Examining The Utility Of Biomarker Panels In Predicting Disease Progression In Patients With Cardiovascular Disorders: Laboratory Approaches

Abstract

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain the leading cause of mortality worldwide, accounting for over 17 million deaths annually. Early and accurate prediction of disease progression could help optimize treatment strategies and reduce mortality.

Novel biomarkers have shown promise for improving risk stratification, but most previous studies have focused on individual biomarkers.

Several biomarkers have been investigated for their potential role in predicting disease progression in cardiovascular disorders.

This study review  papers enrolled  patients with a history of myocardial infarction, stable angina, or heart failure who were referred for outpatient evaluation and management at a large tertiary care center.

A four-biomarker panel containing hs-TnI, BNP, hs-CRP and galectin-3 demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy.

Our findings are consistent with previous reports demonstrating the incremental value of multi-biomarker approaches. However, our study has some limitations. The review aimed to evaluate the potential utility of multi-biomarker panels in pred[1]icting adverse outcomes among patients with established cardiovascular disease. Combined multi-biomarker approaches may improve risk stratification compared to individual biomarkers or clinical risk scores alone. Further studies are warranted to validate these findings and assess the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of multi-biomarker testing.

While promising, these findings from a small single-center study require confirmation in larger, ideally multicenter cohorts. Additionally, the performance of the biomarker panel should be compared against established clinical risk models to truly evaluate its potential incremental value. Further research is also needed to optimize biomarker selection and assess whether adding novel markers can augment prediction achieved by current biomarkers.  Further investigation is merited to fully characterize the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of such strategies