Recurrence After Atrial Fibrillation Ablation and Investigational Biomarkers of Cardiac Remodeling.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation remains common. We evaluated the association between recurrence and levels of biomarkers of cardiac remodeling, and their ability to improve recurrence prediction when added to a clinical prediction model. METHODS AND RESULTS: Blood samples collected before de novo catheter ablation were analyzed. Levels of bone morphogenetic protein-10, angiopoietin-2, fibroblast growth factor-23, insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-7, myosin-binding protein C3, growth differentiation factor-15, interleukin-6, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and high-sensitivity troponin T were measured. Recurrence was defined as ≥30 seconds of an atrial arrhythmia 3 to 12 months postablation. Multivariable logistic regression was performed using biomarker levels along with clinical covariates: APPLE score (Age >65 years, Persistent AF, imPaired eGFR [<60 ml/min/1.73m2], LA diameter ≥43 mm, EF <50%; which includes age, left atrial diameter, left ventricular ejection fraction, persistent atrial fibrillation, and estimated glomerular filtration rate), preablation rhythm, sex, height, body mass index, presence of an implanted continuous monitor, year of ablation, and additional linear ablation. A total of 1873 participants were included. A multivariable logistic regression showed an association between recurrence and levels of angiopoietin-2 (odds ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.02-1.15], P=0.007) and interleukin-6 (odds ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.003-1.03]; P=0.02). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of a model that only contained clinical predictors was 0.711. The addition of any of the 9 studied biomarkers to the predictive model did not result in a statistically significant improvement in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. CONCLUSIONS: Higher angiopoietin-2 and interleukin-6 levels were associated with recurrence after atrial fibrillation ablation in multivariable modeling. However, the addition of biomarkers to a clinical prediction model did not significantly improve recurrence prediction.

Comparison between a new assay system, Elecsys® Anti-p53, and conventional MESACUP™ for the detection of serum anti-p53 antibodies: A multi-institutional study.

The sensitivity and specificity of a new automated electrochemiluminescence immunoassay system, Elecsys® Anti-p53 (Elecsys), were compared with that of the conventional serum anti-p53 antibody (s-p53-Ab) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit [MESACUP anti-p53 test (MESACUP)]. Elecsys and MESACUP were used to analyze the levels of s-p53-Abs in patients with esophageal, colorectal and breast cancer. A total of 532 controls and 288, 235 and 329 patients with esophageal, colorectal and breast cancer, respectively, were enrolled. Additionally, the sera of patients with benign diseases of the esophagus, colorectal system and breast, patients with autoimmune diseases and healthy volunteers were analyzed as controls. Sensitivity and specificity were compared between the two assay systems. Positive agreement rates were 58.7% in all samples, 71.2% in esophageal samples, 73.6% in colorectal samples and 35.1% in breast samples. Negative agreement rates for the different cancer types were ≥97.1% and the overall agreement rates were ≥92.3%. When the specificities of the two assays were aligned for all samples, Elecsys demonstrated higher sensitivities for all types of analyzed cancer together, as well as for esophageal, colorectal and breast cancer, respectively. Although positive concordance between the two assay systems was low in terms of specificity, Elecsys had a higher sensitivity than the MESACUP.