Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 889

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

Use of Multiple Biomarkers to Improve the Prediction of Death from Cardiovascular Causes

Open access
Zethelius, Björn, Berglund, Lars, Sundström, Johan, Ingelsson, Erik, Basu, Samar, Larsson, Anders, Venge, Per, Ärnlöv, Johan·2008·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The incremental usefulness of adding multiple biomarkers from different disease pathways for predicting the risk of death from cardiovascular causes has not, to our knowledge, been evaluated among the elderly. METHODS: We used data from the Uppsala Longitudinal Study of Adult Men (ULSAM), a community-based cohort of elderly men, to investigate whether a combination of biomarkers that reflect myocardial cell damage, left ventricular dysfunction, renal failure, and inflammation (troponin I, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, cystatin C, and C-reactive protein, respectively) improved the risk stratification of a person beyond an assessment that was based on the established risk factors for cardiovascular disease (age, systolic blood pressure, use or nonuse of antihypertensive treatment, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, use or nonuse of lipid-lowering treatment, presence or absence of diabetes, smoking status, and body-mass index). RESULTS: During follow-up (median, 10.0 years), 315 of the 1135 participants in our study (mean age, 71 years at baseline) died; 136 deaths were the result of cardiovascular disease. In Cox proportional-hazards models adjusted for established risk factors, all of the biomarkers significantly predicted the risk of death from cardiovascular causes. The C statistic increased significantly when the four biomarkers were incorporated into a model with established risk factors, both in the whole cohort (C statistic with biomarkers vs. without biomarkers, 0.766 vs. 0.664; P<0.001) and in the group of 661 participants who did not have cardiovascular disease at baseline (0.748 vs. 0.688, P=0.03). The improvement in risk assessment remained strong when it was estimated by other statistical measures of model discrimination, calibration, and global fit. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in elderly men with or without prevalent cardiovascular disease, the simultaneous addition of several biomarkers of cardiovascular and renal abnormalities substantially improves the risk stratification for death from cardiovascular causes beyond that of a model that is based only on established risk factors.

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa0707064

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 889

Metadata

Authors
Zethelius, B., Berglund, L., Sundström, J., Ingelsson, E., Basu, S., Larsson, A., Venge, P., & Ärnlöv, J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2008-05-15
Volume
358
Issue
20
Pages
2107-2116
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2151353276
Cited by
889
References
2
FWCI
77.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Use of Multiple Biomarkers to Improve the Prediction of Death from Cardiovascular Causes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa0707064
The paper
Zethelius, B., Berglund, L., Sundström, J., Ingelsson, E., Basu, S., Larsson, A., Venge, P., & Ärnlöv, J. (2008). Use of Multiple Biomarkers to Improve the Prediction of Death from Cardiovascular Causes. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa0707064

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.