MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410950862 · doi:10.1186/s12882-025-04169-1

Using vascular biomarkers to assess heart failure event risk in hospitalized patients with and without AKI

2025· article· en· W4410950862 on OpenAlexaff
Audrey A. Shi, Anna Simone Andrawis, Aditya Biswas, F. Perry Wilson, Wassim Obeid, Heather Thiessen Philbrook, Alan S. Go, T. Alp İkizler, Edward D. Siew, Vernon M. Chinchilli, Chi‐yuan Hsu, Amit X. Garg, William Reeves, David K. Prince, Pavan K. Bhatraju, Steven G. Coca, Kathleen D. Liu, Paul L. Kimmel, James S. Kaufman, Mark Wurfel, Jonathan Himmelfarb, Chirag R. Parikh, Sherry G. Mansour

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nephrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureNephrologyInternal medicineCardiologyIntensive care medicineEvent (particle physics)Emergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with AKI experience higher rates of heart failure (HF). This study seeks to identify criteria to assess the risk of heart failure post-hospitalization, with a special focus on AKI patients. We hypothesized that the combined use of 9 vascular biomarkers would predict future heart failure events after AKI. Using a study of 1497 hospitalized patients with and without AKI, we found that these 9 vascular biomarkers successfully stratified patients into different risk groups for HF, and were able to improve prediction of HF when added to routine clinical variables. METHODS: Using the ASSESS-AKI cohort, we performed an unsupervised spectral cluster analysis with 9 plasma biomarkers measured at 3 months post-hospitalization [Angiopoietin (angpt)-1, angpt-2, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A, VEGF-C, VEGF-d, VEGF receptor 1 (R1), solubleTie-2 (sTie-2), placental growth factor (PlGF), and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF)] in 1,497 patients, half of whom had AKI. We used a Cox regression analysis to evaluate the associations between the clusters and HF. Models were adjusted for demographics, cardiovascular disease risk factors, medications, ICU status, lung disease, sepsis, clinical center, and 3-month post-discharge serum creatinine and proteinuria. We calculated change in the area under the curve (AUC) for the prediction of HF or death at 3 years by adding the biomarkers to a clinical model selected by a penalized regression with LASSO. We also calculated a net reclassification index for the addition of the biomarkers to the clinical model. RESULTS: Three biomarker-derived clusters were identified: Cluster 1 [n = 302, Vascular Injury (Injury) Phenotype] had higher levels of injury markers, whereas Cluster 2 [n = 728, Vascular Repair (Repair) Phenotype] had higher levels of repair markers. Cluster 3 (n = 467) had lower levels of all markers (Dormant Phenotype). Across the entire cohort, those with the Injury Phenotype had twofold higher risk of a HF event compared to the Repair Phenotype [aHR 2.24 (95% CI: 1.57-3.19)] and noted in both participants with AKI [aHR 2.12 (95% CI: 1.35-3.34)] and without AKI [aHR 2.94 (95%CI: 1.57-5.50)]. The Dormant Phenotype was associated with higher risk of HF events only in participants without AKI. The AUC for the prediction of HF event or death at 3 years by the biomarkers was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80) for the clinical model, and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.83) for the combined model. The addition of the biomarkers significantly improved reclassification of HF event or death. CONCLUSIONS: Vascular biomarkers can be used to derive phenotypes capable of stratifying future risk of HF events in recently hospitalized patients with or without AKI.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NephrologySame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207