Back

Insulin-like Growth Factor-Binding Protein 2 and Adverse Left Ventricular Remodeling After First Myocardial Infarction

Elbaz, M.; Grazide, M.-H.; Bataille, V.; Blanc, G.; Gautier, P.; Mkhwananzi, R.; Firat, H.; Vindis, C.

2026-03-05 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.03.04.26347626 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background and AimsDespite advances in reperfusion and medical therapy, survivors of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain at risk for adverse left ventricular remodeling (LVR), a precursor to heart failure. Building on prior work outlining 12-month biomarker trajectories linked to early ventricular dysfunction, we aimed to assess whether these circulating biomarkers predict long-term adverse LVR. MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 155 patients experiencing their first AMI. Clinical, biochemical, and echocardiographic data were obtained at pre-percutaneous coronary intervention (pre-PCI), 24 h post-PCI, discharge (day 3), 6 months, and 12 months. Adverse LVR was defined as an increase of [≥]15 % in left ventricular end-systolic volume at 12 months. ResultsAdverse LVR occurred in 34 % of patients and was associated with cardiometabolic dysregulation (higher glucose, triglycerides, BMI, HOMA-IR; lower HDL-C). Among the six baseline biomarkers, only insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 2 (IGFBP-2) differed significantly between groups (p = 0.021) and remained independently associated in multivariable analysis (p = 0.036). Inclusion of IGFBP-2 increased the predictive models area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve from 0.735 to 0.801. ConclusionsIGFBP-2 is an independent predictor of adverse LVR following AMI, highlighting the interplay between metabolic dysfunction and maladaptive remodeling. Incorporating IGFBP-2 into clinical risk models could improve stratification and guide precision therapies for high-risk patients.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.