Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 414

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predictive value of C-reactive protein and troponin T in patients with unstable angina: a comparative analysis

Open access
Heeschen, Christopher, Hamm, Christian W, Bruemmer, Jens, Simoons, Maarten L·2000·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated C-reactive protein (CRP) and troponin T (TnT) for predicting six-month cardiac risk in patients with unstable angina. BACKGROUND: Troponin T is predictive of cardiac risk in patients with unstable angina. The clinical implications of elevated CRP in such patients remains controversial. METHODS: Baseline TnT and CRP values were determined in 447 patients with unstable angina enrolled in the placebo group of the Chimeric c7E3 AntiPlatelet Therapy in Unstable angina REfractory to standard treatment trial (CAPTURE) trial. All patients underwent a coronary intervention and were followed for a six month period in which 13 deaths and 47 myocardial infarctions were documented (MIs). RESULTS: Troponin T was >0.1 microg/liter in 30% and CRP was >10 mg/L in 41% of the patients. For the initial 72-h period (including coronary intervention), TnT (17.4% vs. 4.2%; p < 0.001) but not CRP (10.3% vs. 8%; p = 0.41) was predictive of mortality and MI. The TnT-positive patients displayed more frequent recurrent instability before the planned intervention (44.8% vs. 16.9%; p < 0.001), but in the CRP-positive patients, no such increase was observed (25.9% vs. 24.8%; p = 0.92). In contrast, for the six month follow-up period, CRP was predictive of cardiac risk (mortality, MI) (18.9% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.003). Using multivariate analysis, both CRP and TnT emerged as independent predictors of mortality and MI at six-month follow-up. Furthermore, the incidence of coronary restenosis during six-month follow-up was not related to TnT status (3% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.49); however, it was significantly related to CRP status (7% vs. 2.3%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Troponin T, but not CRP, was predictive of cardiac risk during the initial 72-h period, whereas CRP was an independent predictor of both cardiac risk and repeated coronary revascularization (coronary artery bypass graft surgery and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty) during six month follow-up.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00581-7

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 414

Metadata

Authors
Heeschen, C., Hamm, C. W., Bruemmer, J., & Simoons, M. L.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-05
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
1535-1542
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003634564
Cited by
414
References
2
FWCI
27.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predictive value of C-reactive protein and troponin T in patients with unstable angina: a comparative analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00581-7
The paper
Heeschen, C., Hamm, C. W., Bruemmer, J., & Simoons, M. L. (2000). Predictive value of C-reactive protein and troponin T in patients with unstable angina: a comparative analysis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00581-7

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.