CLINICAL RESEARCH: BIOMARKERS
Significance of a Multiple Biomarkers Strategy Including Endothelial Dysfunction to Improve Risk Stratification for Cardiovascular Events in Patients at High Risk for Coronary Heart Disease
Toshimitsu Nozaki, MD*,
Seigo Sugiyama, MD, PhD*,*,
Hidenobu Koga, MD, PhD*,
Koichi Sugamura, MD*,
Keisuke Ohba, MD*,
Yasushi Matsuzawa, MD*,
Hitoshi Sumida, MD, PhD ,
Kunihiko Matsui, MD, PhD ,
Hideaki Jinnouchi, MD, PhD and
Hisao Ogawa, MD, PhD*
* Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
Department of Interventional Cardiology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
Department of General Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan
Jinnouchi Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan
Manuscript received January 5, 2009;
revised manuscript received May 21, 2009,
accepted May 25, 2009.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Seigo Sugiyama, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Kumamoto City 860-8556, Japan (Email: ssugiyam{at}gpo.kumamoto-u.ac.jp).
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Objectives: We investigated whether a multiple biomarkers strategy that includes plasma levels of endothelium-derived microparticles (EMP), reflecting endothelial dysfunction, can improve prediction of future cardiovascular events in patients at high risk for coronary heart disease (CHD).
Background: Detailed risk stratification using multiple biomarkers can provide clinical benefits in high-risk patients. Endothelial dysfunction has been described as a predictor of cardiovascular complications.
Methods: We measured 3 biomarkers in 488 consecutive patients with various CHD risks: B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and EMP. We followed 387 stable patients at high risk for CHD and examined future cardiovascular events.
Results: During a mean follow-up of 36 months, 55 patients developed cardiovascular events. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis adjusted for established risk factors identified age, BNP, hsCRP, and EMP as significant and independent predictors of future cardiovascular events (age: hazard ratio [HR]: 1.042, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.007 to 1.080, p = 0.02; BNP: HR: 1.242, 95% CI: 1.004 to 1.536, p = 0.046; hsCRP: HR: 1.468, 95% CI: 1.150 to 1.875, p = 0.002; EMP: HR: 1.345, 95% CI: 1.094 to 1.652, p = 0.005). The C statistics for cardiovascular events increased when each biomarker or combinations of biomarkers were added to the Framingham risk model (C statistics: Framingham risk model alone 0.636, Framingham risk + BNP 0.695, Framingham risk + hsCRP 0.696, Framingham risk + EMP 0.682, and Framingham risk + BNP + hsCRP + EMP 0.763).
Conclusions: The assessment of endothelial dysfunction by plasma levels of EMP can independently predict future cardiovascular events in patients at high risk for CHD. A multiple biomarkers strategy that includes endothelial dysfunction assessed by EMP can identify patients vulnerable to cardiovascular disease. (University Hospital Medical Information Network number: UMIN000000876)
Key Words: biomarkers • endothelium • microparticles • follow-up studies • coronary heart disease
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | ACS = acute coronary syndromes | | BNP = B-type natriuretic peptide | | CAD = coronary artery disease | | CHD = coronary heart disease | | CI = confidence interval | | DM = diabetes mellitus | | eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate | | EMP = endothelium-derived microparticle(s) | | HDL = high-density lipoprotein | | HR = hazard ratio | | hsCRP = high-sensitivity C-reactive protein | | LDL = low-density lipoprotein |
|
The present cardiovascular risk stratification with established coronary risk factors cannot fully predict the development of cardiovascular events (1). Several biomarkers including B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) have been reported to be useful for identifying the high-risk patients, independent of the established risk factors, and the multiple biomarkers strategy has been demonstrated to improve the risk stratification for cardiovascular events beyond the risk assessment based on established risk factors alone (2,3). Biomarkers reflecting different disease pathways may have the potential advantage of improving predictive power utility, and improvement of the assessment of cardiovascular risk with new biomarkers is desirable. It has been demonstrated that endothelial dysfunction is involved in the development of atherothrombogenic complications (4) and associated with future cardiovascular events in high-risk patients (5–7); however, it has not been incorporated into the previous multiple biomarkers strategy. Endothelial dysfunction can be clinically detected by measuring impairment of endothelium-dependent vasodilatation in response to acetylcholine during coronary angiography or by brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation (5,8). These physiological tests are complex, operator dependent, and provide limited quantitative data (9,10).
