| Literature DB >> 32545310 |
Laura Bäz1, Gudrun Dannberg1, Katja Grün1, Julian Westphal1, Sven Möbius-Winkler1, Christian Jung2, Alexander Pfeil3, P Christian Schulze1, Marcus Franz1.
Abstract
In patients with aortic stenosis (AS), a novel staging classification of extra-valvular left and right heart damage with prognostic relevance was introduced in 2017. The aim of the study was to evaluate the biomarkers of cardiovascular tissue remodelling in relation to this novel staging classification. Patients were categorized according to the novel staging classification into stages 0 to 4. The levels of matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9), tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 1 (TIMP-1), B and C domain containing tenascin-C (B+ Tn-C, C+ Tn-C), the ED-A and ED-B domain containing fibronectin (ED-A+ Fn, ED-B+ Fn), endothelin 1 (ET-1) and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) were determined in serum by ELISA. There were significantly decreased serum levels of MMP-9 and increased levels of B+ Tn-C and C+ Tn-C when comparing stages 0 and 1 with stage 2, with no further dynamics in stages 3 and 4. In contrast, for TIMP-1, C+ Tn-C, ED-A+ Fn, ET-1 and NGAL, significantly increased serum levels could be detected in stages 3 and 4 compared to both stages 0 and 1 and stage 2. ED-A+ Fn and ET-1 could be identified as independent predictors of the presence of stage 3 and/or 4. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study identifying novel serum biomarkers differentially reflecting the patterns of left and right heart extra-valvular damage in patients suffering from AS. Our findings might indicate a more precise initial diagnosis and risk stratification.Entities:
Keywords: aortic stenosis; biomarker; cardiovascular remodelling; extra-valvular cardiac damage; risk stratification; staging
Year: 2020 PMID: 32545310 PMCID: PMC7312014 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21114174
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Baseline characteristics of the patients (n = 94) and the control group (n = 37) and corresponding p values (Mann–Whitney-U test). The control group consisted of patients at increased cardiovascular risk but without structural heart disease or heart failure; coronary artery disease has been excluded by invasive coronary angiography. The TAVI (trans-catheter aortic valve implantation) collective represents a typical cohort of elderly patients suffering from severe symptomatic aortic stenosis exhibiting a moderate to high surgical risk.
| Parameter | TAVI Collective | Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 78.3 ± 7.3 | 66.2 ± 6.5 | <0.001 | |
|
| 46.8 | 35.1 | 0.227 |
|
| 4.4 ± 2.8 | N/A | |
|
| 7.4 | N/A | |
|
| 29.8 | N/A | |
|
| 58.5 | N/A | |
|
| 4.3 | N/A | |
|
| 37.2 | N/A | |
|
| 62.8 | N/A | |
|
| 31.9 | 71.4 ( | <0.001 |
|
| 65.9 | 0 | <0.001 |
|
| 13.8 | N/A | |
|
| 44.7 | 18.9 | 0.008 |
|
| 24.5 | 2.7 | 0.004 |
|
| 41.5 | 18.9 | 0.015 |
| 168 ± 133 | N/A | ||
|
| 13.8 | 0 | 0.018 |
|
| 5.3 | 0 | 0.154 |
|
| 91 | 5.6 ( | <0.001 |
|
| 55.7 ± 13.8 | 67.8 ± 6.9 | <0.001 |
|
| 92 ( | 52.2 ( | <0.001 |
|
| 26.6 | 2.7 | 0.002 |
|
| 18.1 | 2.7 | 0.022 |
|
| 9.6 | 0 | 0.052 |
|
| 77.6 ( | 0 ( | <0.001 |
|
| |||
|
| 4.3 | N/A | |
|
| 16 | N/A | |
|
| 54.3 | N/A | |
|
| 16 | N/A | |
|
| 9.6 | N/A | |
|
| |||
|
| 72.3 | N/A | |
|
| 17 | N/A | |
|
| 10.6 | N/A | |
|
| |||
| 47.9 | N/A | ||
| 44.7 | N/A | ||
| 7.4 | N/A | ||
Figure 1Distribution of the different stages of extra-valvular damage in this study compared to the results in the Partner 2 trial. Except for stage 3, for all stages, the percentage of patients per stage was similar between the studies.
Baseline characteristics of the patients (n = 94) in comparison between the three staging groups: group 1 (stage 0 + 1; n = 19), group 2 (stage 2; n = 51) and group 3 (stage 3 + 4; n = 24). The corresponding p values (Mann–Whitney-U test) between the different groups reveals that the majority of parameters did not show significant differences (boldness indicates significant p values ≤0.05).
