IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0165982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Circulating Angiopoietin-1 Is Not a Biomarker of Disease Severity or Prognosis in Pulmonary Hypertension

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel Jonas Richter
  • Svenja Lena Tiede
  • Natascha Sommer
  • Thomas Schmidt
  • Werner Seeger
  • Hossein Ardeschir Ghofrani
  • Ralph Schermuly
  • Henning Gall

Abstract

Background: Circulating angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1) has been linked to pulmonary hypertension (PH) in experimental studies. However, the clinical relevance of Ang-1 as a biomarker in PH remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic and clinical significance of Ang-1 in PH using data from the prospectively recruiting Giessen PH Registry. Methods: Patients with suspected PH (without previous specific pulmonary arterial hypertension [PAH] therapy) who underwent initial right heart catheterization (RHC) in our national referral center between July 2003 and May 2012 and who agreed to optional biomarker analysis were included if they were diagnosed with idiopathic PAH, connective tissue disease-associated PAH (CTD-PAH), PH due to left heart disease (PH-LHD), or chronic thromboembolic PH (CTEPH), or if PH was excluded by RHC (non-PH controls). The association of Ang-1 levels with disease severity (6-minute walk distance and pulmonary hemodynamics) was assessed using linear regression, and the impact of Ang-1 levels on transplant-free survival (primary endpoint) and clinical worsening was assessed using Kaplan—Meier curves, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses, and Cox regression. Results: 151 patients (39, 39, 32, and 41 with idiopathic PAH, CTD-PAH, PH-LHD, and CTEPH, respectively) and 41 non-PH controls were included. Ang-1 levels showed no significant difference between groups (p = 0.8), and no significant associations with disease severity in PH subgroups (p ≥ 0.07). In Kaplan—Meier analyses, Ang-1 levels (stratified by quartile) had no significant impact on transplant-free survival (p ≥ 0.27) or clinical worsening (p ≥ 0.51) in PH subgroups. Regression models found no significant association between Ang-1 levels and outcomes (p ≥ 0.31). ROC analyses found no significant cut-off that would maximize sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions: Despite a strong pathophysiological association in experimental studies, this first comprehensive analysis of Ang-1 in PH subgroups suggests that Ang-1 is not a predictive and clinically relevant biomarker in PH.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Jonas Richter & Svenja Lena Tiede & Natascha Sommer & Thomas Schmidt & Werner Seeger & Hossein Ardeschir Ghofrani & Ralph Schermuly & Henning Gall, 2016. "Circulating Angiopoietin-1 Is Not a Biomarker of Disease Severity or Prognosis in Pulmonary Hypertension," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0165982
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165982
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165982&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0165982?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0165982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.