Endothelium-derived microparticles (EMP) are small membrane-shed vesicles generated from endothelial cell surfaces in response to cellular activation or injury/apoptosis, and can potentially reflect endothelial dysfunction (11,12). Recently, we reported that CD144-EMP is derived selectively from human endothelial cells (13) and that circulating plasma CD144-EMP levels correlate significantly with coronary endothelial dysfunction and are significantly elevated in patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerosis (13). Although EMP are still only used for research purpose and in specialized laboratories because of their elusive nature and difficult assessment due to very small size (14), these findings underscore the potential application of CD144-EMP as a quantitative biomarker of endothelial dysfunction.
We hypothesized that the addition of a quantitative measure of endothelial dysfunction to a multiple biomarkers strategy could improve the prediction of future cardiovascular events. The hypothesis was tested by investigating the utility of plasma CD144-EMP levels for prediction of future cardiovascular events in stable patients at high risk for coronary heart disease (CHD), and examined the usefulness of the modified multiple biomarkers strategy, including endothelial dysfunction assessed by EMP, to predict cardiovascular complications.
|
Methods
|
|---|
Study patients.
In this prospective study, we screened 519 consecutive Japanese patients between May 2003 and August 2007 at Kumamoto University Hospital. Patients with severe valvular heart disease requiring surgical intervention within 1 month, scheduled for coronary revascularization, active infection, or malignant disease were excluded from the study (n = 31). The 488 patients who fulfilled the study criteria were divided into the following 4 groups: low-risk patients who had no or 1 CHD risk factor, patients with multiple risk factors without documented coronary artery disease (CAD), patients with documented CAD at stable condition (stable-CAD), and patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) (Fig. 1). Stable-CAD represented patients with angiographically documented organic coronary stenosis of >50% by quantitative coronary angiography in major coronary arteries. Risk factors for CHD were defined as age  65 years (15); current smoking; family history of ischemic heart disease; hypertension (>140/90 mm Hg or taking antihypertensive medication) (16); dyslipidemia (high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol <40 mg/dl, low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol 140 mg/dl, triglycerides 150 mg/dl, or receiving lipid-lowering treatment); diabetes mellitus (DM) (17); body mass index 25.0 kg/m2 (16); hsCRP 2.0 mg/l; or chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 ml/min/1.73 m2). The glomerular filtration rate was estimated using the modified formula of Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study equation, which was proposed by the Japanese Society of Nephrology (18). This study protocol was conducted in accordance with guidelines approved by the ethics committee at our institution.
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 1 Flow Diagram of Subject Recruitment
Thirty-one patients were excluded for the following reasons: malignant diseases (n = 20), unstable conditions (n = 6), systemic inflammatory disease (n = 3), and active infections (n = 2). ACS = acute coronary syndromes; CAD = coronary artery disease; CHD = coronary heart disease.
|
|
Measurement of plasma levels of CD144-EMP and blood parameters.
Blood samples were withdrawn by venipuncture into vacutainer tubes containing sodium citrate after a 12-h overnight fast for stable patients and on admission to the emergency room for ACS patients, before any mechanical intervention. Fresh plasma was assayed immediately for CD144-EMP by flow cytometry using the method described previously (13,14). We verified plasma levels of CD144-EMP with standard plasma for each sample. Standard plasma were subdivided into 1-use volume and stocked at –80°C. One thawing of stock plasma did not affect CD144-EMP levels. We measured hsCRP by a nephelometry with BN II (Siemens, Berlin, Germany) and BNP by a fluorescence enzyme immunoassay with AIA-21 (Tosoh Bioscience, Tokyo, Japan). Total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglyceride, LDL cholesterol, and creatinine concentrations were determined by routine laboratory methods.
Study protocol.
