High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay to screen for acute rejection in patients with heart transplant

PC Patel, DA Hill, CR Ayers, B Lavingia… - Circulation: Heart …, 2014 - Am Heart Assoc
PC Patel, DA Hill, CR Ayers, B Lavingia, P Kaiser, AK Dyer, AP Barnes, JT Thibodeau…
Circulation: Heart Failure, 2014Am Heart Assoc
Background—A noninvasive biomarker that could accurately diagnose acute rejection (AR)
in heart transplant recipients could obviate the need for surveillance endomyocardial
biopsies. We assessed the performance metrics of a novel high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I
(cTnI) assay for this purpose. Methods and Results—Stored serum samples were
retrospectively matched to endomyocardial biopsies in 98 cardiac transplant recipients, who
survived≥ 3 months after transplant. AR was defined as International Society for Heart and …
Background
A noninvasive biomarker that could accurately diagnose acute rejection (AR) in heart transplant recipients could obviate the need for surveillance endomyocardial biopsies. We assessed the performance metrics of a novel high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (cTnI) assay for this purpose.
Methods and Results
Stored serum samples were retrospectively matched to endomyocardial biopsies in 98 cardiac transplant recipients, who survived ≥3 months after transplant. AR was defined as International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation grade 2R or higher cellular rejection, acellular rejection, or allograft dysfunction of uncertain pathogenesis, leading to treatment for presumed rejection. cTnI was measured with a high-sensitivity assay (Abbott Diagnostics, Abbott Park, IL). Cross-sectional analyses determined the association of cTnI concentrations with rejection and International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation grade and the performance metrics of cTnI for the detection of AR. Among 98 subjects, 37% had ≥1 rejection episode. cTnI was measured in 418 serum samples, including 35 paired to a rejection episode. cTnI concentrations were significantly higher in rejection versus nonrejection samples (median, 57.1 versus 10.2 ng/L; P<0.0001) and increased in a graded manner with higher biopsy scores (Ptrend<0.0001). The c-statistic to discriminate AR was 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.88). Using a cut point of 15 ng/L, sensitivity was 94%, specificity 60%, positive predictive value 18%, and negative predictive value 99%.
Conclusions
A high-sensitivity cTnI assay seems useful to rule out AR in cardiac transplant recipients. If validated in prospective studies, a strategy of serial monitoring with a high-sensitivity cTnI assay may offer a low-cost noninvasive strategy for rejection surveillance.
Am Heart Assoc