Repeated Measurements of NT-pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide, Troponin T or C-Reactive Protein Do Not Predict Future Allograft Rejection in Heart Transplant Recipients

Battes, Linda C.; Çalışkan, Kadir; Rizopoulos, Dimitris; Constantinescu, Alina A.; Robertus, Jan Lukas; Akkerhuis, Martijn; Manintveld, Olivier C.; Boersma, Eric; Kardys, Isabella

doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000000378

Cited by 23 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although in the development and application of MVJMs they are often restricted to the simple case of continuous outcomes only [17, 19–21, 37–53], it is conceivable that multiple outcomes might be a mixture of different outcome types. For example, in Rizopoulos and Ghosh [29], GFR and haematocrit were both continuous measures, whereas proteinuria was recorded as a binary outcome.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Battes et al [21] used an ad hoc approach of either summing or multiplying the three repeated continuous measures (standardized according to clinical upper reference limits of the biomarker assays), and then applying standard univariate joint models.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Battes et al [21] used the R package JM [27], which fits univariate joint models, by reducing the multivariate longitudinal data to a univariate outcome through ad hoc techniques. R has also been used as an interface to execute JAGS [85] and WinBUGS/OpenBUGS programs [47, 53, 56, 65].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Applications have been in the disease areas of HIV/AIDS [16, 38–41, 43, 52], lung disease [65, 68], cancer [19, 37, 42, 49, 53, 60, 70], cardiovascular disease [21, 56, 59, 67], neurodegenerative disease [18, 45, 54, 55, 57], renal disease [17, 29, 48, 50, 51, 63], hepatic disease [46, 61], mental health [58, 66], and cognitive studies [20, 44]. We illustrate three examples below.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commensurate with this methodological research has been an increase in wide-ranging clinical application [16–21] and accessibility to analysis tools using mainstream statistical software packages [22–28]. In practice, however, the data collected will often be more complex, featuring multiple longitudinal outcomes and possibly multiple, recurrent or competing event times.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Joint modelling of time-to-event and multivariate longitudinal outcomes: recent developments and issues

Hickey

Philipson

Jorgensen

et al. 2016

BMC Med Res Methodol

137

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAvailable methods for the joint modelling of longitudinal and time-to-event outcomes have typically only allowed for a single longitudinal outcome and a solitary event time. In practice, clinical studies are likely to record multiple longitudinal outcomes. Incorporating all sources of data will improve the predictive capability of any model and lead to more informative inferences for the purpose of medical decision-making.MethodsWe reviewed current methodologies of joint modelling for time-to-event data and multivariate longitudinal data including the distributional and modelling assumptions, the association structures, estimation approaches, software tools for implementation and clinical applications of the methodologies.ResultsWe found that a large number of different models have recently been proposed. Most considered jointly modelling linear mixed models with proportional hazard models, with correlation between multiple longitudinal outcomes accounted for through multivariate normally distributed random effects. So-called current value and random effects parameterisations are commonly used to link the models. Despite developments, software is still lacking, which has translated into limited uptake by medical researchers.ConclusionAlthough, in an era of personalized medicine, the value of multivariate joint modelling has been established, researchers are currently limited in their ability to fit these models routinely. We make a series of recommendations for future research needs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0212-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Joint modelling of time-to-event and multivariate longitudinal outcomes: recent developments and issues

Hickey

Philipson

Jorgensen

et al. 2016

BMC Med Res Methodol

137

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Novel Biomarker Approaches for Managing Patients With Cardiac Transplantation

Kennel

Schulze

2015

Curr Heart Fail Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite major advances in the medical care of patients following heart transplantation (HTx) and a steady increase in long-term survival, allograft surveillance is still based on endomyocardial biopsy, the gold standard since the 1970s. This invasive procedure calls for less burdening and more cost-effective approaches. In recent years, impressive progress has been made in utilizing blood-based biomarkers for the diagnosis and management of diseases in a variety of fields. Hence, a number of trials have been performed testing the usefulness of circulating molecules or other technical methods to overcome the need for surveillance myocardial biopsy in HTx patients. Here, we review current approaches and the state of research on novel biomarkers for the management of patients following heart transplantation.

show abstract

CXCL10 Is a Circulating Inflammatory Marker in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: a Pilot Study

Altara

Manca

Hessel

et al. 2016

J. of Cardiovasc. Trans. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemokines are involved in the remodeling of the heart; however, their significance as biomarkers in heart failure is unknown. We observed that circulating CXCR3 receptor chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10 in a rat model of heart failure were increased 1 week after myocardial infarction. CXCL10 was also increased in both remote and infarcted regions of the heart and remained elevated at 16 weeks; CXCL9 was elevated in the remote area at 1 week. In humans, hierarchical clustering and principal component analysis revealed that circulating CXCL10, MIP-1α, and CD40 ligand were the best indicators for differentiating healthy and heart failure subjects. Serum CXCL10 levels were increased in patients with symptomatic heart failure as indexed by NYHA classification II through IV. The presence of CXCL10, MIP-1α, and CD40 ligand appears to be dominant in patients with advanced heart failure. These findings identify a distinct profile of inflammatory mediators in heart failure patients.

show abstract

Repeated Measurements of NT-pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide, Troponin T or C-Reactive Protein Do Not Predict Future Allograft Rejection in Heart Transplant Recipients

Abstract: The temporal evolution of NT-proBNP, TropT, and CRP before AR did not predict occurrence of acute AR both in the early and late course of the first year after HTx.

Cited by 23 publications

References 41 publications

Joint modelling of time-to-event and multivariate longitudinal outcomes: recent developments and issues

Joint modelling of time-to-event and multivariate longitudinal outcomes: recent developments and issues

Novel Biomarker Approaches for Managing Patients With Cardiac Transplantation

CXCL10 Is a Circulating Inflammatory Marker in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: a Pilot Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About