First, we compared plasma levels of CD144-EMP among low-risk patients (CHD risk factor  1), multiple risk patients (CHD risk factors 2), stable-CAD, and ACS patients. Second, patients with multiple risk factors or stable-CAD were categorized as high-risk patients for CHD and followed up every month at the outpatient department until July 2008 or at end point (Fig. 1). The end point was cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischemic stroke, or coronary revascularization to new lesions. Cardiovascular events were documented by phone calls to the patients or their families, followed by a review of medical records, electrocardiogram, ultrasound echocardiogram, and cardiac enzyme data. Cardiovascular death was defined as death due to myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or documented sudden cardiac death. Diagnosis of ischemic stroke was made if the patient had clinical and radiological evidence of stroke without intracranial hemorrhage. For subjects experiencing more than 2 acute events, only the first event was considered in the analysis. Revascularization therapy based only on angiographic data, including percutaneous coronary intervention-mediated restenosis, was not counted as a cardiovascular event. We used the previously reported cutoff values of 52.6 pg/ml (19) and 2.0 mg/l (20), and the median levels for BNP, hsCRP, and CD144-EMP, respectively, to divide our follow-up population into 2 groups: the high-level group and low-level group for the particular parameter.
Statistical analysis.
Results were expressed as mean ± SD or as frequencies (percentages), while BNP, hsCRP, and CD144-EMP levels were expressed as median and interquartile range. The frequencies of risk factors and medications were compared between 2 groups by using chi-square analysis. Continuous variables were compared between 2 groups by the unpaired t test or Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. Data of the 4 groups were compared by 1-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis test, and chi-square analysis. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and assessed with the log-rank test.
The predictive value for cardiovascular events was assessed by Cox proportional hazards regression. The following variables were incorporated first into the univariate model: age, sex, current smoking, hypertension, DM, body mass index, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, eGFR, BNP, hsCRP, and CD144-EMP. Variables with p values <0.20 were then entered into a forward stepwise multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis. In this model, we evaluated the effect of the biomarkers, BNP, hsCRP, and CD144-EMP, according to quintile increment in biomarkers levels.
Proportional hazards assumption was confirmed by Schoenfeld's test. Estimates of the C statistic for Cox proportional hazards regression models were calculated (21). The comparison of C statistics after the addition of the biomarkers to the model with Framingham risk was estimated (22). We also examined whether the addition of various combinations of biomarkers improved the discriminatory power of the model.
We assessed the calibration of Cox regression models by the Grønnesby and Borgan (23) calibration test, which compares the number of events that are expected based on estimation from 5 risk score groups. To evaluate whether the global model fit improved after the addition of the biomarkers, we performed likelihood ratio tests.
The statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS version 15.0J for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois), STATA version 10.0 (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas), and SAS version 9.1.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina). Statistical significance was defined as a value of p < 0.05 from 2-sided tests.
|
Results
|
|---|
Enrollment, classification, and follow-up of patients.
We screened 519 patients, but 31 patients were excluded (Fig. 1). Data of the remaining 488 patients were subjected to analysis. In this study population, 387 patients at high risk for CHD were followed up, and the data of 378 patients (multiple risk factors, n = 167; stable-CAD, n = 220) were available for analysis of cardiovascular events while 9 patients were lost to follow-up (Fig. 1). The follow-up period was 1 to 62 months (mean 36 months).
Comparison of CD144-EMP levels.
All clinical factors except the frequency of current smoking were significantly different among patients with various CHD risk. The plasma levels of CD144-EMP increased significantly with increased coronary risk factors and with complicated clinical manifestations (patients at low-risk: n = 51, median [interquartile range], 0.303 [0.142 to 0.367] x 106; multiple risk factors: n = 167, 0.508 [0.387 to 0.681] x 106; stable-CAD: n = 220, 0.604 [0.449 to 0.795] x 106; ACS: n = 50, 0.983 [0.718 to 1.150] x 106/ml, p < 0.001) (Fig. 2). LDL cholesterol, eGFR, and hsCRP were higher in ACS than stable-CAD (ACS vs. stable-CAD: LDL cholesterol: 121.2 ± 30.0 mg/dl vs. 110.8 ± 32.7 mg/dl, eGFR: 65.7 ± 20.8 ml/min/1.73 m2vs. 58.9 ± 21.4 ml/min/1.73 m2, and hsCRP: 2.2 [0.7 to 7.8] mg/l vs. 1.2 [0.5 to 3.6] mg/l). Moreover, CD144-EMP levels were significantly higher in ACS patients than in stable-CAD patients (Fig. 2).
