ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2026
Comprehensive assessment of novel cardiovascular biomarkers in AF.
Article in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsBiomarkers have the potential to improve risk prediction beyond clinical characteristics. We examined the association of four emerging cardiovascular biomarkers [angiopoietin 2 (Angpt2), bone morphogenetic protein 10 (BMP10), fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23), insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 (IGFBP7)] in comparison with N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) across the disease course of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND
resultsWe enrolled patients from a prospective cohort of patients at risk of AF or with manifest arrhythmia. The circulating vascular biomarkers were quantified using high-throughput, high-precision precommercial assays (Roche Diagnostics). A combined endpoint comprised: stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, incident coronary heart disease, heart failure, and all-cause mortality. Of the total n = 1047 individuals, n = 527 had prevalent AF, and n = 507 were free of AF at baseline. Median follow-up was 42 months. A total of n = 66 individuals died; the combined endpoint occurred in n = 198 individuals. All five biomarkers were significantly associated with the incidence of AF, both in multistate analysis (MSA) and Cox regression, although the association with FGF23 was only significant in the age- and sex-adjusted Cox model. AF recurrence was significantly associated with all biomarkers, most strongly with NT-proBNP. In prevalent AF, NT-proBNP, FGF23, and IGFBP7 were associated with the combined endpoint and all-cause mortality, and Angpt2 was associated with all-cause mortality. NT-proBNP showed the strongest association for all-cause mortality, and IGFBP7 for the combined endpoint in prevalent AF. In incident AF the association with the combined outcome was statistically significant for NT-proBNP in multivariable-adjusted models. All-cause mortality in individuals with incident AF was associated with NT-proBNP, Angpt2, FGF23, and IGFBP7 both in the MSA and Cox model.
conclusionAll novel biomarkers Angpt2, BMP10, FGF23, and IGFBP7 showed predictive value for incident and recurrent AF. Individual biomarkers showed distinct strengths in prediction of outcomes across the disease spectrum of AF.
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.