Masson Serge, Latini Roberto, Anand Inder S, Vago Tarcisio, Angelici Laura, Barlera Simona, Missov Emil D, Clerico Aldo, Tognoni Gianni, Cohn Jay N
Department of Cardiovascular Research, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milan, Italy.
Clin Chem. 2006 Aug;52(8):1528-38. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2006.069575. Epub 2006 Jun 15.
The B-type or brain natriuretic peptides (BNP) and the amino-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are good markers of prognosis and diagnosis in chronic heart failure (HF). It is unclear, however, whether differences in their biological characteristics modify their clinical correlates and prognostic performance in HF. This work aimed to provide a direct comparison of the prognostic value of BNP and NT-proBNP in patients with chronic and stable HF.
We measured BNP and NT-proBNP at baseline in 3916 patients enrolled in the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial. To identify the variables associated with both peptides, we conducted simple and multivariable linear regression analyses. We used Cox multivariable regression models to evaluate the independent prognostic value for all-cause mortality, mortality and morbidity, and hospitalization for HF. Prognostic performance was assessed by pairwise comparisons of the area under the curve of receiver-operator characteristic curves.
NT-proBNP and BNP had similar relationships with age, left ventrical ejection fraction, and internal diameter and creatinine clearance. Either peptide ranked as the first independent predictor of outcome after adjustment for major confounding clinical characteristics. ROC curves were almost superimposable for all-cause mortality (area under the curve (SE): BNP 0.665 (0.011) vs NT-proBNP 0.679 (0.011); P=0.0734), but NT-proBNP was superior to BNP for predicting mortality and morbidity (P=0.032) or hospitalization for HF (P=0.0143). Overall sensitivity and specificity ranged from 0.590 to 0.696.
The natriuretic peptides BNP and NT-proBNP showed subtle differences in their relation to clinical characteristics and prognostic performance in a large population of patients with chronic and stable HF. They were the most powerful independent markers of outcome in HF.
B型利钠肽(BNP)和氨基末端脑钠肽前体(NT-proBNP)是慢性心力衰竭(HF)预后和诊断的良好标志物。然而,它们生物学特性的差异是否会改变其在HF中的临床相关性和预后表现尚不清楚。这项研究旨在直接比较BNP和NT-proBNP在慢性稳定HF患者中的预后价值。
我们在缬沙坦心力衰竭试验纳入的3916例患者基线时测量了BNP和NT-proBNP。为了确定与这两种肽相关的变量,我们进行了单变量和多变量线性回归分析。我们使用Cox多变量回归模型评估全因死亡率、死亡率和发病率以及HF住院的独立预后价值。通过对接受者操作特征曲线下面积的成对比较来评估预后表现。
NT-proBNP和BNP与年龄、左心室射血分数、内径和肌酐清除率具有相似的关系。在调整主要混杂临床特征后,两种肽均被列为结局的首要独立预测因子。全因死亡率的ROC曲线几乎重叠(曲线下面积(SE):BNP为0.665(0.011),NT-proBNP为0.679(0.011);P = 0.0734),但NT-proBNP在预测死亡率和发病率(P = 0.032)或HF住院方面优于BNP(P = 0.0143)。总体敏感性和特异性范围为0.590至0.696。
在大量慢性稳定HF患者中,利钠肽BNP和NT-proBNP在与临床特征和预后表现的关系上存在细微差异。它们是HF结局最有力的独立标志物。