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 2 Plasma Levels of CD144-EMP in Patients With Various Cardiovascular Risks
The line within the box represents the median value; the top and bottom lines of the box represent the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively; and the top and bottom vertical lines outside the boxes represent the 90th and 10th percentiles, respectively. ANOVA = analysis of variance; EMP = endothelium-derived microparticle; other abbreviations as in Figure 1.
|
|
Baseline clinical features of patients at high risk for CHD.
Table 1
summarizes the baseline clinical features of patients at high risk for CHD (multiple risk factors or stable-CAD; follow-up population). The mean age was 66.9 years and 61.4% were men. Plasma levels of CD144-EMP correlated weakly with hsCRP (r = 0.16, p = 0.002) and did not correlate with BNP (r = 0.08, p = 0.14). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified male sex and DM as significant risk factors of high EMP levels (above median) (men: hazard ratio [HR]: 1.685, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.076 to 2.639, p = 0.02; DM: HR: 1.551, 95% CI: 1.009 to 2.386, p = 0.046).
Cardiovascular events and biomarker levels.
We recorded 55 cardiovascular events in patients at high risk for CHD during the follow-up period. Patients of the high EMP group developed significantly more cardiovascular events than the low EMP group during the follow-up (Table 2). Specifically, the incidences of cardiovascular death and ACS were significantly higher in the high-EMP group than in the low-EMP group (Table 2). Kaplan-Meier analysis based on high and low levels of biomarkers showed a significantly higher probability of cardiovascular events in the presence of high levels of BNP, hsCRP, and EMP during the follow-up (log-rank test: BNP p < 0.001, hsCRP p < 0.001, and EMP p < 0.001) (Figs. 3A to 3C).
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 3 Kaplan-Meier Analysis for the Probability of Cardiovascular Events
(A to C) Based on each cutoff point of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and CD144 endothelium-derived microparticles (EMP). BNP 52.6 pg/ml, hsCRP 2.0 mg/l, and CD144-EMP 0.569 x 106/ml.
|
|
Cox proportional hazard analysis and C statistics for cardiovascular events.
Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis for cardiovascular events showed that age, BNP, hsCRP, and CD144-EMP were independent predictors of future cardiovascular events in patients at high risk for CHD (age: HR: 1.042, 95% CI: 1.007 to 1.080, p = 0.02; BNP: HR: 1.242, 95% CI: 1.004 to 1.536, p = 0.046; hsCRP: HR: 1.468, 95% CI: 1.150 to 1.875, p = 0.002; EMP: HR: 1.345, 95% CI: 1.094 to 1.652, p = 0.005) (Table 3). Framingham risk was not incorporated into multivariate analysis because it was constructed by the same variables in univariate analysis. Framingham risk was confirmed to be a significant factor by univariate analysis in the present study (HR: 1.043, 95% CI: 1.011 to 1.076, p = 0.008). We then estimated the C statistic of Framingham risk alone. Separate incorporation of each biomarker into the Framingham risk model showed that all biomarkers increased the C statistic for prediction of cardiovascular events (C statistics: Framingham risk alone 0.636, Framingham risk + BNP 0.695, Framingham risk + hsCRP 0.696, and Framingham risk + EMP 0.682) (Table 4). Moreover, we examined the additive usefulness of EMP in multiple biomarkers strategy based on Framingham risk and BNP, hsCRP, or both. EMP increased the C statistics in multiple biomarkers strategy (C statistics: Framingham risk + BNP 0.695, Framingham risk + BNP + EMP 0.741; Framingham risk + hsCRP 0.696, Framingham risk + hsCRP + EMP 0.734; and Framingham risk + BNP + hsCRP 0.732, Framingham risk + BNP + hsCRP + EMP 0.763) (Table 4). The p value for the Schoenfeld's tests indicated that proportional hazards assumptions were appropriate (p = 0.70). We also confirmed good calibration for the model in patients at high risk for CHD by Grønnesby and Borgan (23) statistics (p = 0.34). Furthermore, models that included all biomarkers had better global fit than models with only Framingham risk, as evaluated by the likelihood ratio test (p = 0.02).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3 Univariate and Multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards Analysis for Cardiovascular Events in Follow-Up Patients
|
|
We examined the effect modification of interaction among all biomarkers and found that there was an interaction term between EMP and hsCRP (p = 0.03).
|
Discussion
|
|---|
We demonstrated that circulating plasma levels of CD144-EMP in patients at high risk for CHD were independent predictors of future cardiovascular events. We also found that the addition of multiple biomarkers, including endothelial dysfunction, as assessed by CD144-EMP, to the Framingham risk model improved classification of risk, as evidenced by a substantial increase in the C statistics. Thus, quantitative evaluation of cardiovascular risk leading to atherothrombogenic complications from multiple aspects that include endothelial dysfunction can be clinically useful and valuable in patients at high risk for CHD.
Although the mean age of the study population and combination of biomarkers were issues of concern in the study design, the multiple biomarkers strategy, which is based on adding several biomarkers to the prediction model, including the established risk factors, is useful for risk stratification of cardiovascular events (2,3). It has already been demonstrated that BNP and hsCRP are independent predictors in healthy subjects (24,25) and CHD patients (26,27), and are significant biomarkers that improve C statistics for death and cardiovascular events (2,3). Endothelial dysfunction has also been recognized as an independent predictor of future cardiovascular events (5–7). Despite the pathophysiological significance of endothelial dysfunction in cardiovascular medicine, one cannot clinically assess coronary endothelial dysfunction because the available method is complex and invasive. It is probably for this reason that endothelial dysfunction was not incorporated into the multiple biomarkers strategy. In addition to the use of coronary reactivity to acetylcholine or brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation, endothelial dysfunction can be assessed by measuring circulating levels of intercellular adhesion molecule 1, E-selectin (28), and von Willebrand factor (29). Soluble biomarkers offer the advantage of convenience and quantitative assessment; however, there is little evidence at present that such markers can accurately predict future cardiovascular events. Because the aforementioned molecules can be produced from cells other than endothelial cells such as leukocytes (28) and platelets, we need to identify a highly specific soluble biomarker that reflects endothelial dysfunction and can predict the prognosis of CHD patients.
Microparticles are released from various circulating blood cells and have many pathophysiological properties, as procoagulants and messengers (11). Microparticles detected by CD144 antigens (vascular endothelial cadherin), which are endothelial cell-type specific transmembrane adhesion molecules located only on the endothelium, exist in human plasma and are derived selectively from human endothelial cells, and their plasma levels can be a clinically specific marker for endothelial dysfunction (13,30). In the present study, we used the CD144-EMP assay to quantitate endothelial dysfunction. Although the clinical significance of measurement of microparticles has not been established yet, as stated in the preceding text, the method used for measurement of CD144-EMP is more specific, safe, simple, and rapid. Moreover, the fact that plasma levels of CD144-EMP independently predicted future cardiovascular events in the present study indicates that measurement of plasma CD144-EMP levels could be potentially useful for risk assessment of endothelial dysfunction with potential cardiovascular complications.
Endothelial dysfunction is one component of vulnerable plaques and closely associated with the occurrence of ACS (31). Vulnerable plaques are characterized by a thin fibrous cap with a large lipid core and superficial erosion of the luminal endothelium. Severe endothelial dysfunction may predispose to vulnerable endothelium, and the main feature of endothelial vulnerability is probably endothelial erosion. A vulnerable endothelium can promote atherothrombogenic complications through endothelial erosion, but there are no reliable methods for evaluating the risk of endothelial vulnerability, including endothelial erosion (31,32). Therefore, cardiovascular risk stratification that includes evaluation of endothelial dysfunction is a sound approach. Analysis of the risk in different disease pathways is important, and we propose that evaluation of endothelial dysfunction could be an important and clinically useful strategy. Based on the concept of vascular protection, a specific and quantifiable marker that can monitor endothelial dysfunction is necessary, as is the need to design intensive treatment to improve endothelial dysfunction.
A weak correlation between EMP and hsCRP resulted in statistical modification of interaction between EMP and hsCRP. EMP levels correlated to some extent with various inflammatory markers, because inflammatory cytokines can induce the release of EMP, and the latter, in turn, promote endothelial injury, leading to endothelial dysfunction (11).
Study limitations.
One limitation of the present study is the relatively small number of patients in a single center. However, this should result in underestimation, stressing the need for further multicenter studies in a larger population to confirm the present results. There is no consensus about measurement of EMP for assessment of endothelial damage and prothrombotic state at this stage, and microparticles are still used only for research purposes. There is a need to standardize the EMP assay for the development and establishment of routine clinical tests, because measurement of CD144-EMP could be potentially useful for the evaluation of endothelial dysfunction. The number of this study population was not estimated by power calculation. It is effective and necessary to have a plan for the number of patients required for a prospective study.
|
Conclusions
|
|---|
Endothelial dysfunction leading to cardiovascular complications can be assessed quantitatively by measurement of plasma levels of CD144-EMP. Moreover, a multiple biomarkers strategy that includes endothelial dysfunction assessed by CD144-EMP can provide better risk stratification of cardiovascular events and, hence, more thorough clinical assessment of patients who might benefit from more aggressive treatment strategies that improve prognosis.
|
Footnotes
|
|---|
This study was supported, in part, by grants-in-aid for Scientific Research (#C19590869 to Dr. Sugiyama) from the Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture, Japan; Advanced Education Program for Integrated Clinical, Basic and Social Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kumamoto University in Kumamoto, Japan (Support Program for Improvement of Graduate School Education, MEXT, Japan); and Kimura Memorial Heart Foundation Bayer Grant for Clinical Vascular Function 2008, Kurume, Japan.
|
References
|
|---|
1. Ridker PM, Brown NJ, Vaughan DE, Harrison DG, Mehta JL. Established and emerging plasma biomarkers in the prediction of first atherothrombotic events Circulation 2004;109:IV6-IV19.[Medline]2. Wang TJ, Gona P, Larson MG, et al. Multiple biomarkers for the prediction of first major cardiovascular events and death N Engl J Med 2006;355:2631-2639.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 3. Zethelius B, Berglund L, Sundstrom J, et al. Use of multiple biomarkers to improve the prediction of death from cardiovascular causes N Engl J Med 2008;358:2107-2116.[CrossRef][Medline] 4. Widlansky ME, Gokce N, Keaney Jr. JF, Vita JA. The clinical implications of endothelial dysfunction J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:1149-1160.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 5. Schachinger V, Britten MB, Zeiher AM. Prognostic impact of coronary vasodilator dysfunction on adverse long-term outcome of coronary heart disease Circulation 2000;101:1899-1906.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 6. Chan SY, Mancini GB, Kuramoto L, Schulzer M, Frohlich J, Ignaszewski A. The prognostic importance of endothelial dysfunction and carotid atheroma burden in patients with coronary artery disease J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:1037-1043.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 7. Modena MG, Bonetti L, Coppi F, Bursi F, Rossi R. Prognostic role of reversible endothelial dysfunction in hypertensive postmenopausal women J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:505-510.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 8. Corretti MC, Anderson TJ, Benjamin EJ, et al. Guidelines for the ultrasound assessment of endothelial-dependent flow-mediated vasodilation of the brachial artery: a report of the International Brachial Artery Reactivity Task Force J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:257-265.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 9. Deanfield JE, Halcox JP, Rabelink TJ. Endothelial function and dysfunction: testing and clinical relevance Circulation 2007;115:1285-1295.[Free Full Text] 10. Kuvin JT, Karas RH. Clinical utility of endothelial function testing: ready for prime time? Circulation 2003;107:3243-3247.