Key result
High circulating miR-181c linked to ~52% lower odds of exercise response in HFpEF.
Why the study?
Up to 55% of HFpEF patients show no increase in peakV·O2 despite adequate exercise training, and biomarkers to distinguish responders are needed.
Does circulating miR-181c predict response to exercise training in patients with HFpEF?
Cohort (n=51)
Does circulating miR-181c predict response to exercise training in patients with HFpEF?
Odds Ratio: 0.48
p-value: p=0.010
Circulating miR-181c is a potential biomarker to identify HFpEF patients who may not respond adequately to exercise training, allowing for individualized management.
miR-181c was associated with blunted exercise response in HFpEF; leaves open its value for guiding therapy in prospective studies.
AIMS: In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), exercise training improves the quality of life and aerobic capacity (peakV·O2). Up to 55% of HF patients, however, show no increase in peakV·O2 despite adequate training. We hypothesized that circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) can distinguish exercise low responders (LR) from exercise high responders (HR) among HFpEF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We selected HFpEF patients from the Optimizing Exercise Training in Prevention and Treatment of Diastolic HF (OptimEx) study which attended ≥70% of training sessions during 3 months (n = 51). Patients were defined as HR with a change in peakV·O2 above median (6.4%), and LR as below median (n = 30 and n = 21, respectively). Clinical, ergospirometric, and echocardiographic characteristics were similar between LR and HR. We performed an miRNA array (n = 377 miRNAs) in 14 age- and sex-matched patients. A total of 10 miRNAs were upregulated in LR, of which 4 correlated with peakV·O2. Validation in the remaining 37 patients indicated that high miR-181c predicted reduced peakV·O2 response (multiple linear regression, β = -2.60, P = 0.011), and LR status (multiple logistic regression, odds ratio = 0.48, P = 0.010), independent of age, sex, body mass index, and resting heart rate. Furthermore, miR-181c decreased in LR after exercise training (P-group = 0.030, P-time = 0.048, P-interaction = 0.037). An in silico pathway analysis identified several downstream targets involved in exercise adaptation. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating miR-181c is a marker of the response to exercise training in HFpEF patients. High miR-181c levels can aid in identifying LR prior to training, providing the possibility for individualized management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gevaert et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (n=51). High circulating miR-181c level vs. Low miR-181c level was evaluated on Low responder (LR) status to exercise training (OR 0.48, p=0.010). High circulating miR-181c levels predicted a reduced peakV·O2 response and low responder status to 3 months of exercise training in patients with HFpEF (OR 0.48, P=0.010).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: