| Literature DB >> 35053387 |
Isabel Moscoso1,2,3, María Cebro-Márquez1,2, Álvaro Martínez-Gómez2, Charigan Abou-Jokh2, María Amparo Martínez-Monzonís2,3, José Luis Martínez-Sande2,3, Laila González-Melchor2, Javier García-Seara2,3, Xesús Alberte Fernández-López2, Sandra Moraña-Fernández2, José R González-Juanatey1,2,3, Moisés Rodríguez-Mañero2,3, Ricardo Lage1,2,3.
Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy represents a therapeutic option for heart failure drug-refractory patients. However, due to the lack of success in 30% of the cases, there is a demand for an in-depth analysis of individual heterogeneity. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of circulating miRNA differences. Responder patients were defined by a composite endpoint of the presence of left ventricular reverse remodelling (a reduction ≥15% in telesystolic volume and an increment ≥10% in left ventricular ejection fraction). Circulating miRNAs signature was analysed at the time of the procedure and at a 6-month follow-up. An expression analysis showed, both at baseline and at follow-up, differences between responders and non-responders. Responders presented lower baseline expressions of miR-499, and at follow-up, downregulation of miR-125b-5p, both associated with a significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction. The miRNA profile differences showed a marked sensitivity to distinguish between responders and non-responders. Our data suggest that miRNA differences might contribute to prognostic stratification of patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy and suggest that preimplant cardiac context as well as remodelling response are key to therapeutic success.Entities:
Keywords: adverse remodelling; cardiac biomarker; cardiac resynchronization therapy; cardiac therapeutic target; heart failure; microRNAs
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35053387 PMCID: PMC8773679 DOI: 10.3390/cells11020271
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
Figure 1Study flow chart.
Clinical parameters. Data are presented as mean + SD, % (n), or median and interquartile range (25–75%). * p < 0.05 baseline vs. 6 months and # p < 0.05 responders vs. non-responders.
| Total ( | Responders ( | Non-responders ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 6 m | Baseline | 6 m | ||
| Age, years | 77 (±8) | 75 (±5) | |||
| Sex, male/female | 15/10 | 9/5 | 6/5 | ||
| BMI, kg/m2 | 28.2 ± 0.83 | 28.3 ± 5.0 | 28.5 ± 5.6 | 28 ±3.18 | 28.8 ± 3.51 |
| Systolic blood pressure | 111 ± 15.62 | 115 ±19.42 | 111 ± 7.85 | ||
| Heart rate | 73 ± 19.63 | 77 ±22 | 68 ±17 | ||
| Dyslipidaemia % ( | 44 (11) | 29 (4) | 64 (7) | ||
| Diabetes, % ( | 36 (9) | 43 (6) | 27 (3) | ||
| Hypertension, % ( | 68 (17) | 71 (10) | 64 (7) | ||
| COPD ( | 25 (3) | 7 (1) | 18 (2) | ||
| GFR mL/min | 55 ± 22 | 56 ± 27 | 58 ± 21 | 53 ± 15 | 53 ± 24 |
| NT-proBNP, pg/mL | 4194 ± 4083 | 3361 ± 2697 | 1744 ± 1481 * | 5254 ± 5325 # | 12,914 ± 29,691 * |
| NYHA class, | 2.64 ± 0.64 | 2.43 ± 0.51 | 1.64 ± 0.50 * | 2.91 ± 0.70 | 2.6 ± 0.97 |
| Aetiology, % ( | |||||
| Ischaemic | 21.43 (3) | 18.18 (2) | |||
| Non-ischaemic | 78.57 (11) | 81.82 (9) | |||
| Medical treatment, % ( | |||||
| ACEIs/ARBs | 56 (14) | 50 (7) | 36 (5) | 64 (7) | 45 (5) |
| Beta-blockers | 84 (21) | 86 (12) | 93 (13) | 82 (9) | 91 (10) |
| ARNI | 40 (10) | 50 (7) | 57 (8) | 27 (3) | 36 (4) |
| Spironolactone | 80 (20) | 79 (11) | 79 (11) | 82 (9) | 82 (9) |
| Diuretics | 88 (22) | 79 (11) | 64 (9) | 100 (11) | 64 (7) |
| Digoxin | 20 (5) | 21(3) | 18 (2) | ||
| Statin | 56 (14) | 50 (7) | 64 (7) | ||
| Echocardiographic data | |||||
| LVEDD (mm) | 64 ± 10 | 65 ± 9 | 57 ± 7 | 63 ± 12 | 60 ± 9 |
| LVESD (mm) | 57 ± 12 | 59 ± 10 | 48 ± 8 | 55 ± 13 | 52 ± 10 |
| LVEDVi, mL/m2 | 177 ± 87 | 187 ± 101 | 99 ± 44 * | 164 ± 68 | 171 ± 74 |
| LVESVi, mL/m2 | 129 ± 76 | 138 ± 87 | 59 ± 38 * | 116 ± 61 | 119 ± 70 |
| LVEF | 31 ± 9 | 30 ± 8 | 46 ± 12 * | 32 ± 10 | 35 ± 13 |
ACEIs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARNI, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors; BMI, body mass index; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; LVEDD, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter; LVESD, left ventricular end-systolic diameter; LVEDVi, left ventricular end-diastolic volume index; LVESVi, left ventricular end-systolic volume index.
Figure 2Differential baseline expression of miRNAs between CRT responders and non-responders. Box-and-whiskers min to max plots showing plasma levels of microRNAs. Data correspond to baseline differentially expressed miRNAs in non-responder (n = 11) vs. responder (n = 14) patients. * p < 0.05 responders vs. non-responders.
Figure 3Differential follow-up expression of miRNAs in responders. Box-and-whiskers min to max plots showing plasma levels of microRNAs. Data correspond to differentially expressed miRNAs in responder patients (n = 14). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01 basal vs. 6 months.
Figure 4Predictive capacity of CRT success. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves comparing sensitivity and specificity of (a) baseline and (b) follow-up differentially expressed miRNAs in predicting CRT response.
Figure 5miRNA correlation with CRT response. Correlation between LVEF change and (a) baseline miR-499a levels and (b) follow-up miR-125b decrease.
Figure 6Gene set enrichment analysis of KEGG pathways of miR-499-5p and miR-125b-5p. Pathways modulated at baseline (a) and follow-up (b) by differentially expressed miRNAs, expressed as negative logarithm of p-value (−LogP).
Figure 7Graphical overview of hypothetical miRNA-regulated processes associated with CRT scheme.