↓ Skip to main content

Multi-Marker Strategy in Heart Failure: Combination of ST2 and CRP Predicts Poor Outcome

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Multi-Marker Strategy in Heart Failure: Combination of ST2 and CRP Predicts Poor Outcome
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0157159
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Natriuretic peptides (BNP and NT-proBNP) are recognized as gold-standard predictive markers in Heart Failure (HF). However, currently ST2 (member of the interleukin 1 receptor family) has emerged as marker of inflammation, fibrosis and cardiac stress. We evaluated ST2 and CRP as prognostic markers in 178 patients with chronic heart failure in comparison with other classical markers such as clinical established parameters but also biological markers: NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT alone or in combination. In multivariate analysis, subsequent addition of ST2 led to age, CRP and ST2 as the only remaining predictors of all-cause mortality (HR 1.03, HR 1.61 and HR 2.75, respectively) as well as of cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.00, HR 2.27 and HR 3.78, respectively). The combined increase of ST2 and CRP was significant for predicting worsened outcomes leading to identify a high risk subgroup that individual assessment of either marker. The same analysis was performed with ST2 in combination with Barcelona score. Overall, our findings extend previous data demonstrating that ST2 in combination with CRP as a valuable tool for identifying patients at risk of death.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Researcher 7 16%
Other 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 16%
Psychology 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,379,002
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#131,324
of 195,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,880
of 326,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,106
of 4,659 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,206 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,659 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.