Association of point‐of‐care testing for sST2 with clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with heart failure

Abstract

Abstract Aims This study aimed to investigate the association of soluble suppression of tumorigenicity‐2 (sST2) measured by point‐of‐care testing assay with clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with heart failure after adjusting for other predictors including N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) and high‐sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs‐cTnT). Methods A total of 1726 consecutive patients hospitalized with heart failure from July 2015 to December 2021 were enrolled. Baseline serum sST2 concentrations were measured by immunofluorescence assay. Primary endpoint event was the composite of all‐cause death, heart transplantation, or left ventricular assist device. Results During the median follow‐up duration of 682 days, 434 patients (25.1%) suffered from primary endpoint events. Baseline sST2 remained an independent predictor of the primary endpoint event in patients hospitalized with heart failure after adjusting for other predictors including NT‐proBNP and hs‐cTnT [per log (unit) increase, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval) (CI): 1.20 (1.09, 1.32), P < 0.001]. And baseline sST2 had a better prognostic value for patients with chronic decompensated heart failure [per log (unit) increase, adjusted HR (95% CI): 1.19 (1.07, 1.31)] than for those with acute new onset heart failure [per log (unit) increase, adjusted HR (95% CI): 1.28 (0.94, 1.75), P value for interaction <0.001], as well as a better prognostic value for patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I–II [per log (unit) increase, adjusted HR (95% CI): 1.67 (1.11, 2.52)] than for those with NYHA functional class III‐IV [per log (unit) increase, adjusted HR (95% CI): 1.18 (1.07, 1.31), P value for interaction <0.001]. Baseline sST2 was also a good predictor of the primary endpoint event in patients hospitalized with heart failure at 1 month, 3 months, 1 year and 2 years (area under the curve: 0.789, 0.775, 0.736 and 0.733, respectively), and the best cut‐off values were 27.2 ng/ml, 27.1 ng/ml, 27.1 ng/ml and 25.1 ng/ml, respectively. Furthermore, baseline sST2 could provide additional prognostic value when added to baseline NT‐proBNP and hs‐cTnT (all P values <0.05). According to the category of elevated biomarkers (including NT‐proBNP, hs‐cTnT, and sST2), patients with three elevated biomarkers had a higher risk of the primary endpoint event compared with those with one or two elevated biomarkers (all P values <0.05). Conclusions Baseline sST2 remained an independent predictor of adverse events after adjusting for other predictors including NT‐proBNP and hs‐cTnT, particularly in patients with chronic decompensated heart failure and NYHA functional class I–II. And in the basis of baseline NT‐proBNP and hs‐cTnT, adding baseline sST2 could provide additional prognostic value for patients hospitalized with heart failure.

Keywords

• heart failure
• sST2
• point‐of‐care testing
• prognosis