Evidence Hub

Prognosis and Personalized In Silico Prediction of Treatment Efficacy in Cardiovascular and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Mayra Alejandra Jaimes Campos, Iván Andújar, Felix Keller, Gert J. Mayer, Peter R Rossing, Jan A. Staessen, Christian Delles, Joachim Beige et al.

Pharmaceuticals, 2023

5,585 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

(1) Background: Kidney and cardiovascular diseases are responsible for a large fraction of population morbidity and mortality. Early, targeted, personalized intervention represents the ideal approach to cope with this challenge. Proteomic/peptidomic changes are largely responsible for the onset and progression of these diseases and should hold information about the optimal means of treatment and prevention. (2) Methods: We investigated the prediction of renal or cardiovascular events using previously defined urinary peptidomic classifiers CKD273, HF2, and CAD160 in a cohort of 5585 subjects, in a retrospective study. (3) Results: We have demonstrated a highly significant prediction of events, with an HR of 2.59, 1.71, and 4.12 for HF, CAD, and CKD, respectively. We applied in silico treatment, implementing on each patient's urinary profile changes to the classifiers corresponding to exactly defined peptide abundance changes, following commonly used interventions (MRA, SGLT2i, DPP4i, ARB, GLP1RA, olive oil, and exercise), as defined in previous studies. Applying the proteomic classifiers after the in silico treatment indicated the individual benefits of specific interventions on a personalized level. (4) Conclusions: The in silico evaluation may provide information on the future impact of specific drugs and interventions on endpoints, opening the door to a precision-based medicine approach. An investigation into the extent of the benefit of this approach in a prospective…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 5,585 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free