sST2 and Big ET-1 as Alternatives of Multi-Biomarkers Strategies for Prognosis Evaluation in Patients Hospitalized with Heart Failure

Abstract

Objective

To identify biomarkers with independent prognostic value and investigate the prognostic value of multiple biomarkers in combination in patients hospitalized with heart failure.

Methods

A total of 884 consecutive patients hospitalized with heart failure from 2015 to 2017 were enrolled. Twelve biomarkers were measured on admission, and the relationships between biomarkers and outcomes were assessed.

Results

During the median follow-up of 913 days, 291 patients (32.9%) suffered from primary endpoint events. Soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 (sST2) (per log [unit] increase, adjusted HR [95% CI]: 1.39 [1.13,1.72], P = 0.002) and big endothelin-1 (big ET-1) (per log [unit] increase, adjusted HR [95% CI]: 1.56 [1.23,1.97], P < 0.001) remained independent predictors of primary endpoint event after adjusting for other predictors including N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT). Both sST2 (C-statistic: 0.810 vs 0.801, P = 0.005, and 0.832 vs 0.826, P = 0.024, respectively) and big ET-1 (C-statistic: 0.829 vs 0.801, P = 0.001, and 0.843 vs 0.826, P < 0.001, respectively) significantly improved the predictive value for primary endpoint event at 1 year and 3 years. However, only big ET-1 (C-statistic: 0.852 vs 0.846, P = 0.014) significantly improved the predictive value at 3 months when added to clinical predictors and known biomarkers. According to the number of elevated biomarkers (including NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, sST2, and big ET-1), patients with three or more elevated biomarkers had a higher risk of primary endpoint event compared to those with two elevated biomarkers (P = 0.001), as well as in patients with two elevated biomarkers compared to those with one elevated biomarker (P = 0.004). However, the risk of primary endpoint event was comparable between patients with one elevated biomarker and those with no elevated biomarker (P = 0.582).

Conclusion

Multiple biomarkers in combination could provide a better prognostic value than a single biomarker. sST2 and big ET-1 could act as alternatives of multi-biomarkers strategies for prognosis evaluation beyond NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT in patients hospitalized with heart failure.

Keywords:

• heart failure
• prognostic value
• multiple biomarkers
• sST2
• big ET-1

Data Sharing Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Ethics Statement

This study complied with the principles contained in the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the ethics committee of Fuwai Hospital (No. 2014-501). Written informed consent has been obtained from all participants.

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC1308300) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81873472).