Article

New and emerging biomarkers of heart failure.

G. Monasterio Foundation, Institute of Clinical Physiology-National Research Council and Scuola Superiore di Studi Universitari e Perfezionamento Sant'Anna, Pisa 56126, Italy.
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences (Impact Factor: 3.78). 02/2009; 46(3):107-28. DOI: 10.1080/10408360902722342
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Heart failure (HF) may be considered as the fatal finishing line of all cardiovascular disorders. There is not a single diagnostic test for HF, and its diagnosis relies on clinical judgment based on a combination of history, physical examination, and appropriate investigations. For these reasons, the accuracy of diagnosis by clinical means alone is often inadequate. Despite the enormous advances in understanding and treatment that have taken place during the last 50 years, HF continues to have a poor prognosis. Diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with HF depend on the availability of specific, accurate, and effective disease or risk markers. Thus, there is an increasing interest in the development of new cardiovascular biomarkers, and, consequently, a great number of laboratory tests have recently been proposed for their assay. In this review, we briefly discuss the characteristics of an ideal HF biomarker and describe the analytical performance and clinical relevance of available biomarker assay methods, comparing their performances with that of an ideal biomarker for HF. Finally, we present a scheme to search for more efficient diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for HF.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
59 Views
  • Clinica Chimica Acta - CLIN CHIM ACTA. 02/2012;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Heart failure is extremely prevalent and is associated with significant mortality, morbidity and cost. Studies have already established mortality benefit with the use of neurohormonal blockade therapy in systolic failure. Unfortunately, physical signs and symptoms of heart failure lack diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, and medication doses proven to improve mortality in clinical trials are often not achieved. Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) has proven to be of clinical use in the diagnosis and prognosis of heart failure, and recent efforts have been taken to further elucidate its role in guiding heart failure management. Multiple studies have been conducted on outpatient guided management, and although still controversial, there is a trend towards improved outcomes. Inpatient studies are lacking, but preliminary data suggest various BNP cut-off values, as well as percentage changes in BNP, that could be useful in predicting outcomes and improving mortality. In the future, heart failure management will probably involve an algorithm using clinical assessment and a multibiomarker-guided approach.
    Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy 02/2012; 10(2):191-203.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract The prognostic significance of cardiospecific troponins and natriuretic peptides in patients with myocardial ischemia is well established, and their measurement is now endorsed by the most important guidelines and recommendations for diagnosis and management of heart failure (HF). Additional biomarkers have also been investigated to support clinical judgment and diagnostic imaging in the stratification of risk of cardiac dysfunction in patients with myocardial infarction (MI). We have performed a systematic analysis of the current scientific literature regarding the most important biomarkers of HF, selecting all prospective studies with adequate sample size (i.e. >100 patients) that have assessed, during the early phase of myocardial ischemia, the prognostic value of emergent biomarkers for new-onset HF or deterioration of cardiac function in patients with MI. This analysis has provided some good evidence suggesting that, in most cases, the use of diagnostic biomarkers of cardiac dysfunction does not translate into efficient risk prediction of HF. However, some notable exceptions were found, including biomarkers of cardiac fibrosis (especially galectin-3), growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), osteoprotegerin, C-reactive protein (CRP), and red blood cell distribution width (RDW). Nevertheless, future studies with well-defined characteristics including the use of larger sample sizes, standardized end points, and replication populations, along with benchmark analyses against other consolidated biomarkers (i.e. cardiospecific troponins and natriuretic peptides), should be planned. Such evaluations will help to establish whether an integrated approach including biomarkers of different pathogenetic pathways - for example, apoptosis, stress of cardiomyocytes, cardiac fibrosis, inflammation, and extra-cardiac involvement - may be cost effective for identifying patients at increased risk of developing HF, and who, therefore, may benefit from a tailored therapeutic strategy.
    Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences 01/2014; · 3.78 Impact Factor