Dataset Information

Protein biomarkers identify patients unlikely to benefit from primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators: findings from the Prospective Observational Study of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (PROSE-ICD).

ABSTRACT: Primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce all-cause mortality, but the benefits are heterogeneous. Current risk stratification based on left ventricular ejection fraction has limited discrimination power. We hypothesize that biomarkers for inflammation, neurohumoral activation, and cardiac injury can predict appropriate shocks and all-cause mortality in patients with primary prevention ICDs.The Prospective Observational Study of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (PROSe-ICD) enrolled 1189 patients with systolic heart failure who underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. The primary end point was an ICD shock for adjudicated ventricular tachyarrhythmia. The secondary end point was all-cause mortality. After a median follow-up of 4.0 years, 137 subjects experienced an appropriate ICD shock and 343 participants died (incidence rates of 3.2 and 5.8 per 100 person-years, respectively). In multivariable-adjusted models, higher interleukin-6 levels increased the risk of appropriate ICD shocks. In contrast, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-? receptor II, pro-brain natriuretic peptide (pro-BNP), and cardiac troponin T showed significant linear trends for increased risk of all-cause mortality across quartiles. A score combining these 5 biomarkers identified patients who were much more likely to die than to receive an appropriate shock from the ICD.An increase in serum biomarkers of inflammation, neurohumoral activation, and myocardial injury increased the risk for death but poorly predicted the likelihood of an ICD shock. These findings highlight the potential importance of serum-based biomarkers in identifying patients who are unlikely to benefit from primary prevention ICDs.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT00733590.

SUBMITTER: Cheng A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4336541 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Protein biomarkers identify patients unlikely to benefit from primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators: findings from the Prospective Observational Study of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (PROSE-ICD).

Cheng Alan A Zhang Yiyi Y Blasco-Colmenares Elena E Dalal Darshan D Butcher Barbara B Norgard Sanaz S Eldadah Zayd Z Ellenbogen Kenneth A KA Dickfeld Timm T Spragg David D DD Marine Joseph E JE Guallar Eliseo E Tomaselli Gordon F GF

Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology 20141001 6

<h4>Background</h4>Primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) reduce all-cause mortality, but the benefits are heterogeneous. Current risk stratification based on left ventricular ejection fraction has limited discrimination power. We hypothesize that biomarkers for inflammation, neurohumoral activation, and cardiac injury can predict appropriate shocks and all-cause mortality in patients with primary prevention ICDs.<h4>Methods and results</h4>The Prospective Observationa ...[more]

PMID: 25273351

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsThe benefit of prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is not uniform due to differences in the risk of life-threatening ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) and non-arrhythmic mortality. We aimed to develop an ICD benefit prediction score that integrates the competing risks.Methods and resultsThe study population comprised all 4531 patients enrolled in the MADIT trials. Best-subsets Fine and Gray regression analysis was used to develop prognostic models for VT (≥200 b.p.m.)/VF vs. non-arrhythmic mortality (defined as death without prior sustained VT/VF). Eight predictors of VT/VF (male, age < 75 years, prior non-sustained VT, heart rate > 75 b.p.m., systolic blood pressure < 140 mmHg, ejection fraction ≤ 25%, myocardial infarction, and atrialarrhythmia) and 7 predictors of non-arrhythmic mortality (age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, body mass index < 23 kg/m2, ejection fraction ≤ 25%, New York Heart Association ≥II, ICD vs. cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator, and atrial arrhythmia) were identified. The two scores were combined to create three MADIT-ICD benefit groups. In the highest benefit group, the 3-year predicted risk of VT/VF was three-fold higher than the risk of non-arrhythmic mortality (20% vs. 7%, P < 0.001). In the intermediate benefit group, the difference in the corresponding predicted risks was attenuated (15% vs. 9%, P < 0.01). In the lowest benefit group, the 3-year predicted risk of VT/VF was similar to the risk of non-arrhythmic mortality (11% vs. 12%, P = 0.41). A personalized ICD benefit score was developed based on the distribution of the two competing risks scores in the study population (https://is.gd/madit). Internal and external validation confirmed model stability.ConclusionsWe propose the novel MADIT-ICD benefit score that predicts the likelihood of prophylactic ICD benefit through personalized assessment of the risk of VT/VF weighed against the risk of non-arrhythmic mortality.

