. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 1.

Published in final edited form as: JACC Heart Fail. 2015 May 14;3(6):445–455. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2014.12.018

Table 4.

Risk of Incident HF, by LVH and change in biomarkers (N=1474)

			Hazard Ratios (95% CI)
LVH by Echo	Increase in NT-proBNP	% of LVH subgroup	Baseline- adjusted	Risk-factor adjusted^*
None	No	1046 (81.7%)	1.0	1.0
	Yes	235 (18.3%)	1.51 (1.14, 2.00)	1.33 (0.99, 1.80)
Yes	No	129 (66.8%)	1.39 (0.97, 1.99)	1.22 (0.83, 1.78)
	Yes	64 (33.2%)	3.56 (2.46, 5.15)	2.90 (1.98, 4.27)
LVH by Echo	Increase in hs cTnT	% of LVH subgroup	Baseline- adjusted	Risk-factor adjusted^*
None	No	1062 (82.9%)	1.0	1.0
	Yes	219 (17.1%)	2.15 (1.63, 2.84)	1.88 (1.40, 2.50)
Yes	No	144 (74.6%)	1.71 (1.23, 2.39)	1.51 (1.06, 2.16)
	Yes	49 (25.4%)	4.27 (2.85, 6.38)	3.08 (2.03, 4.67)

Baseline-adjusted: Adjusted for baseline biomarker concentration.

Risk-Factor Adjusted: Adjusted for baseline biomarker level, age, race, gender, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease, body mass index, LVEF<45%, eGFR<60 cc/min/1.73m², and RWT.

Interaction of LVH with: Increase in NT-proBNP: p=.04; Increase in hs-cTnT: p=0.8