4.4 Article

Serum B-type natriuretic peptide levels as a marker for anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity

Journal

ONCOLOGY LETTERS
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages 3483-3492

Publisher

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/ol.2016.4424

Keywords

serum B-type natriuretic peptide levels; anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity; post-treatment; pretreatment; standardized mean difference; meta-analysis; case and control study; confidence interval

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Observational and experimental studies have produced inconsistent evidence about the association of serum levels of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (AIC). Therefore, the current meta-analysis examined the association between serum BNP levels and AIC by using data from high quality studies published in peer-reviewed journals. Relevant studies were identified through literature searches of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Web of Science, PubMed, Google Scolar and China BioMedicine (CBM). STATA software was used in this meta-analysis for statistical analysis. In addition, the crude standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the highest vs. the lowest category of serum BNP levels was calculated. A total of 8 independent case-control studies, containing 126 AIC patients and 569 healthy controls, were included for the current meta-analysis. The results indicated a significant difference in serum BNP levels between the cardiotoxic group and normal group, with respect to post-treatment and pretreatment with anthracyclines. Specifically, the serum levels of BNP increased remarkably after treatment with anthracyclines in the cardiotoxic group, compared with the normal group. No publication bias was detected in this meta-analysis. The findings of the present study provide strong evidence that serum BNP levels may be associated with AIC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available