Biomarkers for predicting atrial fibrillation: An explorative sub-analysis of the randomised SCREEN-AF trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common treatable risk factor for stroke. Screening for paroxysmal AF in general practice is difficult, but biomarkers might help improve screening strategies. OBJECTIVES: We investigated six blood biomarkers for predicting paroxysmal AF in general practice. METHODS: This was a pre-specified sub-study of the SCREEN-AF RCT done in Germany. Between 12/2017-03/2019, we enrolled ambulatory individuals aged 75 years or older with a history of hypertension but without known AF. Participants in the intervention group received active AF screening with a wearable patch, continuous ECG monitoring for 2x2 weeks and usual care in the control group. The primary endpoint was ECG-confirmed AF within six months after randomisation. High-sensitive Troponin I (hsTnI), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro BNP), N-terminal pro atrial natriuretic peptide (NT-ANP), mid-regional pro atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-pro ANP) and C-reactive protein (CRP) plasma levels were investigated at randomisation for predicting AF within six months after randomisation. RESULTS: Blood samples were available for 291 of 301 (96.7%) participants, including 8 with AF (3%). Five biomarkers showed higher median results in AF-patients: BNP 78 vs. 41 ng/L (p = 0.012), NT-pro BNP 273 vs. 186 ng/L (p = 0.029), NT-proANP 4.4 vs. 3.5 nmol/L (p = 0.027), MR-pro ANP 164 vs. 125 pmol/L (p = 0.016) and hsTnI 7.4 vs. 3.9 ng/L (p = 0.012). CRP levels were not different between groups (2.8 vs 1.9 mg/L, p = 0.1706). CONCLUSION: Natriuretic peptide levels and hsTnI are higher in patients with AF than without and may help select patients for AF screening, but larger trials are needed.

BNP, NT-pro BNP, NT-ANP and MR-pro ANP and hsTnI levels are higher in patients with AF than without AFWith a sensitivity at 100%, BNP had the highest specificity of 60% (BNP level 50.1ng/L), followed by NT-pro BNP with a specificity of 53% (179ng/l).

Coping styles as predictors for quality of life and prognosis in patients at risk for or with a diagnosis of heart failure: Results from the observational DIAST-CHF study.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with heart failure often experience impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and have an increased risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The aim of this study was to investigate the predictive role of different coping styles on outcome. METHODS: This longitudinal study included 1536 participants who either had cardiovascular risk factors or were diagnosed with heart failure. Follow-ups took place one, two, five and ten years after recruitment. Coping and HRQOL were investigated using self-assessment questionnaires (Freiburg Questionnaire for Coping with Illness, Short Form-36 Health Survey). Somatic outcome was quantified by incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and 6-min-walking-distance. RESULTS: Pearson correlation and multiple linear regression analysis showed significant associations between the coping styles used at the first three time points and HRQOL after five years. After adjusting for baseline HRQOL, minimization and wishful thinking predicted worse mental HRQOL (ß = -0.106; p = 0.006), while depressive coping predicted worse mental (ß = -0.197; p < 0.001) and physical HRQOL (ß = -0.085; p = 0.03; n = 613). Active problem-oriented coping could not significantly predict HRQOL. Only minimization and wishful thinking was significantly associated with an increased 10-year-risk for MACCE (hazard ratio = 1.06; 95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.11; p = 0.02; n = 1444) and reduction in 6-min-walking-distance at 5 years (ß = -0.119; p = 0.004; n = 817) in adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive coping and minimization and wishful thinking were associated with worse quality of life in patients at risk for or with diagnosed heart failure. Minimization and wishful thinking also predicted worse somatic outcome. Therefore, patients using those coping styles might benefit from early psychosocial interventions.

NT-proBNP as a marker for atrial fibrillation and heart failure in four observational outpatient trials.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) frequently coexist and are both associated with increased levels of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). It is known that AF impairs the diagnostic accuracy of NT-proBNP for HF. The aim of the present study was to compare the diagnostic and predictive accuracy of NT-proBNP for HF and AF in stable outpatients with cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were obtained from the DIAST-CHF trial, a prospective cohort study that recruited individuals with cardiovascular risk factors and followed them up for 12 years. Data were validated in three independent population-based cohorts using the same inclusion/exclusion criteria: LIFE-Adult (n = 2869), SHIP (n = 2013), and SHIP-TREND (n = 2408). Serum levels of NT-proBNP were taken once at baseline. The DIAST-CHF study enrolled 1727 study participants (47.7% female, mean age 66.9 ± 8.1 years). At baseline, patients without AF or HF (n = 1375) had a median NT-proBNP of 94 pg/mL (interquartile range 51;181). In patients with AF (n = 93), NT-proBNP amounted to 667 (215;1130) pg/mL. It was significantly higher than in the first group (P < 0.001) and compared with those with only HF [n = 201; 158 (66;363) pg/mL; P < 0.001]. The highest levels of NT-proBNP [868 (213;1397) pg/mL] were measured in patients with concomitant HF and AF (n = 58; P < 0.001 vs. control and vs. HF, P = 1.0 vs. AF). In patients with AF, NT-proBNP levels did not differ between those with HF and preserved ejection fraction (EF) > 50% [n = 38; 603 (175;1070) pg/mL] and those without HF (P = 1.0). Receiver-operating characteristic curves of NT-proBNP showed a similar area under the curve (AUC) for the detection of AF at baseline (0.84, 95% CI [0.79-0.88]) and for HF with EF < 50% (0.78 [0.72-0.85]; P = 0.18). The AUC for HF with EF > 50% was significantly lower (0.61 [0.56-0.65]) than for AF (P = 0.001). During follow-up, AF was newly diagnosed in 157 (9.1%) and HF in 141 (9.6%) study participants. NT-proBNP was a better predictor of incident AF during the first 2 years (AUC: 0.79 [0.75-0.83]) than of newly diagnosed HF (0.59 [0.55-0.63]; P < 0.001). Data were validated in three independent population-based cohorts (LIFE-Adult, n = 2869; SHIP, n = 2013; and SHIP-TREND, n = 2408). CONCLUSIONS: In stable outpatients, NT-proBNP is a better marker for prevalent and incident AF than for HF. In AF patients, the diagnostic value of NT-proBNP for HF with EF > 50% is very limited.

[Update on the diagnosis of HFrEF and HFpEF]. / Diagnostische Herausforderungen bei Herzinsuffizienz.

Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause for inpatient treatment in Germany. Its diagnosis is based on the ESC Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Heart Failure of 2016. More than half of all patients with HF suffer from HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), whose diagnosis is still challenging. Two new diagnostic scores have been proposed to facilitate the diagnosis of HFpEF and are presented in this article, the H2FPEF-Score and the HFA-PEFF-algorithm by the Heart Failure Association.