| Parameter | Staging Group 1 | Staging Group 2 | Staging Group 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 76.5 ± 6.9 | 79 ± 7.7 | 78.2 ± 6.9 | 0.202 | 0.641 | 0.422 | |
|
| 42.2 | 49 | 45.8 | 0.609 | 0.809 | 0.798 |
|
| 2.9 ± 1.7 | 4.4 ± 2.5 | 5.4 ± 2.7 | 0.016 | 0.001 | 0.084 |
|
| 0 | 9.8 | 8.3 | 0.160 | 0.203 | 0.839 |
|
| 31.6 | 33.3 | 20.8 | 0.890 | 0.428 | 0.271 |
|
| 63.2 | 52.9 | 66.7 | 0.447 | 0.813 | 0.265 |
|
| 5.3 | 3.9 | 4.2 | 0.807 | 0.867 | 0.960 |
|
| 31.6 | 43.1 | 29.2 | 0.383 | 0.866 | 0.250 |
|
| 68.4 | 56.9 | 70.8 | 0.383 | 0.866 | 0.250 |
|
| 42.1 | 35.3 | 16.7 | 0.603 | 0.068 | 0.101 |
|
| 57.9 | 62.7 | 79.2 | 0.713 | 0.136 | 0.158 |
|
| 10.5 | 15.7 | 12.5 | 0.586 | 0.843 | 0.718 |
|
| 31.6 | 54.9 | 33.3 | 0.106 | 0.904 | 0.105 |
|
| 31.6 | 27.5 | 12.5 | 0.736 | 0.131 | 0.152 |
|
| 0 | 45.1 | 66.7 |
|
| 0.083 |
| 260 ± 140 | 141 ± 132 | 107 ± 81 |
|
| 0.558 | |
|
| 5.3 | 9.8 | 29.2 | 0.549 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 3.9 | 12.5 | 0.385 | 0.114 | 0.168 |
|
| 68.4 ( | 93.9 ( | 100 ( |
|
| 0.239 |
|
| 60.4 ± 11.3 | 56.7 ± 12.1 | 49.7 ± 17.1 | 0.272 | 0.057 | 0.130 |
|
| 94.4 ( | 95.9 ( | 80 ( | 0.797 | 0.194 |
|
|
| 0 | 31.4 | 37.5 |
|
| 0.602 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 70.8 | 1.0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 37.5 | 1.0 |
|
|
|
| 50 ( | 73.3 ( | 90.9 ( | 0.264 |
| 0.116 |
|
| ||||||
|
| 84.2 | 82.4 | 41.7 | 0.856 |
|
|
|
| 5.3 | 11.8 | 37.5 | 0.423 |
|
|
|
| 10.5 | 5.9 | 20.8 | 0.505 | 0.369 | 0.052 |
| 47.4 | 51 | 41.7 | 0.790 | 0.712 | 0.454 | |
| 47.4 | 41.2 | 50 | 0.644 | 0.865 | 0.476 | |
| 5.3 | 7.8 | 8.3 | 0.711 | 0.698 | 0.942 |
Figure 2Clinical characteristics assessed in this study in comparison between the three different staging subgroups: (a) heart rhythm: sinus rhythm versus atrial fibrillation (*,# indicate significant differences between the groups with a p value <0.05), (b) 6-minutes’ walk test and (c) BNP serum levels.
Serum levels of the eight preselected biomarkers investigated in this study in comparison between the control group (n = 37) and the entire AS patients’ collective (n = 94). There were significant differences (Mann–Whitney-U test, p < 0.05) for MMP-9, TIMP-1, B+ Tn-C, ED-B+ Fn, ET-1 and NGAL (boldness indicates significant p values ≤0.05).
| Biomarker | Controls ( | AS-Patients ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 602.05 ± 305.17 | 399.95 ± 323.6 |
| |
| 159.1 ± 42.66 | 177.75 ± 88.68 |
| |
| 362.11 ± 380.05 | 794.05 ± 775.53 |
| |
| 66.08 ± 27.37 | 70.03 ± 51.96 | 0.366 | |
| 8.82 ± 10.22 | 13.31 ± 12.08 | 0.116 | |
| 3.06 ± 2.10 | 5.25 ± 3.23 |
| |
| 1.35 ± 0.38 | 2.49 ± 1.19 |
| |
| 83.14 ± 32.98 | 142.64 ± 146.42 |
|
Figure 3Differences in serum biomarkers in comparison with the three different staging subgroups within the TAVI collective: (a) MMP-9, (b) B+ Tn-C, (c) C+ Tn-C, (d) TIMP-1, (e) ED-A+ Fn, (f) ET-1 and (g) NGAL. The given p values indicate statistical significance (Mann–Whitney-U test, p value < 0.05).
Serum levels of the eight preselected biomarkers investigated in this study in comparison with the three staging groups of AS patients (n = 94): group 1 (stage 0 + 1; n = 19), group 2 (stage 2; n = 51) and group 3 (stage 3 + 4; n = 24). The corresponding p values (Mann–Whitney-U test) between the different groups reveal certain differences between the groups (boldness indicates significant p values ≤0.05).
| Biomarker | Staging Group 1 | Staging Group 2 | Staging Group 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 528.11 ± 418.53 | 353.60 ± 288.08 | 411.94 ± 292.48 |
| 0.271 | 0.413 | |
| 172.19 ± 53.99 | 174.32 ± 80.74 | 230.44 ± 112.44 | 0.853 | 0.056 |
| |
| 571.19 ± 483.34 | 1081.68 ± 788.11 | 720.93 ± 841.37 |
| 0.065 | 0.343 | |
| 45.88 ± 26.12 | 73.77 ± 52.69 | 76.53 ± 59.31 |
|
| 0.729 | |
| 10.30 ± 5.95 | 10.91 ± 11.90 | 20.65 ± 14.19 | 0.838 |
|
| |
| 5.05 ± 2.73 | 5.16 ± 3.50 | 6.22 ± 3.07 | 0.890 | 0.353 | 0.367 | |
| 2.20 ± 1.24 | 2.47 ± 1.06 | 3.40 ± 1.28 | 0.146 |
|
| |
| 122.84 ± 67.24 | 136.41 ± 159.12 | 181.57 ± 158.85 | 0.561 |
|
|