Project description:AimsThe EUropean Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD), a prospective investigator-initiated, controlled cohort study, was conducted in 44 centres and 15 European countries. It aimed to assess current clinical effectiveness of primary prevention ICD therapy.Methods and resultsWe recruited 2327 patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) or dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and guideline indications for prophylactic ICD implantation. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Clinical characteristics, medications, resting, and 12-lead Holter electrocardiograms (ECGs) were documented at enrolment baseline. Baseline and follow-up (FU) data from 2247 patients were analysable, 1516 patients before first ICD implantation (ICD group) and 731 patients without ICD serving as controls. Multivariable models and propensity scoring for adjustment were used to compare the two groups for mortality. During mean FU of 2.4 ± 1.1 years, 342 deaths occurred (6.3%/years annualized mortality, 5.6%/years in the ICD group vs. 9.2%/years in controls), favouring ICD treatment [unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.682, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.537-0.865, P = 0.0016]. Multivariable mortality predictors included age, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association class <III, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Adjusted mortality associated with ICD vs. control was 27% lower (HR 0.731, 95% CI 0.569-0.938, P = 0.0140). Subgroup analyses indicated no ICD benefit in diabetics (adjusted HR = 0.945, P = 0.7797, P for interaction = 0.0887) or those aged ≥75 years (adjusted HR 1.063, P = 0.8206, P for interaction = 0.0902).ConclusionIn contemporary ICM/DCM patients (LVEF ≤35%, narrow QRS), primary prophylactic ICD treatment was associated with a 27% lower mortality after adjustment. There appear to be patients with less survival advantage, such as older patients or diabetics.

Project description:BackgroundShared decision making (SDM) is gaining importance in cardiology, including Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement policies requiring documented SDM for patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The DECIDE-ICD Trial (Decision Support Intervention for Patients offered implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) assessed the implementation and effectiveness of patient decision aids (DAs) using a stepped-wedge design at 7 sites. The purpose of this subanalysis was to qualitatively describe electrophysiology clinicians' experience implementing and using the DAs.MethodsThis included semi-structured individual interviews with electrophysiology clinicians at participating sites across the US, at least 6 months following conversion into the implementation phase of the trial (from June 2020 through February 2022). The interview guide was structured according to the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [implementation evaluation model]) framework, assessing clinician experiences, which can impact implementation domains, and was qualitatively assessed using a mixed inductive/deductive method.ResultsWe completed 22 interviews post-implementation across all 7 sites. Participants included both physicians (n=16) and other clinicians who counsel patients regarding treatment options (n=6). While perception of SDM and the DA were positive, participants highlighted reasons for uneven delivery of DAs to appropriate patients. The CMS mandate for SDM was not universally viewed as associating with patients receiving DA's, but rather (1) logistics of DA delivery, (2) perceived effectiveness in improving patient decision-making, and (3) match of DA content to current patient populations. Remaining tensions include the specific trial data used in DAs and reconciling timing of delivery with when patients are actively making decisions.ConclusionsClinicians charged with delivering DAs to patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators were generally supportive of the tenets of SDM, and of the DA tools themselves, but noted several opportunities to improve the reach and continued use of them in routine care.RegistrationURL: https://www.Clinicaltrialsgov; Unique Identifier: NCT03374891.

Dataset Information

Protein biomarkers identify patients unlikely to benefit from primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators: findings from the Prospective Observational Study of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (PROSE-ICD).

Publications

Protein biomarkers identify patients unlikely to benefit from primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators: findings from the Prospective Observational Study of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (PROSE-ICD).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets