Impact of G protein-coupled receptor autoantibodies on clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

IF 3.3 2区医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

International journal of cardiology Pub Date : 2026-04-15 Epub Date: 2026-01-18 DOI:10.1016/j.ijcard.2026.134185

Xiaosong Ding , Wenxi Dang , Weiping Li , Man Wang , Yue Zhang , Hui Chen , Shun Li , Ning Cao

{"title":"Impact of G protein-coupled receptor autoantibodies on clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction","authors":"Xiaosong Ding , Wenxi Dang , Weiping Li , Man Wang , Yue Zhang , Hui Chen , Shun Li , Ning Cao","doi":"10.1016/j.ijcard.2026.134185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>G protein-coupled receptor autoantibodies (GPCR-AAs) have been implicated in various cardiovascular disorders. However, their prognostic value for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this prospective cohort study, 436 STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) completed a one-year follow-up. Serum levels of five GPCR-AAs (β<sub>1</sub>-, β<sub>2</sub>-, α<sub>1</sub>-, AT<sub>1</sub>-, and M<sub>2</sub>-AAs) were measured at admission using ELISA. Patients were grouped based on the occurrence of MACEs, and associations of GPCR- AAs with MACEs were evaluated using multivariate Cox regression.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Compared with the non-MACEs group, the optical density (OD) values and positivity rates of the β<sub>1</sub>-AA levels (69.6% vs 19.6%) and M<sub>2</sub>-AA levels (82.6% vs 60.2%) in patients with STEMI were significantly higher in the MACEs group. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that β<sub>1</sub>-AA [HR (95% CI) 1.11 (1.06–1.16), <em>p</em> < 0.001] and M<sub>2</sub>-AA [HR (95%CI) 1.14 (1.05–1.23), <em>p</em> = 0.001] were regarded as predictors for the incidence of MACEs in patients with STEMI after PPCI. The combination of β<sub>1</sub>-AA and M<sub>2</sub>-AA has the highest predictive performance for MACEs. The area under the curve (AUC) of the integrated 2-marker panel was 0.807 (95% CI, 0.75–0.86, <em>p</em> < 0.001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Elevated β<sub>1</sub>- and M<sub>2</sub>-Autoantibody levels at admission are independent predictors of one-year MACEs in STEMI patients undergoing PPCI. Their combined assessment enhances early risk stratification for guiding post-infarction management.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13710,"journal":{"name":"International journal of cardiology","volume":"449 ","pages":"Article 134185"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167527326000331","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

G protein-coupled receptor autoantibodies (GPCR-AAs) have been implicated in various cardiovascular disorders. However, their prognostic value for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear.

Methods

In this prospective cohort study, 436 STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) completed a one-year follow-up. Serum levels of five GPCR-AAs (β₁-, β₂-, α₁-, AT₁-, and M₂-AAs) were measured at admission using ELISA. Patients were grouped based on the occurrence of MACEs, and associations of GPCR- AAs with MACEs were evaluated using multivariate Cox regression.

Results

Compared with the non-MACEs group, the optical density (OD) values and positivity rates of the β₁-AA levels (69.6% vs 19.6%) and M₂-AA levels (82.6% vs 60.2%) in patients with STEMI were significantly higher in the MACEs group. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that β₁-AA [HR (95% CI) 1.11 (1.06–1.16), p < 0.001] and M₂-AA [HR (95%CI) 1.14 (1.05–1.23), p = 0.001] were regarded as predictors for the incidence of MACEs in patients with STEMI after PPCI. The combination of β₁-AA and M₂-AA has the highest predictive performance for MACEs. The area under the curve (AUC) of the integrated 2-marker panel was 0.807 (95% CI, 0.75–0.86, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Elevated β₁- and M₂-Autoantibody levels at admission are independent predictors of one-year MACEs in STEMI patients undergoing PPCI. Their combined assessment enhances early risk stratification for guiding post-infarction management.

查看原文本刊更多论文

G蛋白偶联受体自身抗体对st段抬高型心肌梗死患者临床预后的影响

背景：G蛋白偶联受体自身抗体（GPCR-AAs）与多种心血管疾病有关。然而，它们对st段抬高型心肌梗死（STEMI）患者主要不良心血管事件（mace）的预后价值尚不清楚。方法：在这项前瞻性队列研究中，436名接受原发性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PPCI）的STEMI患者完成了为期一年的随访。入院时采用ELISA检测血清中5种GPCR-AAs （β1-、β2-、α1-、AT1-和M2-AAs）的水平。根据mace的发生情况对患者进行分组，采用多因素Cox回归评估GPCR- AAs与mace的相关性。结果：与非MACE组相比，MACE组STEMI患者β1-AA水平的光密度（OD）值和阳性率（69.6% vs 19.6%）、M2-AA水平（82.6% vs 60.2%）均显著高于MACE组。多因素Cox回归分析显示，β1-AA [HR(95%CI)1.11(1.06-1.16),p 2-AA [HR(95%CI)1.14(1.05-1.23),p = 0.001]可作为STEMI患者PPCI术后mace发生率的预测因子。β1-AA和M2-AA组合对mace的预测能力最高。综合2个标志物面板的曲线下面积（AUC）为0.807 （95% CI, 0.75-0.86, p ）结论：入院时β1-和m2自身抗体水平升高是STEMI患者接受PPCI后一年mace的独立预测因素。他们的联合评估增强了早期风险分层，以指导梗死后的管理。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International journal of cardiology 医学-心血管系统

CiteScore

6.80

自引率

5.70%

发文量

758

审稿时长

44 days

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Cardiology is devoted to cardiology in the broadest sense. Both basic research and clinical papers can be submitted. The journal serves the interest of both practicing clinicians and researchers. In addition to original papers, we are launching a range of new manuscript types, including Consensus and Position Papers, Systematic Reviews, Meta-analyses, and Short communications. Case reports are no longer acceptable. Controversial techniques, issues on health policy and social medicine are discussed and serve as useful tools for encouraging debate.