Skip to main content
ESC Heart Failure logoLink to ESC Heart Failure
. 2020 May 18;7(4):1488–1501. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.12728

Growth differentiation factor 15 in adverse cardiac remodelling: from biomarker to causal player

Marian Wesseling 1,2, Julius HC de Poel 1, Saskia CA de Jager 1,3,
PMCID: PMC7373942  PMID: 32424982

Abstract

Heart failure is a growing health issue as a negative consequence of improved survival upon myocardial infarction, unhealthy lifestyle, and the ageing of our population. The large and complex pathology underlying heart failure makes diagnosis and especially treatment very difficult. There is an urgent demand for discriminative biomarkers to aid disease management of heart failure. Studying cellular pathways and pathophysiological mechanisms contributing to disease initiation and progression is crucial for understanding the disease process and will aid to identification of novel biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets. Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) is a proven valuable biomarker for different pathologies, including cancer, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases. Although the prognostic value of GDF15 in heart failure is robust, the biological function of GDF15 in adverse cardiac remodelling is not fully understood. GDF15 is a distant member of the transforming growth factor‐β family and involved in various biological processes including inflammation, cell cycle, and apoptosis. However, more research is suggesting a role in fibrosis, hypertrophy, and endothelial dysfunction. As GDF15 is a pleiotropic protein, elucidating the exact role of GDF15 in complex disease processes has proven to be a challenge. In this review, we provide an overview of the role GDF15 plays in various intracellular and extracellular processes underlying heart failure, and we touch upon crucial points that need consideration before GDF15 can be integrated as a biomarker in standard care or when considering GDF15 for therapeutic intervention.

Keywords: Adverse cardiac remodelling, GDF‐15, Biomarker, Fibrosis, Hypertrophy

Introduction

The mortality rates related to cardiovascular disease (CVD) have increased worldwide; since 2015, one in three deaths worldwide is a consequence of a CVD. 1 Heart failure is a growing health issue as a negative consequence of improved survival upon myocardial infarction (MI), unhealthy lifestyle, and the ageing of our population. 2 Therefore, the European Society of Cardiology recently updated their criteria defining heart failure by including extra‐cardiac organ co‐morbidities like diabetes, hypertension, and kidney dysfunction. 3 , 4 These new criteria show the complexity of heart failure throughout the patient population.

Heart failure cannot be classified as a single disease; multiple underlying causes, including hypertension, vascular calcification, or MI, show that heart failure better fits the description of a syndrome rather than a disease. 5 , 6 Furthermore, apart from underlying cardiac pathologies, extra‐cardiac pathologies such as cardiorenal syndrome and anaemia contribute to the development of heart failure. 7 , 8 Disease progression is further accelerated by ageing, diabetes, and hypertension as they cause endothelial dysfunction, left ventricular hypertrophy, and vascular disease. 9 , 10 , 11

A key process underlying heart failure is cardiac remodelling as response to injury, like inflammation, volume, and pressure overload. In response to injury, the heart compensates for the loss of cardiac output by remodelling of the myocardium. Cardiac remodelling is characterized by molecular, cellular, and structural changes that manifest in morphological changes of heart size, shape, and function. 12 , 13 The mechanisms underlying cardiac remodelling are not fully understood, as they vary from apoptosis, oxidative stress, and inflammation to changes in energy metabolism and contractile proteins. 5 , 12 , 13 Severe remodelling of cardiac tissue associates with progressive worsening of cardiac function eventually increasing mortality risk in patients‚ this highlights the need for assessment of cardiac remodelling to monitor disease and therapy adjustment where needed.

The demand for biomarkers that improve disease management of heart failure patients is increasing. 14 Although no curative therapy for heart failure is available, co‐morbidities influence disease progression and contribute to worsening of cardiac function. Proper biomarkers would allow to routinely assess disease progression and, in case of heart failure, which includes many co‐morbidities, inform on their presence to combine this information and maintain optimal treatment for the patient.

Elevated protein expression of circulating growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) is correlated to many pathological conditions, mainly being different types of cancer and also metabolic diseases such as obesity and diabetes. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 GDF15 is easily detectable in the blood; however, concentrations vary with age and gender. 15 , 19 , 20 , 21 For instance, we have shown that circulating levels of GDF15 can serve as strong independent predictor for cardiovascular events in women but not in men. 22 Although GDF15 has a sex‐dependent prognostic value in heart failure patients, 23 the prognostic value of GDF15 is not standardly analysed for men and women separately to increase accuracy. 24 , 25 , 26 Elevated serum levels of GDF15 were also associated with enhanced CVD development, progression, and mortality in both disease and general population. 17 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 In line, experimental murine ischaemia/reperfusion injury models show an rapid increase in circulating and tissue GDF15 levels upon cardiac injury that remained elevated for several days. 27 , 32 Moreover, GDF15 has been proven to be a valuable biomarker for heart failure, apart from the existing cardiac markers such as natriuretic peptides, ST2, high‐sensitivity troponin, and procalcitonin, 19 , 33 , 34 as it can serve as independent biomarker for survival and outcome. 35 , 36 This accounts for both heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and heart failure with mild reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF), where GDF15 levels are reported to be similar. 37 , 38 Based on the current lack of knowledge on the function of GDF15, there is no significant evidence regarding a clinical advantage of GDF15 in diagnosis or classification of HFpEF and HFmrEF compared with HFrEF. 39 , 40 , 41 Nevertheless, GDF15 has been linked to the incidence, progression, and prognosis of heart failure as biomarker for acute and chronic cellular stress. 28 , 35 In line, a commercial assay that provided robust data of GDF15 levels in serum and plasma under routine conditions is currently developed. 21 To implement GDF15 as biomarker in standard clinical practice, we need to understand which pathophysiological processes are associated with increased levels in order to adjusted disease management accordingly.

Besides its biomarker function, GDF15 may have a causal role in heart failure, something we need to elucidate before GDF15 can become the new discovered target for therapeutic therapy. As GDF15 is an active player in many pathophysiological processes, 16 , 42 understanding its molecular basis, biological mechanism, and receptor activity in heart tissue could help elucidating its role in the onset and progression of heart failure. Therefore, the aim of this review is to summarize current literature regarding biomarker function and causal role of GDF15 relevant in heart function and adverse cardiac remodelling. We describe the molecular background of GDF15, followed by an overview of effects on intracellular and extracellular processes associated with pathophysiological mechanisms driving heart failure. Lastly, based on all this information, we will touch upon future perspectives and current needs in the GDF15 cardiac research field.

Growth differentiation factor 15

Growth differentiation factor 15, also termed macrophage inhibitory cytokine 1, is a divergent member of the transforming growth factor (TGF)‐β family. 42 , 43 The TGF‐β family consists of TGF‐β isoforms, activins, and bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) and are best known for their effects on tissue homeostasis and cell proliferation and differentiation. 44 Although GDF15 belongs to this TGF‐β superfamily and shares homology with BMPs, its major functions are not completely identical. GDF15 is robustly expressed by placenta and prostate tissue, while in other tissues, expression is very low. 15 , 17 , 42 , 45 However, under pathophysiological conditions like cellular stress and tissue injury, GDF15 can be produced and secreted by many various cell types like macrophages, vascular smooth muscle cells, endothelial cells, and cardiomyocytes 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 in organs such as the kidney, heart, and liver.

Growth differentiation factor 15 receptor identification

Knowing GDF15 is rapidly produced and secreted by various tissue and cells, one of the most urgent questions is to which receptor GDF15 binds and which intracellular signalling cascades are activated. It was recently established that GDF15 can bind with high affinity to the GDNF family receptor α‐like (GFRAL) receptor. 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 GFRAL is mainly locate in the central nervous system, 50 and binding and signalling of GDF15/GFRAL axis lead to a decreased food intake and subsequent weight loss. 51 , 52 This discovery helped unravel a role for GDF15 on activation of certain metabolic pathways and increases knowledge about possible therapeutic use of GDF15 in obesity and weight loss. 48

To our knowledge, expression of the GFRAL receptor has only been found in the central nervous system, leaving the question to which primary receptor GDF15 binds in the periphery still open. 53 So far, studies have reported GDF15 binding to the TGF‐β II receptor 54 and ALK receptors, 17 , 54 , 55 and some indicate binding to tyrosine or serine/threonine receptors. 56 The discovery of GFRAL provided important insight in the signalling capabilities of GDF15 via non TGF‐β‐related receptors and suggests that signalling of GDF15 beyond the TGF‐β receptor family may be very important in the periphery as well. As such, exploring the possible cardiac signalling receptors of GDF15 in cardiomyocytes, fibroblasts, and endothelial cells may provide more insights in mechanistic effects and possible therapeutic targeting of GDF15 during progressive heart failure.

Regulation of growth differentiation factor 15 on the genetic level

Growth differentiation factor 15 is located on chromosome 19p12‐13.1, with a length of 2.746 base pairs containing two exons separated by an intron 15 , 57 (Figure 1 ). Various gene polymorphisms [single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)] are suggested to affect GDF15 expression; for example, rs888663 and rs1054564 located upstream of the GDF15 gene 58 , 59 , 60 are associated with CVDs. 61 , 62 , 63 Contradictory, no effect of SNPs increasing GDF15 transcription activity 62 in CVDs is also present. 60 , 64 In addition, SNPs in the miRNAs (miR) regulating GDF15 expression are suggested to be important as well; an example is miRSNP rs1054564 in the 3′ UTR of the GDF15 transcript, which causes allele‐specific translational repression via has‐miR‐1233‐3p. 65 Furthermore, miRSNP rs1054564 is associated with reduced levels of circulating GDF15 in a Taiwanese CVD population. 66 They suggest GDF15 to be a major genetic determinant of the GDF15 concentration. 66

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) transcription and maturation. Originating from two exons, GDF15 is synthesized as polypeptide consisting of a propeptide and a mature region. Between two mature regions, a homodimer is formed by a interchain disulfide bond. The propeptide plays an important role intracellular trafficking and secretion. Pro‐protein convertase subtilisin/kexin types (PCSKs) and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) are able to cleave the pro‐GDF15 polypeptide at the RXXR cleave site, thereby forming a biological active mature GDF15. After cleavage, both the propeptide and a mature GDF15 are secreted (figure adapted from Servier Medical Art, https://smart.servier.com/).

Production of growth differentiation factor 15

Originating from two exons, GDF15 is synthesized as a polypeptide (pre‐pro‐GDF15), which consists of a signal peptide, a propeptide, and a mature region 47 , 67 (Figure 1 ). The GDF15 polypeptide is biologically inactive and forms a homodimers through an interchain disulfide bond at the C‐terminus in the endoplasmic reticulum. 68 The N‐terminal side contains the signalling peptide important for secretion and intracellular trafficking. 47 Once located in the endoplasmic reticulum, the polypeptide is cleaved by the serine proteinases pro‐protein convertase subtilisin/kexin types (PCSKs). 69 PCSK3, PCSK5, and PCSK6 are able to recognize and remove the signalling peptide of the GDF15 polypeptide and therefore essential in the formation of a biologically active GDF15. 70 In addition to PCSKs, GDF15 can also be processed by matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)‐26 71 (Figure 1 ). The presence of GDF15 and MMP‐26 in placental development suggests that MMP‐26 is just as important as PCSKs in the processing and maturation of GDF15. Besides serine and MMPs, there are also cysteine proteinases, 72 all involved in extracellular proteolysis, 73 and further research should elucidate their possible contribution to GDF15 maturation. After cleavage of the pro‐GDF15 domain, both a mature GDF15 protein and the remaining propeptide are secreted (Figure 1 ). Pro‐GDF15 is secreted into the extracellular matrix and is stored in latent stromal extracellular matrix stores. 68 Under stress conditions, latent pro‐GDF15 from the storage pools is cleaved to its active mature form. Bauskin et al. 68 , 74 found that the propeptide of pro‐GDF15 is responsible for this cleaving and signalling to increase circulating serum levels of GDF15 upon demand. Whether these storage pools are present or activated in cardiac tissue during the progression of heart failure has not been clarified, but it may contribute to increased GDF15 secretion into the circulation during heart failure. As previously reported that an increase in these stromal stores of GDF15 associates with disease outcome of prostate cancer patients, it could be very relevant to investigate the presence of stores in cardiac tissue. 68 Therefore, histopathological assessment of GDF15 in cardiac tissue of heart failure patients could indicate the increased GDF15 production and storage, possibly predictive of disease severity and outcome.

Growth differentiation factor 15 as non‐cardiac specific biomarker in heart failure

The heart failure population is diverse as multiple causes and co‐morbidities affect disease progression and prognosis. 75 Underlying risk factors like diabetes, hypertension, and inflammatory responses predict the onset of future CVDs including heart failure. 76 This exemplifies the urgency for methods to distinguish between heart failure subpopulations based on the underlying processes aside from a functional classification. 77 Current biomarkers like natriuretic peptides and cardiac troponins are especially strong in reflecting the degree of acute cardiac injury and mostly represent systolic heart failure or HFrEF (Table 1 ). We are currently lacking biomarkers reflecting the more chronic type of cardiac remodelling, which is mostly observed in patients with heart failure of non‐ischaemic origin. 78 New and promising biomarkers like soluble ST2, galectin‐3, and GDF15 are currently evaluated for their contribution to diagnosis or prognosis of heart failure as they reflect underlying pathophysiological pathways related to chronic cardiac remodelling (Table 1 ). Non‐cardiac‐specific biomarkers have a potential use as diagnostic tool in heart failure patients as they report on the different biological processes involved in the systemic consequences or causes of heart failure. 78 In heart failure patients, GDF15 levels increased with disease severity in various tissues and cells particularly during pathological inflammatory conditions. 78 We propose that GDF15 levels represent underlying mechanisms of disease that would inform clinicians about the patients' general state of disease progression. In relation to treatment of co‐morbidities to reduce disease progression, GDF15 may also provide information on treatment responsiveness. This would especially help patients with chronic heart failure or HFpEF, which are difficult to diagnose and often affected by several co‐morbidities contributing to the disease. Nevertheless, we feel that all patients independent on their heart failure classification would benefit from a general marker of disease to evaluate the patients' systemic conditions.

Table 1.

Advantages and disadvantages of current heart failure biomarkers

Biomarker Source Reflective of Biomarker properties for HF Advantage Disadvantage Reference
Natriuretic peptides (NT‐proBNP) Cardiomyocytes LV systolic dysfunction and cardiac wall stress Diagnosis of HF, prognosis of HF, and mortality Useful in risk stratification of patients with acute HF

Less prognostic in HFpEF and stable HF

Not discriminative between HFrEF and HFpEF

Berezin and de Lemos et al. 40 , 81
Cardiac troponins (TnT and TnI) Cardiomyocytes Reflects myocardial injury Diagnosis of HF, prognosis of HF, and mortality Useful in risk assessment of outcome and disease severity in HF patients Not discriminative between HFrEF and HFpEF Several studies 82 , 83 , 84
Soluble ST2 Enhanced cardiac strain increases production by cardiomyocytes and cardiac fibroblasts Cardiac fibrosis, hypertrophy, and ventricular remodelling Diagnosis of HF, prognosis of HF, and mortality

Good prognostic marker beyond risk factors

Less affected by age, BMI, and eGFR

Unclear if it could be superior for HFpEF compared with HFrEF Berezin and McCarthy and Januzzi 40 , 85
Galectin‐3 Produced upon inflammatory responses by inflammatory cells Fibrosis and inflammation in development and progression of HF Diagnosis of HF, prognosis of HF, and mortality Combined with NT‐proBNP reflecting a worse prognosis in suspected and proven HF Not discriminative between HFrEF and HFpEF Dong et al. and van Kimmenade et al. 86 , 87
GDF15 Cardiac cells: cardiomyocytes, cardiac fibroblasts, endothelial cells, inflammatory cells, etc. n.d. Prognosis of HF and mortality Independently prognostic in both HFpEF and HFrEF

Not discriminative for early HFpEF

Not discriminative in HF diagnosis

Several studies 37 , 88 , 89

BMI, body mass index; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; GDF15, growth differentiation factor 15; HF, heart failure; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; LV, left ventricular; NT‐proBNP, N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide.

Growth differentiation factor 15 as a causal player in adverse remodelling

Growth differentiation factor 15 can be produced by almost every cell type in the periphery under stress conditions and can have an influence on numerous cell types. 79 , 80 Depending on the state of cells and the micro‐environment present, GDF15 can have both beneficial and adverse effects on several different cellular processes. 16 , 49 Most pathophysiological and mechanistic effects of GDF15 are observed in cancers; however, also inflammation, hypertrophy, and fibrosis in organ dysfunction are under direct influence of GDF15. 16 , 49 In the succeeding text, we describe the most important cellular mechanisms that can be influenced in cardiac cells by GDF15 and are related to the onset and progression of heart failure.

Effect of growth differentiation factor 15 on cardiomyocytes

The loss of cardiomyocyte as a consequence of apoptosis and the very low proliferation rate of cardiomyocyte are highly important mechanisms in the development of heart failure. Studying interactions of GDF15 with cell cycle processes has so far gained most insights from the cancer research field. Elevation of circulating GDF15 levels has been associated with increased apoptosis and reduced cell proliferation in solid tumours. 90 , 91 Multiple oncogenic studies propose GDF15 to play a role in cell growth arrest and apoptosis, via either p53‐dependent or p53‐independent mechanisms. 92 , 93 , 94 In line, as mentioned earlier, Jones et al. 95 identified a p53‐regulated miR embedded in the GDF15 intron gene able to reduce cell proliferation and desensitize cells to DNA damage‐induced apoptosis in a human colorectal cancer cells line. Moreover, as GDF15 is also a downstream target of p53, early growth response 1, and Akt/GSK‐3β, there is a feedback loop for the effect of GDF15 plays in cell growth arrest and apoptosis. 90 , 92 , 93 , 96 , 97 Nevertheless, knowing that GDF15 is pleotropic, opposing studies showed that an increase in GDF15 is able to induce proliferation of cervical and malignant glioma cancer cells. 98 , 99 Relating to cardiomyocytes, GDF15 is associated with protection against ischaemia reperfusion and angiotensin II, nitric oxide (NO), or TGF‐β1 induced apoptosis. 32 , 100 Even more interesting, GDF15 is associated with ERBB2 and cyclin D1 in cervical cancer cell proliferation, 98 both known factors to induce cardiomyocyte proliferation. 101 , 102 , 103 In line, recently, the Hippo–YAP pathway gained special attention in regard to cardiac regeneration as potential therapeutic target. 104 , 105 Moreover, interplay between Hippo–YAP and TGF‐β pathways is known to be involved in tissue homeostasis. 106 , 107 , 108 This suggests that GDF15, as TGF‐β family member, may affect the Hippo–YAP pathway, thereby possibly targeting cardiomyocyte proliferation. To conclude, the effect of GDF15 on proliferation and apoptosis is relevant to study in cardiomyocytes to maintain high number of viable and functional cardiomyocytes in order to maintain cardiac output.

Cardiac hypertrophy is characterized by an increase in heart size and a loss of sufficient cardiac output as cardiomyocytes enlarge as consequence of pathophysiological stimuli. 109 Elevated circulating GDF15 levels positively correlate with thickness of the posterior wall of the left ventricle, interventricular septum, and left ventricular mass. 56 , 110 , 111 Mechanistically, GDF15 is reported to have a pro‐hypertrophic effect on cardiomyocytes that attenuates cardiac hypertrophy via phosphoinositide 3‐kinase and extracellular signal‐regulated kinase signalling pathways, thereby affecting transcription via the Smad1 pathway. 100 , 112 , 113 However, it has also been described that GDF15 can protect against hypertrophy through Smad‐dependent pathways. 112 Moreover, it has been shown that GDF15 can inhibit the activation of endothelial growth factor receptor, thereby attenuating hypertrophic responses in a Smad‐independent manner. 111 Furthermore, in animal models, mesenchymal stem cell treatment showed beneficial paracrine effects via induction of GDF15 secretion, thereby reducing hypertrophy and left ventricular remodelling. 114 , 115 Concluding, both pro‐hypertrophic and anti‐hypertrophic effects of GDF15 are described, suggesting a mediating role of GDF15 in cardiac hypertrophic responses dependent on the environmental circumstances. It remains unclear if Smad‐dependent signalling pathways dominate other pathways in GDF15‐mediated hypertrophic responses.

Effect of growth differentiation factor 15 on endothelial cells

Endothelial dysfunction is crucial mediator of impaired coronary and systemic perfusion and reduced cardiac capacity via directly negatively affecting cardiac remodelling and cardiomyocyte function. 116 , 117 Endothelial dysfunction in patients with chronic heart failure is associated with increased mortality. 118 Increased adhesion molecule expression, reduced anticoagulant properties, and imbalanced production of vasodilating and vasoconstriction substances all lead to endothelial dysfunction. 119 There are sufficient indications that GDF15 causes endothelial dysfunction by impairing vascular contraction and relaxation, which consequently could have a large impact on the function of the heart, by inducing not only large artery disease but also microvascular disease, which is associated with a deteriorating cardiac function. 120 Mechanistically, Mazagova et al. 119 showed that the vascular contractility in response to vasoconstrictor agents was repressed under presence of GDF15, suggesting that GDF15 affects the NO system in endothelial cells. Indeed, others show that increased levels of GDF15 are important for NO release in endothelial cells that will result in reduced vasodilation. 121 Furthermore, it has been shown that GDF15 can induce proliferation of endothelial cells during angiogenesis 122 and also endothelial senescence via reactive oxygen species pathway activation, implicating endothelial function loss. 123 , 124

Recently, various studies have addressed the contribution of epithelial–mesenchymal transition and endothelial–mesenchymal transition (EndMT) to the inflammation and fibrosis response in tissue repair, implicated to play a role in pathological processes of heart failure. 125 , 126 It is well established that the TGF‐β pathway plays an important role in EndMT and thereby cell migration and fibrosis as expression of respectively MMPs and collagens is up‐regulated during this process. It has been shown that GDF15 inhibits TGF‐β I target genes, thereby diminishing cell migration as a result of suppressed epithelial–mesenchymal transition in bone tumour epithelial cells. 127 These data support the notion that GDF15 has a potential anti‐migratory effect on endothelial cells. 128 However, contradictory results are found that display EndMT progression and increased cell migration promoted by GDF15, through activation of the TGF‐β pathway in a paracrine and autocrine signalling manner. 93 , 129 , 130

Effect of growth differentiation factor 15 on fibroblasts

In cardiac pathologies, during repair and regenerative processes following upon tissue injury, an excessive amount of fibrous connective tissue is formed consisting of extracellular matrix deposition, including collagen, fibronectin, and laminin. 131 , 132 This myocardial fibrosis is an integral component leading to both functional impairment and arythmogenesis. 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 Various studies show associations between GDF15 and cardiac fibrosis, collagen turnover, and collagen depositions in respectively heart failure, MI, and atherosclerosis. 54 , 137 , 138 However, the exact source of this increased GDF15 production has not been clearly identified. Lok et al. 137 showed that cardiac tissue itself was not the main source of GDF15 production in cardiac fibrosis but suggest systemic oxidative stress to increase GDF15 in different cells and organs, while Kempf et al. 32 show that GDF15 is expressed and secreted in cardiomyocytes subjected to ischaemia/reperfusion injury, through a nitrosative stress‐dependent signalling pathway. GDF15 is recently identified as a possible inhibitor of fibroblast growth via repression of TGF‐β signalling and oncogenic protein N‐Myc, reducing fibroblast activation and fibrosis in chronic kidney disease and pulmonary fibrosis. 139 , 140 These results suggest the possibility of using GDF15 as therapeutic to delay progression of fibrosis. 139 However, contrary results have also been found in gastric cancer, suggesting that GDF15 stimulates the activation and proliferation of fibroblasts and therefore playing an important role in fibrosis progression. 141 Considering the anti‐fibrotic and pro‐fibrotic effects of GDF15 described, using GDF15 as possible therapeutic target for cardiac fibrosis relies on further research to discover specific effects of GDF15 on cardiac‐related fibrosis.

Effect of growth differentiation factor 15 on resident and infiltrating inflammatory cells

As GDF15 is a family member of TGF‐β and an inflammatory cytokine secreted upon injury, it is opposed to be a mediator of tissue inflammation. 142 The balance in resident and infiltrating inflammatory cells varies depending on acute and chronic heart failure, with respectively monocytes and macrophages and later reparative monocytes and T‐cell infiltration. 143 , 144 In acute heart failure upon MI, the necrotic area is controlled by inflammatory cells like neutrophils, monocytes, and macrophages, thereby prone to cardiac rupture. 145 , 146 Kempf et al. 147 showed an anti‐inflammatory role of GDF15 after an MI, as the infarct border zone increased GDF15 expression, thereby inhibiting myeloid cell recruitment and protecting the myocardium from cardiac rupture. In chronic heart failure, for example, HFpEF, the increase in GDF15 is thought to reflect the inflammatory response as systemic low‐grade inflammation is a central pathophysiological mechanism. 120 In chronic heart failure, an increasing amount of infiltrating inflammatory cells is present in cardiac tissue; the same accounts for GDF15 levels with progression of the disease. For example, macrophages express GDF15 during inflammatory responses contributing to the inflammatory activity of activated macrophages. 148 In line, a lack of GDF15 resulted in impaired macrophage migration and monocyte recruitment and a down‐regulation of pro‐inflammatory cytokines such as interferon‐γ. 54 , 149 This suggests that circulating GDF15 reflects the inflammatory status of the patient, and reduction of GDF15 as therapeutic intervention may be useful to attenuate macrophage inflammation in CVD.

