4.6 Article

Osteopontin as Candidate Biomarker of Coronary Disease despite Low Cardiovascular Risk: Insights from CAPIRE Study

期刊

CELLS
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells11040669

关键词

cardiovascular risk; osteopontin; coronary artery disease; inflammation; neutrophil

资金

  1. Rete Cardiologica of Italian Ministry of Health [2754291]
  2. Fondazione Carige

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inflammation may play a role in the development of coronary artery disease (CAD) in different cardiovascular risk factor categories. Osteopontin (OPN) levels were highest in the low risk factor group and associated with CAD. Other biomarkers, such as myeloperoxidase (MPO) and resistin, did not differ based on CAD presence.
Stratification according high cardiovascular (CV) risk categories, still represents a clinical challenge. In this analysis of the CAPIRE study (NCT02157662), we investigate whether inflammation could fit between CV risk factors (RFs) and the presence of coronary artery disease (CAD). In total, 544 patients were included and categorized according with the presence of CAD and CV risk factor burden (low/multiple). The primary endpoint was to verify any independent association of neutrophil-related biomarkers with CAD across CV risk categories. The highest values of osteopontin (OPN) were detected in the low RF group and associated with CAD (23.2 vs. 19.4 ng/mL; p = 0.001), although no correlation with plaque extent and/or composition were observed. Conversely, myeloperoxidase (MPO) and resistin did not differ by CAD presence. Again, OPN was identified as independent variable associated with CAD but only in the low RF group (adjOR 8.42 [95% CI 8.42-46.83]; p-value = 0.015). As an ancillary finding, a correlation linked OPN with the neutrophil degranulation biomarker MPO (r = 0.085; p = 0.048) and resistin (r = 0.177; p = 3.4 x 10(-5)). In the present study, OPN further strengthens its role as biomarker of CAD, potentially bridging subclinical CV risk with development of atherosclerosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据