Key result
Three abnormal biomarkers linked to a ~37% adverse event rate vs none in women with suspected ischemia.
Why the study?
Inflammatory markers and hemoglobin levels considered separately predict adverse events, but the predictive value of a multiple biomarker approach in women evaluated for ischemia was unclear.
Does a multiple biomarker approach predict adverse events in women referred for evaluation of suspected ischemia?
Cohort (n=595)
Does a multiple biomarker approach predict adverse events in women referred for evaluation of suspected ischemia?
Absolute Event Rate: 37% vs 11.6%
p-value: p=< 0.001
A multimarker approach incorporating inflammatory markers and hemoglobin provides additive prognostic information beyond traditional risk factors in women evaluated for suspected ischemia.
May refine prognostication in women with suspected ischemia; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before guiding care.
BACKGROUND: Inflammatory marker and hemoglobin levels (eg biomarkers) considered separately, predict adverse events in selected populations. HYPOTHESIS: A multiple biomarker approach predicts adverse events in women referred for evaluation of ischemia. METHODS: We investigated associations between biomarkers (high sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, serum amyloid-A, and hemoglobin levels) with adverse outcomes in women referred for coronary angiography for suspected ischemia in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)-sponsored Women's Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE). RESULTS: Among 595 women (mean age 58 years, ejection fraction [EF] 65%, majority without coronary stenosis >or= 50%) followed for 3.6 +/- 1.8 years (mean +/- SD), those without abnormal markers had fewer events (11.6%) compared to those with 1 (18.4%), 2 (20.9%), or 3 (37%) abnormal markers (p < 0.001 for trend). Women without abnormal markers had fewer deaths (1.6%) than women with 1 (6.1%), 2 (9.1%), or 3 (17%) abnormal markers (p < 0.001 for trend). Adding low hemoglobin was associated with higher adverse event and all-cause mortality rates. In multivariate analysis, as the number of abnormal biomarkers increased risk increased. Women with 3 or 4 abnormal biomarkers were approximately 10-20 times more likely to die (p < 0.05). Biomarkers added to the predictive information provided by the Framingham Risk Score. CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing coronary angiography for suspected ischemia, a multibiomarker approach predicted adverse events. Biomarkers added prognostic information beyond that obtained from traditional risk factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arant et al. (2009) conducted a cohort in Suspected ischemia (n=595). Abnormal biomarkers (hs-CRP, IL-6, SAA, and hemoglobin) vs. No abnormal biomarkers was evaluated on Adverse events (p=< 0.001). In women evaluated for suspected ischemia, having 3 abnormal biomarkers was associated with a 37% adverse event rate compared to 11.6% in those with no abnormal markers (p < 0.001 for trend).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: