ArticlePulmonary circulation2026
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Pulmonary Hypertension: A Comparative Study of Biomarkers and Clinical Indicators.
Article in Pulmonary circulation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Pulmonary Hypertension: A Comparative Study of Biomarkers and Clinical Indicators.Pulmonary circulation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A major consequence of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is pulmonary hypertension (PH), which raises morbidity and mortality rates. This study assessed biomarker profiles, clinical characteristics and diagnostic efficacy of important coagulation and inflammatory markers in AECOPD patients who have varying degrees of PH severity. A total of 248 AECOPD patients were included and divided into three groups according to the severity of their PH. Analysis of biomarker levels, such as B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), troponin I (TNT-I), d-dimer, C-reactive protein (CRP), and coagulation markers, besides pulmonary artery systolic pressure was done. These biomarkers' diagnostic precision for PH was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. PH patients were much older than those without PH. The moderate to severe PH group had highest BNP levels (619.92 ± 945.81 pg/mL), which rose gradually with PH severity. TNT-I, CRP and D-dimer showed similar patterns. The most dependable biomarker for PH, according to ROC analysis, was BNP (AUC = 0.803), followed by TNT-I (AUC = 0.712) and D-dimer (AUC = 0.694). Prothrombin and Activated Partial Thromboplastin had a considerable predictive value, although fibrinogen's diagnostic utility was restricted (AUC = 0.559). BNP showed the highest predictive value with an AUC, suggested BNP is most important biomarker for PH in AECOPD patients, TNT-I and D-dimer serve as useful secondary markers. The observed elevations in coagulation and inflammatory markers indicate their potential role in PH pathogenesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.