A pilot study of S100A4, S100A8/A9, and S100A12 in dilated cardiomyopathy: novel biomarkers for diagnosis or prognosis?

AIMS: Circulating biomarkers can provide important information for the diagnosis and prognosis of dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). We explored novel biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of DCM to improve clinical decision-making. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 238 DCM patients and 65 control were consecutively enrolled at Zhongshan Hospital between January 2017 and January 2019. In the screening set, four DCM patients and four controls underwent measurements of serum proteomic analysis. Seventy-six differentially expressed circulating proteins were screened by data-independent acquisition proteomics, and three of these proteins (S100A4, S100A8/A9, and S100A12) were validated by multiple-reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry. In the validation set, subsequently, a total of 234 DCM patients and 61 control subjects were evaluated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Circulating S100A4, S100A8/A9, and S100A12 were significantly increased in DCM patients (P < 0.001). These three proteins were significant positively correlated with other parameters, such as Lg (NT-proBNP), IL-1β, TGF-β, CRP, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and left ventricular end-systolic diameter, whereas they were negatively correlated with left ventricular ejection fraction, respectively (P < 0.05). The receiver operator characteristic curve showed the combination of S100A4, S100A8/A9, and S100A12 [area under curve (AUC) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-0.93] was better than single S100A4 (AUC 0.74, 95% CI 0.68-0.81), S100A8/A9 (AUC 0.82, 95% CI 0.77-0.88), or S100A12 (AUC 0.80, 95% CI 0.72-0.88) in the diagnosis of DCM (P < 0.01). After a median follow-up period of 33.5 months, 110 patients (47.01%) experienced major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including 46 who had cardiac deaths and 64 who had heart failure rehospitalizations. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that the DCM patients with ≥75th percentile level of S100A4 had a significantly higher incidence of MACEs than those with <75th percentile level of S100A4 (61.40% vs. 42.37%, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences of MACE rate among DCM patients with different concentrations of S100A8/A9 and S100A12 (P > 0.05). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed that S100A4 [≥75th percentile vs. <75th percentile: hazard ratio (HR) 1.65; 95% CI 1.11-2.45] remained significant independent predictors for MACEs (P < 0.05); however, S100A8/A9 and S100A12 were not independent factors for predicting MACE (P ≥ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: S100A4, S100A8/A9, and S100A12 may be additional diagnostic tools for human DCM recognition, and the combination of these three indicators helped to improve the accuracy of a single index to diagnose DCM. Additionally, S100A4 was identified as a significant predictor of prognosis in patients with DCM.