[Free Full Text] 11. Boulanger CM, Amabile N, Tedgui A. Circulating microparticles: a potential prognostic marker for atherosclerotic vascular disease Hypertension 2006;48:180-186.[Free Full Text] 12. VanWijk MJ, VanBavel E, Sturk A, Nieuwland R. Microparticles in cardiovascular diseases Cardiovasc Res 2003;59:277-287.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 13. Koga H, Sugiyama S, Kugiyama K, et al. Elevated levels of VE-cadherin-positive endothelial microparticles in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:1622-1630.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 14. Shet AS. Characterizing blood microparticles: technical aspects and challenges Vasc Health Risk Manag 2008;4:769-774.[Medline] 15. Grundy SM, Balady GJ, Criqui MH, et al. Primary prevention of coronary heart disease: guidance from Framingham: a statement for healthcare professionals from the AHA Task Force on Risk Reduction. American Heart Association. Circulation 1998;97:1876-1887.[Free Full Text] 16. Pearson TA, Blair SN, Daniels SR, et al. AHA guidelines for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke: 2002 update: Consensus Panel Guide to Comprehensive Risk Reduction for Adult Patients Without Coronary or Other Atherosclerotic Vascular Diseases. American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. Circulation 2002;106:388-391.[Free Full Text] 17. Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus Report of the expert committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus Diabetes Care 2003;26(Suppl 1):S5-S20.[CrossRef][Medline] 18. Imai E, Matsuo S, Makino H, et al. Chronic Kidney Disease Japan Cohort (CKD-JAC) study: design and methods Hypertens Res 2008;31:1101-1107.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 19. Omland T, Sabatine MS, Jablonski KA, et al. Prognostic value of B-type natriuretic peptides in patients with stable coronary artery disease: the PEACE trial J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:205-214.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 20. Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FA, et al. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reactive protein N Engl J Med 2008;359:2195-2207.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 21. Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RB. Overall C as a measure of discrimination in survival analysis: model specific population value and confidence interval estimation Stat Med 2004;23:2109-2123.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 22. D'Agostino RB, Russell MW, Huse DM, et al. Primary and subsequent coronary risk appraisal: new results from the Framingham study Am Heart J 2000;139:272-281.[Web of Science][Medline] 23. Grønnesby JK, Borgan O. A method for checking regression models in survival analysis based on the risk score Lifetime Data Anal 1996;2:315-328.[CrossRef][Medline] 24. Koenig W, Sund M, Frohlich M, et al. C-reactive protein, a sensitive marker of inflammation, predicts future risk of coronary heart disease in initially healthy middle-aged men: results from the MONICA (Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease) Augsburg cohort study, 1984 to 1992 Circulation 1999;99:237-242.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 25. Wang TJ, Larson MG, Levy D, et al. Plasma natriuretic peptide levels and the risk of cardiovascular events and death N Engl J Med 2004;350:655-663.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 26. Danesh J, Wheeler JG, Hirschfield GM, et al. C-reactive protein and other circulating markers of inflammation in the prediction of coronary heart disease N Engl J Med 2004;350:1387-1397.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 27. Omland T, Richards AM, Wergeland R, Vik-Mo H. B-type natriuretic peptide and long-term survival in patients with stable coronary artery disease Am J Cardiol 2005;95:24-28.[Web of Science][Medline] 28. Meigs JB, Hu FB, Rifai N, Manson JE. Biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus JAMA 2004;291:1978-1986.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 29. Boos CJ, Balakrishnan B, Blann AD, Lip GY. The relationship of circulating endothelial cells to plasma indices of endothelial damage/dysfunction and apoptosis in acute coronary syndromes: implications for prognosis J Thromb Haemost 2008;6:1841-1850.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 30. Amabile N, Guerin AP, Leroyer A, et al. Circulating endothelial microparticles are associated with vascular dysfunction in patients with end-stage renal failure J Am Soc Nephrol 2005;16:3381-3388.