IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0350697.html

Proteomics risk scores and mortality in heart failure: Generalizability across populations

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph J Shearer
  • Jungnam Joo
  • Carolina G Downie
  • Kayode O Kuku
  • Maryam Hashemian
  • Eric Leifer
  • Suzette J Bielinski
  • Véronique L Roger

Abstract

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a complex syndrome with high mortality. Proteomics risk scores have shown promise in predicting mortality beyond guideline-recommended clinical tools. It is crucial to understand how risk scores generated by different methods and populations perform, and whether they highlight the same protein targets relevant to outcomes. Methods: To examine whether the study design impacts proteomics scores designed to predict mortality in HF, we evaluated three published risk scores that used the SomaScan assay to measure plasma proteins in a community cohort, clinical trial, and registry. Each score was assessed in the aforementioned community cohort and Cox models examined the association of a 1-standard deviation increase in score with mortality, with and without adjustment for clinical covariates. Performance of each risk score to predict 5-year mortality risk was assessed using calibration plots and time-dependent area under the curve and compared with a clinical model. Results: Risk scores were similarly distributed and moderately correlated (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.59–0.76). A 1-standard deviation increase in each risk score was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality: community cohort (HR = 2.70, 95% CI: 2.50–2.91); clinical trial (HR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.65–1.88); registry (HR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.6–1.81). Risk remained after adjustment for clinical covariates, although slightly attenuated, and similar across different ejection fraction categories. All risk scores showed strong calibration across the risk levels, alone, with an average expected over observed ratio ranging between 0.96–1.56. Seven proteins were included in at least two risk scores, with renin being included in all three. Conclusions: All three proteomics risk scores improved risk stratification in HF patients beyond guideline recommended clinical tools, independent of study design and ejection fraction. These results demonstrate that proteomics risk scores can enhance risk stratification across the HF syndrome, even when derived from different methods and populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph J Shearer & Jungnam Joo & Carolina G Downie & Kayode O Kuku & Maryam Hashemian & Eric Leifer & Suzette J Bielinski & Véronique L Roger, 2026. "Proteomics risk scores and mortality in heart failure: Generalizability across populations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-12, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0350697
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0350697
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0350697
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0350697&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0350697?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0350697. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.