Heart Failure and Diabetes Mellitus: Biomarkers in Risk Stratification and Prognostication

The clinical significance of neopterin and NT-pro BNP in chronic heart failure: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers emerged as powerful adjuncts to conventional clinical care in heart failure (HF). The aim of this study is to evaluate neopterin and NT-pro BNP as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in HF.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in six electronic databases from inception to July 24th, 2022. Independent reviewers screened the title, abstract and full text then data extraction and critical appraisal of included studies were performed.

RESULTS

A total of eleven studies were included. Neopterin and NT-pro BNP levels were elevated in HF patients as compared to control. Moreover, within HF patients, levels of biomarkers were significantly higher in patients with advanced HF and more severe disease state. Patients who suffered cardiovascular adverse events had high levels of biomarkers. Two studies assessed the effect of treatment on biomarkers levels, showed that levels of neopterin and/or NT-pro BNP decreased with treatment. Studies confirmed the potential of relying on neopterin and NT-pro BNP as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in HF in addition to assessing disease severity.

CONCLUSION

Biomarkers levels correlate with disease severity and could be used as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in HF. Further research is needed for a definitive conclusion about using these biomarkers to determine the efficacy of therapy.

Methods to predict heart failure in diabetes patients

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the leading causes of cardiovascular disease and powerful predictor for new-onset heart failure (HF).

AREAS COVERED

We focus on the relevant literature covering evidence of risk stratification based on imaging predictors and circulating biomarkers to optimize approaches to preventing HF in DM patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Multiple diagnostic algorithms based on echocardiographic parameters of cardiac remodeling including global longitudinal strain/strain rate are likely to be promising approach to justify individuals at higher risk of incident HF. Signature of cardiometabolic status may justify HF risk among T2DM individuals with low levels of natriuretic peptides, which preserve their significance in HF with clinical presentation. However, diagnostic and predictive values of conventional guideline-directed biomarker HF strategy may be non-optimal in patients with obesity and T2DM. Alternative biomarkers affecting cardiac fibrosis, inflammation, myopathy, and adipose tissue dysfunction are plausible tools for improving accuracy natriuretic peptides among T2DM patients at higher HF risk. In summary, risk identification and management of the patients with T2DM with established HF require conventional biomarkers monitoring, while the role of alternative biomarker approach among patients with multiple CV and metabolic risk factors appears to be plausible tool for improving clinical outcomes.

Comparative study of Dapagliflozin versus Glimepiride effect on insulin regulated aminopeptidase (IRAP) and interleukin-34 (IL-34) in patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the most common diseases, that managed by several medications such as Glimepiride and Dapagliflozin. This study aims to compare the effects of Dapagliflozin versus Glimepiride on glycemic control, insulin resistance, and biomarkers as (extracellular domain of insulin regulated aminopeptidase) IRAPe, (interleukin-34) IL-34, and (N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide) NT-proBNP. This study included 60 type 2 diabetic patients, who are randomized to receive either Glimepiride 4 mg/day (group 1) or Dapagliflozin 10 mg/day (group 2). Blood samples were collected at baseline and after 3 months of treatment for biochemical analysis. Additionally, HOMA-IR is calculated. After 3 months of receiving the intervention, there is no significant difference between the effects of Glimepiride and Dapagliflozin on FBG, PPBG, HbA1C%, fasting insulin, and HOMA-IR. The difference between both groups is significant for IL-34 (p = 0.002) and non-significant for IRAPe (p = 0.12) and NT-Pro BNP (p = 0.68). Both Glimepiride and Dapagliflozin significantly improve glycemic control, and HOMA-IR with no significant difference between them. Both drugs significantly improved the level of NT-proBNP. Dapagliflozin has a borderline significant effect on IRAPe but not IL-34, and Glimepiride has significant effect on IL-34 but not IRAPe. Clinical Trial Registration: This trial was registered on clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04240171).

Editorial for the Special Issue “Biological Markers of Cardiovascular Diseases: Applications and Utility in Clinical Practice”

Circulating biomarkers are currently under scientific discussion as a potential tool for the diagnosis, prediction and risk stratification of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases [...]