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 31. Naghavi M, Libby P, Falk E, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient: a call for new definitions and risk assessment strategies: part I Circulation 2003;108:1664-1672.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 32. Sugiyama S, Kugiyama K, Aikawa M, Nakamura S, Ogawa H, Libby P. Hypochlorous acid, a macrophage product, induces endothelial apoptosis and tissue factor expression: involvement of myeloperoxidase-mediated oxidant in plaque erosion and thrombogenesis Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2004;24:1309-1314.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Related Article
-
Inside This Issue
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2009 54: A24.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
K. Walenta, V. Schwarz, S. Schirmer, I. Kindermann, E. B. Friedrich, E. F. Solomayer, K. Sliwa, S. Labidi, D. Hilfiker-Kleiner, and M. Bohm
Circulating microparticles as indicators of peripartum cardiomyopathy
Eur. Heart J.,
February 3, 2012;
(2012)
ehr485v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Angelillo-Scherrer
Leukocyte-Derived Microparticles in Vascular Homeostasis
Circ. Res.,
January 20, 2012;
110(2):
356 - 369.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Amabile, A. P. Guerin, A. Tedgui, C. M. Boulanger, and G. M. London
Predictive value of circulating endothelial microparticles for cardiovascular mortality in end-stage renal failure: a pilot study
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant.,
October 29, 2011;
(2011)
gfr573v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.-E. Rautou, A.-C. Vion, N. Amabile, G. Chironi, A. Simon, A. Tedgui, and C. M. Boulanger
Microparticles, Vascular Function, and Atherothrombosis
Circ. Res.,
August 19, 2011;
109(5):
593 - 606.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-M. Sinning, J. Losch, K. Walenta, M. Bohm, G. Nickenig, and N. Werner
Circulating CD31+/Annexin V+ microparticles correlate with cardiovascular outcomes
Eur. Heart J.,
August 2, 2011;
32(16):
2034 - 2041.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Amabile and C. M. Boulanger
Circulating microparticle levels in patients with coronary artery disease: a new indicator of vulnerability?
Eur. Heart J.,
August 2, 2011;
32(16):
1958 - 1960.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K.-C. Chen, T.-P. Lee, Y.-C. Pan, C.-L. Chiang, C.-L. Chen, Y.-H. Yang, B.-L. Chiang, H. Lee, and A. M. Wo
Detection of Circulating Endothelial Cells via a Microfluidic Disk
Clin. Chem.,
April 1, 2011;
57(4):
586 - 592.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z.-J. Ou, F.-J. Chang, D. Luo, X.-L. Liao, Z.-P. Wang, X. Zhang, Y.-Q. Xu, and J.-S. Ou
Endothelium-derived microparticles inhibit angiogenesis in the heart and enhance the inhibitory effects of hypercholesterolemia on angiogenesis
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab,
April 1, 2011;
300(4):
E661 - E668.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Philippova, Y. Suter, S. Toggweiler, A. W. Schoenenberger, M. B. Joshi, E. Kyriakakis, P. Erne, and T. J. Resink
T-cadherin is present on endothelial microparticles and is elevated in plasma in early atherosclerosis
Eur. Heart J.,
March 2, 2011;
32(6):
760 - 771.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. M. Miner
Erectile Dysfunction: A Harbinger or Consequence: Does Its Detection Lead to a Window of Curability?
J Androl,
March 1, 2011;
32(2):
125 - 134.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. E. Tushuizen, M. Diamant, A. Sturk, and R. Nieuwland
Cell-Derived Microparticles in the Pathogenesis of Cardiovascular Disease: Friend or Foe?
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol,
January 1, 2011;
31(1):
4 - 9.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Dignat-George and C. M. Boulanger
The Many Faces of Endothelial Microparticles
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol,
January 1, 2011;
31(1):
27 - 33.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Nozaki, S. Sugiyama, K. Sugamura, K. Ohba, Y. Matsuzawa, M. Konishi, J. Matsubara, E. Akiyama, H. Sumida, K. Matsui, et al.
Prognostic value of endothelial microparticles in patients with heart failure
Eur J Heart Fail,
November 1, 2010;
12(11):
1223 - 1228.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
Top
Abstract
Methods