.0 +/- 0.8-63.6 +/- 0.9 mm) and LVESD (left ventricular end-systolic dimension) (P < 0.01, from 57.1 +/- 1.4 to 43.9 +/- 0.8 mm vs. 56.2 +/- 0.9-48.6 +/- 1.0 mm), and LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction) (P < 0.01, from 35.4 +/- 1.3 to 49.8 +/- 0.6% vs. 34.4 +/- 1.0-44.3 +/- 1.1%) by metoprolol therapy in combination with standard treatment regime for one year. Of the CHF patients with (+) anti-beta(1)-AR, 65.4% responded to target metoprolol dose as compared to 21.4% of CHF patients without anti-beta(1)-AR (P < 0.01). Response to target metoprolol dose occurred more rapidly in (+) anti-beta(1)-AR than (-) anti-beta(1)-AR of CHF patients (67.5 +/- 2.4 vs. 100.8 +/- 3.0 days, P < 0.01). These results demonstrated that CHF patients with (+) anti-beta(1)-AR had greater improvements in LV remodelling and heart function by metoprolol as compared to (-) anti-beta(1)-AR patients. Moreover, patients with (+) anti-beta(1)-AR have better tolerance to metoprolol therapy than patients without anti-beta(1)-AR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miao et al. (2006) conducted a cohort in Congestive heart failure (CHF) (n=96). Positive anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies vs. Negative anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies was evaluated on Response to target metoprolol dose (p=<0.01). CHF patients positive for anti-beta(1)-AR autoantibodies had greater improvements in left ventricular remodeling and a higher response rate to target metoprolol dose than negative patients.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: