Christina Hansen1, Cristina Sastre1, Zoe Wolcott1, Matthew B Bevers2, W Taylor Kimberly1. 1. Department of Neurology, Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Divisions of Stroke, Cerebrovascular and Critical Care Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Time-dependent change in the level of biomarkers after stroke is not well understood. We sought to compare fatty acid-binding protein 4 (FABP4), Galectin-3, and soluble ST2 to ascertain for a change in prediction of outcome at admission and 48 h later. METHODS: Plasma FABP4, Galectin-3, and soluble ST2 were measured in biospecimens from acute stroke patients at the time of admission (n = 383) and 48 h later (n = 244). Functional outcome was assessed at 90 days using the modified Rankin Scale and dichotomized into good (modified Rankin Scale 0-2) and poor outcome (modified Rankin Scale 3-6). RESULTS: On admission, elevated levels of each biomarker predicted poor outcome (FABP4: OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.42-2.59, P < 0.0001; Galectin-3: OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.42-2.40, P < 0.0001; soluble ST2: OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.22-1.97, P < 0.0001) and death (FABP4: OR 2.45; 95% CI 1.51-3.98; P < 0.0001; Galectin-3: OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.50-3.30; P < 0.0001; soluble ST2: OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.58-2.99; P < 0.0001). At 48 h, soluble ST2 predicted poor outcome (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.77-3.88, P < 0.0001) and mortality (OR 3.36, 95% CI 2.06-5.48, P < 0.0001), and Galectin-3 predicted mortality only (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.05-3.10, P = 0.033). FABP4 measured at 48 h was not predictive of outcome or death. Associations of Galectin-3 and soluble ST2 with outcome or mortality were independent of age, sex, and NIHSS, whereas those with FABP4 were not. CONCLUSIONS: Galectin-3 performed better when measured on admission, whereas soluble ST2 was predictive at admission and better at 48 h after stroke. The time-dependent differences may reflect the evolving role of these pathways after acute stroke.
BACKGROUND: Time-dependent change in the level of biomarkers after stroke is not well understood. We sought to compare fatty acid-binding protein 4 (FABP4), Galectin-3, and soluble ST2 to ascertain for a change in prediction of outcome at admission and 48 h later. METHODS: Plasma FABP4, Galectin-3, and soluble ST2 were measured in biospecimens from acute stroke patients at the time of admission (n = 383) and 48 h later (n = 244). Functional outcome was assessed at 90 days using the modified Rankin Scale and dichotomized into good (modified Rankin Scale 0-2) and poor outcome (modified Rankin Scale 3-6). RESULTS: On admission, elevated levels of each biomarker predicted poor outcome (FABP4: OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.42-2.59, P < 0.0001; Galectin-3: OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.42-2.40, P < 0.0001; soluble ST2: OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.22-1.97, P < 0.0001) and death (FABP4: OR 2.45; 95% CI 1.51-3.98; P < 0.0001; Galectin-3: OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.50-3.30; P < 0.0001; soluble ST2: OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.58-2.99; P < 0.0001). At 48 h, soluble ST2 predicted poor outcome (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.77-3.88, P < 0.0001) and mortality (OR 3.36, 95% CI 2.06-5.48, P < 0.0001), and Galectin-3 predicted mortality only (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.05-3.10, P = 0.033). FABP4 measured at 48 h was not predictive of outcome or death. Associations of Galectin-3 and soluble ST2 with outcome or mortality were independent of age, sex, and NIHSS, whereas those with FABP4 were not. CONCLUSIONS: Galectin-3 performed better when measured on admission, whereas soluble ST2 was predictive at admission and better at 48 h after stroke. The time-dependent differences may reflect the evolving role of these pathways after acute stroke.
Authors: Ilia D Vainchtein; Gregory Chin; Frances S Cho; Kevin W Kelley; John G Miller; Elliott C Chien; Shane A Liddelow; Phi T Nguyen; Hiromi Nakao-Inoue; Leah C Dorman; Omar Akil; Satoru Joshita; Ben A Barres; Jeanne T Paz; Ari B Molofsky; Anna V Molofsky Journal: Science Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Miguel Angel Burguillos; Martina Svensson; Tim Schulte; Antonio Boza-Serrano; Albert Garcia-Quintanilla; Edel Kavanagh; Martiniano Santiago; Nikenza Viceconte; Maria Jose Oliva-Martin; Ahmed Mohamed Osman; Emma Salomonsson; Lahouari Amar; Annette Persson; Klas Blomgren; Adnane Achour; Elisabet Englund; Hakon Leffler; Jose Luis Venero; Bertrand Joseph; Tomas Deierborg Journal: Cell Rep Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 9.423
Authors: Salim S Virani; Alvaro Alonso; Emelia J Benjamin; Marcio S Bittencourt; Clifton W Callaway; April P Carson; Alanna M Chamberlain; Alexander R Chang; Susan Cheng; Francesca N Delling; Luc Djousse; Mitchell S V Elkind; Jane F Ferguson; Myriam Fornage; Sadiya S Khan; Brett M Kissela; Kristen L Knutson; Tak W Kwan; Daniel T Lackland; Tené T Lewis; Judith H Lichtman; Chris T Longenecker; Matthew Shane Loop; Pamela L Lutsey; Seth S Martin; Kunihiro Matsushita; Andrew E Moran; Michael E Mussolino; Amanda Marma Perak; Wayne D Rosamond; Gregory A Roth; Uchechukwu K A Sampson; Gary M Satou; Emily B Schroeder; Svati H Shah; Christina M Shay; Nicole L Spartano; Andrew Stokes; David L Tirschwell; Lisa B VanWagner; Connie W Tsao Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Marc S Sabatine; David A Morrow; Luke J Higgins; Catherine MacGillivray; Wei Guo; Christophe Bode; Nader Rifai; Christopher P Cannon; Robert E Gerszten; Richard T Lee Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-03-31 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Pietro Scicchitano; Andrea Marzullo; Annarita Santoro; Annapaola Zito; Francesca Cortese; Cristina Galeandro; Andrea Sebastiano Ciccone; Domenico Angiletta; Fabio Manca; Raffaele Pulli; Eliano Pio Navarese; Paul A Gurbel; Marco Matteo Ciccone Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Juan García-Revilla; Antonio Boza-Serrano; Ana M Espinosa-Oliva; Manuel Sarmiento Soto; Tomas Deierborg; Rocío Ruiz; Rocío M de Pablos; Miguel Angel Burguillos; Jose L Venero Journal: Cell Death Dis Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 9.685