Discussion and future perspective

With this review, we aimed to summarize the current knowledge about GDF15 in heart failure and define the most vital questions that should be addressed in the coming years. Over the last years, GDF15 gained more and more interest in the cardiovascular field as it hold promise as a valuable biomarker. It has been shown that GDF15 has cardioprotective properties mostly through anti‐apoptotic, anti‐hypertrophic, anti‐fibrotic, and anti‐inflammatory actions. However, an increase in GDF15 concentrations has also been associated with pro‐apoptotic, pro‐hypertrophic, pro‐fibrotic, and pro‐inflammatory responses including a worse prognosis and higher mortality rates among heart failure patients. However, a causal role for GDF15 in adverse cardiac remodelling remains to be elucidated; whether GDF15 plays an adaptive or maladaptive role in heart failure patients is still poorly understood. Summarizing on the data included in this review, we propose that GDF15 may be a valuable therapeutic target in heart failure as it is involved in several key processes in the pathobiology of heart failure.

Added value of growth differentiation factor 15 as a heart failure biomarker?

Currently, it has been well established that GDF15 level is increased during CVD development and progression and can prognosticate disease progression. 31 However, the availability of a reliable diagnostic test for routine clinical use and the complementary relevant cut‐off values are lacking. With the recent development of a diagnostic GDF15 kit, the first steps towards a clinical biomarker approach are made. 21 However, it remains unclear what the specific implications are when heart failure patients have increased levels of GDF15, as we cannot connect the level to a specific pathophysiological contributor to disease progression, like cardiac fibrosis. Therefore, we need more information on the causal role of GDF15 before the specific biomarker function of GDF15 in clinical care can be established. For example, it has been reported that after left ventricular assist device implantation in patients with advanced heart failure, GDF15 levels decrease. 137 , 150 This indicates that the elevation of GDF15 in heart failure patients is reversible upon treatment. A pharmacological treatment with vasodilator hormone human relaxin‐2 (Serelaxin) was able to lower to GDF15 levels in patients with acute heart failure. 151 , 152 This indicates that improving heart function by reduction of cardiac stress due to treatment consequently lead to down‐regulation of GDF15 levels and insinuates GDF15 may be an interesting biomarker for treatment responsiveness. Furthermore, treatment of co‐morbidities could strongly benefit the heart failure prognosis; however, determining if patients are treated optimally remains very difficult as this is poorly reflected by current biomarkers. 77 Current biomarkers, like N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide, provide information on the cardiac function in HFrEF, where critical information on disease state and progression for HFpEF are lacking from current biomarkers. HFpEF patients will most likely benefit most from non‐cardiac biomarkers like GDF15, specifying the general disease state, as they provide information on the systemic and chronic cardiac stress induced by multiple co‐morbidities. If treatment focuses on the co‐morbidities in HFpEF patients, we can use GDF15 as a marker for treatment responsiveness, as the general state of disease in HFpEF patients should improve upon therapy. To assess within the diverse heart population which patients would benefit most from GDF15 as biomarker for diagnosis or treatment responsiveness, we suggest that levels of GDF15 should be thoroughly assessed in patients with severe non‐ischaemic heart failure, which would benefit most. Nonetheless, because this is a very heterogeneous patient population, the relation between GDF15 and specific co‐morbidities and their underlying pathophysiology should be thoroughly addressed. Besides patient‐based research, the molecular insights should be studies in experimental disease models (in vivo and in vitro) that reflect the specific patient population as best as possible.

When looking for future therapeutic intervention options or clinical discriminative biomarkers to aid to prediction and guide treatment, it is of crucial importance to gain more insight in the specific signalling effects of GDF15 within cardiac tissue. Elucidating the balance in GDF15 concentration needed for normal pathophysiological function, thereby needing to either increasing or decreasing the GDF15 levels, is needed to provide a beneficial effect on cardiac function.

Growth differentiation factor 15 as therapeutic intervention for heart failure

Before GDF15 can become a therapeutic option, we need to elucidate on the possible options for intervention, for example, inhibiting or enhancing GDF15 production, post‐transcriptional regulation, receptor ligand binding, and protein interactions. Before clinical application of therapeutic interventions with GDF15, we need to understand these processes through thorough basic research into the function of GDF15. This includes receptor identification and unravelling the specific effects of GDF15 on cardiac cell types both in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, we have to establish the contribution of GDF15 to adverse processes of cardiac dysfunction like fibrosis and cardiac remodelling to find a specific cellular target for GDF15. Although cardiomyocytes are the functional cellular cardiac component, these cells have proven to be difficult targets 153 as endothelial cells form the functional barrier between the circulating levels and cardiac tissue. Therefore, a more relevant cell type for targeting via receptor interaction would be endothelial cells, especially as endothelial dysfunction can be reversible. 154 In this manner, modulation of fibrotic responses could be made possible. GDF15 receptor inhibition is where potential lies, as shown with the GFRAL receptor in the blood–brain barrier, which yields beneficial treatment potential for obesity. 47 , 48 A logical druggable target are receptors, as they are easily accessible for biologicals; however, for heart failure, this will remain complex because of the lack of known cardiac receptor for GDF15. Therefore, emphasizing more research into the specific cardiac receptor for GDF15 is crucial.

Microvascular intervention

To the best of our knowledge, no research has been performed into the role of GDF15 on cardiac tissue calcification, something less prevalent but nevertheless interesting as it plays a major role in conduction disturbances in cardiac tissue. 155 In line, HFpEF is associated with microvascular stiffness and microvascular calcification. 156 , 157 Well established are coronary artery calcifications associated with heart failure as they increase the risk for cardiovascular events. 158 , 159 Until known preventive treatment for calcification is not possible because of lack of knowledge about the underlying mechanism, 160 , 161 , 162 GDF15 is associated with the presence of carotid artery calcification, 22 increased expression resulted in reduced atherosclerotic lesion formation, 163 and absence of GDF15 in leukocytes resulted in stable lesion formation. 54 From patients and animal studies, we know that endothelial dysfunction leads to increased vascular calcification via BMP pathway activation, 164 , 165 addressing endothelial cells as possible target to reduce calcification. Therefore, the role of GDF15 in vascular calcification and stiffness could give valuable information towards unravelling the mechanism behind heart failure.

Conclusions

With this review, we aimed to display the potential behind GDF15 beyond a biomarker function as it is involved in many pathophysiological processes in heart failure. The future of GDF15 as therapeutic target lies in additional cardiac specific research unravelling the causal effect of GDF15 in cardiac dysfunction on a cellular and molecular level.

Funding

This work was supported by Netherlands Cardiovascular Research Initiative: an initiative with the support of the Dutch Heart Foundation (CVON2014‐11 RECONNECT and Queen of Hearts Program 2013T084).

Wesseling, M. , de Poel, J. H. C. , and de Jager, S. C. A. (2020) Growth differentiation factor 15 in adverse cardiac remodelling: from biomarker to causal player. ESC Heart Failure, 7: 1488–1501. 10.1002/ehf2.12728.

References

  • 1. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, Lim S, Shibuya K, Aboyans V, Abraham J, Adair T, Aggarwal R, Ahn SY, Alvarado M, Anderson HR, Anderson LM, Andrews KG, Atkinson C, Baddour LM, Barker‐Collo S, Bartels DH, Bell ML, Benjamin EJ, Bennett D, Bhalla K, Bikbov B, Bin Abdulhak A, Birbeck G, Blyth F, Bolliger I, Boufous S, Bucello C, Burch M, Burney P, Carapetis J, Chen H, Chou D, Chugh SS, Coffeng LE, Colan SD, Colquhoun S, Colson KE, Condon J, Connor MD, Cooper LT, Corriere M, Cortinovis M, de Vaccaro KC, Couser W, Cowie BC, Criqui MH, Cross M, Dabhadkar KC, Dahodwala N, de Leo D, Degenhardt L, Delossantos A, Denenberg J, Des Jarlais DC, Dharmaratne SD, Dorsey ER, Driscoll T, Duber H, Ebel B, Erwin PJ, Espindola P, Ezzati M, Feigin V, Flaxman AD, Forouzanfar MH, Fowkes FG, Franklin R, Fransen M, Freeman MK, Gabriel SE, Gakidou E, Gaspari F, Gillum RF, Gonzalez‐Medina D, Halasa YA, Haring D, Harrison JE, Havmoeller R, Hay RJ, Hoen B, Hotez PJ, Hoy D, Jacobsen KH, James SL, Jasrasaria R, Jayaraman S, Johns N, Karthikeyan G, Kassebaum N, Keren A, Khoo JP, Knowlton LM, Kobusingye O, Koranteng A, Krishnamurthi R, Lipnick M, Lipshultz SE, Ohno SL, Mabweijano J, MacIntyre M, Mallinger L, March L, Marks GB, Marks R, Matsumori A, Matzopoulos R, Mayosi BM, McAnulty J, McDermott M, McGrath J, Mensah GA, Merriman TR, Michaud C, Miller M, Miller TR, Mock C, Mocumbi AO, Mokdad AA, Moran A, Mulholland K, Nair MN, Naldi L, Narayan KM, Nasseri K, Norman P, O'Donnell M, Omer SB, Ortblad K, Osborne R, Ozgediz D, Pahari B, Pandian JD, Rivero AP, Padilla RP, Perez‐Ruiz F, Perico N, Phillips D, Pierce K, Pope CA 3rd, Porrini E, Pourmalek F, Raju M, Ranganathan D, Rehm JT, Rein DB, Remuzzi G, Rivara FP, Roberts T, de León FR, Rosenfeld LC, Rushton L, Sacco RL, Salomon JA, Sampson U, Sanman E, Schwebel DC, Segui‐Gomez M, Shepard DS, Singh D, Singleton J, Sliwa K, Smith E, Steer A, Taylor JA, Thomas B, Tleyjeh IM, Towbin JA, Truelsen T, Undurraga EA, Venketasubramanian N, Vijayakumar L, Vos T, Wagner GR, Wang M, Wang W, Watt K, Weinstock MA, Weintraub R, Wilkinson JD, Woolf AD, Wulf S, Yeh PH, Yip P, Zabetian A, Zheng ZJ, Lopez AD, Murray CJ, AlMazroa M, Memish ZA. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380: 2095–2128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Bleumink G, Knetsch AM, Sturkenboom MC, Straus SM, Hofman A, Deckers JW, Witteman JC, Stricker BH. Quantifying the heart failure epidemic: prevalence, incidence rate, lifetime risk and prognosis of heart failure: the Rotterdam Study. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 1614–1619. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Crespo‐Leiro MG, Metra M, Lund LH, Milicic D, Costanzo MR, Filippatos G, Gustafsson F, Tsui S, Barge‐Caballero E, de Jonge N, Frigerio M, Hamdan R, Hasin T, Hülsmann M, Nalbantgil S, Potena L, Bauersachs J, Gkouziouta A, Ruhparwar A, Ristic AD, Straburzynska‐Migaj E, McDonagh T, Seferovic P, Ruschitzka F. Advanced heart failure: a position statement of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail 2018; 20: 1505–1535. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, Falk V, González‐Juanatey JR, Harjola VP, Jankowska EA, Jessup M, Linde C, Nihoyannopoulos P, Parissis JT, Pieske B, Riley JP, Rosano GMC, Ruilope LM, Ruschitzka F, Rutten FH, van der Meer P, ESC Scientific Document Group . 2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J; 37: 2129–2200.27206819 [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Shah AM, Mann DL. In search of new therapeutic targets and strategies for heart failure: recent advances in basic science. Lancet 2011; 378: 704–712. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. The Lancet . Heart failure: the need for improved treatment and care. Lancet 2018; 392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Ronco C, Haapio M, House AA, Anavekar N, Bellomo R. Cardiorenal syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52: 1527–1539. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Anand IS. Anemia and chronic heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52: 501–511. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Strait JB, Lakatta EG. Aging‐associated cardiovascular changes and their relationship to heart failure. Heart Fail Clin 2012; 8: 143–164. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Dhingra R, Vasan RS. Diabetes and the risk of heart failure. Heart Fail Clin 2012; 8: 125–133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Frohlich ED, Susic D. Pressure overload. Heart Fail Clin 2012; 8: 21–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Frohlich E, Risk D. Mechanisms in hypertensive heart disease. Hypertension 1999; 34: 782–789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Azevedo PS, Polegato BF, Minicucci MF, Paiva SAR, Zornoff LAM. Cardiac remodeling: concepts, clinical impact, pathophysiological mechanisms and pharmacologic treatment. Arq Bras Cardiol 2016; 106: 62–69. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Eitel I, Blase P, Adams V, Hildebrand L, Desch S, Schuler G, Thiele H. Growth‐differentiation factor 15 as predictor of mortality in acute reperfused ST‐elevation myocardial infarction: insights from cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Heart 2011; 97: 632–640. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Corre J, Hébraud B, Bourin P. Concise review: growth differentiation factor 15 in pathology: a clinical role? Stem Cells Transl Med 2013; 2: 946–952. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Breit SN, Johnen H, Cook AD, Tsai VW, Mohammad MG, Kuffner T, Zhang HP, Marquis CP, Jiang L, Lockwood G, Lee‐Ng M, Husaini Y, Wu L, Hamilton JA, Brown DA. The TGF‐β superfamily cytokine, MIC‐1/GDF15: a pleotrophic cytokine with roles in inflammation, cancer and metabolism. Growth Factors 2011; 29: 187–195. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Adela R, Banerjee SK. GDF‐15 as a target and biomarker for diabetes and cardiovascular diseases: a translational prospective. J Diabetes Res 2015; 2015: 490842. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Koopmann J, Buckhaults P, Brown DA, Zahurak ML, Sato N, Fukushima N, Sokoll LJ, Chan DW, Yeo CJ, Hruban RH, Breit SN, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B, Goggins M. Serum macrophage inhibitory cytokine 1 as a marker of pancreatic and other periampullary cancers. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10: 2386–2392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Kempf T, Horn‐Wichmann R, Brabant G, Peter T, Allhoff T, Klein G, Drexler H, Johnston N, Wallentin L, Wollert KC. Circulating concentrations of growth‐differentiation factor 15 in apparently healthy elderly individuals and patients with chronic heart failure as assessed by a new immunoradiometric sandwich assay. Clin Chem 2006; 53: 284–291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Dominguez‐Rodriguez A, Abreu‐Gonzalez P, Hernandez‐Baldomero IF, Avanzas P, Bosa‐Ojeda F. Change in growth differentiation factor 15, but not C‐reactive protein, independently predicts major cardiac events in patients with non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Mediators Inflamm 2014; 2014: 929536. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Wollert KC, Kempf T, Giannitsis E, Bertsch T, Braun SL, Maier H, Reim M, Christenson RH. An automated assay for growth differentiation factor 15. J Appl Lab Med 2017; 1: 510–521. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Gohar A, Gonçalves I, Vrijenhoek J, Haitjema S, van Koeverden I, Nilsson J, de Borst GJ, de Vries JP, Pasterkamp G, den Ruijter HM, Björkbacka H, de Jager SCA. Circulating GDF‐15 levels predict future secondary manifestations of cardiovascular disease explicitly in women but not men with atherosclerosis. Int J Cardiol 2017; 241: 430–436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Meyer S, van der Meer P, van Deursen VM, Jaarsma T, van Veldhuisen DJ, van der Wal MHL, Hillege HL, Voors AA. Neurohormonal and clinical sex differences in heart failure. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 2538–2547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Zelniker TA, Jarolim P, Silverman MG, Bohula EA, Park JG, Bonaca MP, Scirica BM, Morrow DA. Prognostic role of GDF‐15 across the spectrum of clinical risk in patients with NSTE‐ACS. Clin Chem Lab Med 2019; 57: 1084–1092. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Benes J, Kotrc M, Wohlfahrt P, Conrad MJ, Franekova J, Jabor A, Lupinek P, Kautzner J, Melenovsky V, Jarolim P. The role of GDF‐15 in heart failure patients with chronic kidney disease. Can J Cardiol 2019; 35: 462–470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Yin J, Zhu Z, Guo D, Wang A, Zeng N, Zheng X, Peng Y, Zhong C, Wang G, Zhou Y, Chen CS, Chen J, Zhang Y, He J. Increased growth differentiation factor 15 is associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes of acute ischemic stroke. Clin Chem 2019; 65: 569–578. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Wollert KC, Kempf T, Peter T, Olofsson S, James S, Johnston N, Lindahl B, Horn‐Wichmann R, Brabant G, Simoons ML, Armstrong PW, Califf RM, Drexler H, Wallentin L. Prognostic value of growth‐differentiation factor‐15 in patients with non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome. Circulation 2007; 115: 962–971. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Wollert KC, Kempf T. Growth differentiation factor 15 in heart failure: an update. Curr Heart Fail Rep 2012; 9: 337–345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Bonaca MP, Morrow DA, Braunwald E, Cannon CP, Jiang S, Breher S, Sabatine MS, Kempf T, Wallentin L, Wollert KC. Growth differentiation factor‐15 and risk of recurrent events in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2011; 31: 203–210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Tzikas S, Palapies L, Bakogiannis C, Zeller T, Sinning C, Baldus S, Bickel C, Vassilikos V, Lackner KJ, Zeiher A, Münzel T, Blankenberg S, Keller T. GDF‐15 predicts cardiovascular events in acute chest pain patients. PLoS ONE 2017; 12: e0182314. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Wollert KC, Kempf T, Wallentin L. Growth differentiation factor 15 as a biomarker in cardiovascular disease. Clin Chem 2017; 63: 140–151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Kempf T, Eden M, Strelau J, Naguib M, Willenbockel C, Tongers J, Heineke J, Kotlarz D, Xu J, Molkentin JD, Niessen HW, Drexler H, Wollert KC. The transforming growth factor‐β superfamily member growth‐differentiation factor‐15 protects the heart from ischemia/reperfusion injury. Circ Res 2006; 98: 351–360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Kurmani S, Squire I. Acute heart failure: definition, classification and epidemiology. Curr Heart Fail Rep 2017; 14: 385–392. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Wettersten N, Maisel AS. Biomarkers for heart failure: an update for practitioners of internal medicine. Am J Med 2016; 129: 560–567. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Kempf T, Wollert KC. Growth‐differentiation factor‐15 in heart failure. Heart Fail Clin 2009; 5: 537–547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Kempf T, Björklund E, Olofsson S, Lindahl B, Allhoff T, Peter T, Tongers J, Wollert KC, Wallentin L. Growth‐differentiation factor‐15 improves risk stratification in ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 2858–2865. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Chan MMY, Santhanakrishnan R, Chong JPC, Chen Z, Tai BC, Liew OW, Ng TP, Ling LH, Sim D, Leong KTG, Yeo PSD, Ong HY, Jaufeerally F, Wong RCC, Chai P, Low AF, Richards AM, Lam CSP. Growth differentiation factor 15 in heart failure with preserved vs. reduced ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail 2016; 18: 81–88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Li J, Cui Y, Huang A, Li Q, Jia W, Liu K, Qi X. Additional diagnostic value of growth differentiation factor‐15 (GDF‐15) to N‐terminal B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) in patients with different stages of heart failure. Med Sci Monit 2018; 24: 4992–4999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Sinning C, Kempf T, Schwarzl M, Lanfermann S, Ojeda F, Schnabel RB, Zengin E, Wild PS, Lackner KJ, Munzel T, Blankenberg S, Wollert KC, Zeller T, Westermann D. Biomarkers for characterization of heart failure—distinction of heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction. Int J Cardiol 2017; 227: 272–277. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Berezin AE. Prognostication in different heart failure phenotypes: the role of circulating biomarkers. J Circ biomarkers 2016; 5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Rieder F, Kessler SP, West GA, Bhilocha S, de la Motte C, Sadler TM, Gopalan B, Stylianou E, Fiocchi C. Inflammation‐induced endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition: a novel mechanism of intestinal fibrosis. Am J Pathol 2011; 179: 2660–2673. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Bootcov MR, Bauskin AR, Valenzuela SM, Moore AG, Bansal M, He XY, Zhang HP, Donnellan M, Mahler S, Pryor K, Walsh BJ, Nicholson RC, Fairlie WD, Por SB, Robbins JM, Breit SN. MIC‐1, a novel macrophage inhibitory cytokine, is a divergent member of the TGF‐β superfamily. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94: 11514–11519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Harris P, Ralph P. Human leukemic models of myelomonocytic development: a review of the HL‐60 and U937 cell lines. J Leukoc Biol 1985; 37: 407–422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Massagué J. TGFβ signalling in context. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2012; 13: 616–630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Yokoyama‐Kobayashi M, Saeki M, Sekine S, Kato S. Human cDNA encoding a novel TGF‐β superfamily protein highly expressed in placenta. J Biochem 1997; 122: 622–626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Xiong Y, Walker K, Min X, Hale C, Tran T, Komorowski R, Yang J, Davda J, Nuanmanee N, Kemp D, Wang X, Liu H, Miller S, Lee KJ, Wang Z, Véniant MM. Long‐acting MIC‐1/GDF15 molecules to treat obesity: evidence from mice to monkeys. Sci Transl Med 2017; 9: eaan8732. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Mullican SE, Rangwala SM. Uniting GDF15 and GFRAL: therapeutic opportunities in obesity and beyond. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2018; 29: 560–570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Yang L, Chang CC, Sun Z, Madsen D, Zhu H, Padkjær SB, Wu X, Huang T, Hultman K, Paulsen SJ, Wang J, Bugge A, Frantzen JB, Nørgaard P, Jeppesen JF, Yang Z, Secher A, Chen H, Li X, John LM, Shan B, He Z, Gao X, Su J, Hansen KT, Yang W, Jørgensen SB. GFRAL is the receptor for GDF15 and is required for the anti‐obesity effects of the ligand. Nat Med 2017; 23: 1158–1166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Emmerson PJ, Wang F, du Y, Liu Q, Pickard RT, Gonciarz MD, Coskun T, Hamang MJ, Sindelar DK, Ballman KK, Foltz LA, Muppidi A, Alsina‐Fernandez J, Barnard GC, Tang JX, Liu X, Mao X, Siegel R, Sloan JH, Mitchell PJ, Zhang BB, Gimeno RE, Shan B, Wu X. The metabolic effects of GDF15 are mediated by the orphan receptor GFRAL. Nat Med 2017; 23: 1215–1219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Yamaguchi K, Cekanova M, McEntee M, Yoon JH, Fischer SM, Renes IB, van Seuningen I, Baek SJ. Peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor ligand MCC‐555 suppresses intestinal polyps in Apc Min/+ mice via extracellular signal‐regulated kinase and peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor‐dependent pathways. Mol Cancer Ther 2008; 7: 2779–2787. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Macia L, Tsai VWW, Nguyen AD, Johnen H, Kuffner T, Shi YC, Lin S, Herzog H, Brown DA, Breit SN, Sainsbury A. Macrophage inhibitory cytokine 1 (MIC‐1/GDF15) decreases food intake, body weight and improves glucose tolerance in mice on normal & obesogenic diets. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: e34868. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Chrysovergis K, Wang X, Kosak J, Lee SH, Kim JS, Foley JF, Travlos G, Singh S, Baek SJ, Eling TE. NAG‐1/GDF‐15 prevents obesity by increasing thermogenesis, lipolysis and oxidative metabolism. Int J Obes (Lond) 2014; 38: 1555–1564. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Mullican SE, Lin‐Schmidt X, Chin CN, Chavez JA, Furman JL, Armstrong AA, Beck SC, South VJ, Dinh TQ, Cash‐Mason TD, Cavanaugh CR, Nelson S, Huang C, Hunter MJ, Rangwala SM. GFRAL is the receptor for GDF15 and the ligand promotes weight loss in mice and nonhuman primates. Nat Med 2017; 23: 1150–1157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. de Jager SCA, Bermúdez B, Bot I, Koenen RR, Bot M, Kavelaars A, de Waard V, Heijnen CJ, Muriana FJG, Weber C, van Berkel TJC, Kuiper J, Lee SJ, Abia R, Biessen EAL. Growth differentiation factor 15 deficiency protects against atherosclerosis by attenuating CCR2‐mediated macrophage chemotaxis. J Exp Med 2011; 208: 217–225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Unsicker K, Spittau B, Krieglstein K. The multiple facets of the TGF‐β family cytokine growth/differentiation factor‐15/macrophage inhibitory cytokine‐1. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev 2013; 24: 373–384. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Xue H, Fu Z, Chen Y, Xing Y, Liu J, Zhu H, Zhou X. The association of growth differentiation factor‐15 with left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: e46534. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Eling TE, Baek SJ, Shim M, Lee CH. NSAID activated gene (NAG‐1), a modulator of tumorigenesis. J Biochem Mol Biol 2006; 39: 649–655. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Jiang J, Thalamuthu A, Ho JE, Mahajan A, Ek WE, Brown DA, Breit SN, Wang TJ, Gyllensten U, Chen MH, Enroth S, Januzzi JL Jr, Lind L, Armstrong NJ, Kwok JB, Schofield PR, Wen W, Trollor JN, Johansson Å, Morris AP, Vasan RS, Sachdev PS, Mather KA. A meta‐analysis of genome‐wide association studies of growth differentiation factor‐15 concentration in blood. Front Genet 2018; 9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Ho JE, Mahajan A, Chen MH, Larson MG, McCabe E, Ghorbani A, Cheng S, Johnson AD, Lindgren CM, Kempf T, Lind L, Ingelsson E, Vasan RS, Januzzi J, Wollert KC, Morris AP, Wang TJ. Clinical and genetic correlates of growth differentiation factor 15 in the community. Clin Chem 2012; 58: 1582–1591. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Cheung C‐L, Tan KCB, Au PCM, Li GHY, Cheung BMY. Evaluation of GDF15 as a therapeutic target of cardiometabolic diseases in human: a Mendelian randomization study. EBioMedicine 2019; 41: 85–90. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Jing R, Liu Q, Xie Q, Qian Z. Correlation between GDF 15 gene polymorphism and the collateral circulation in acute non‐ST segment elevated myocardial infarction. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015; 8: 14383–14387. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Wang X, Yang X, Sun K, Chen J, Song X, Wang H, Liu Z, Wang C, Zhang C, Hui R. The haplotype of the growth‐differentiation factor 15 gene is associated with left ventricular hypertrophy in human essential hypertension. Clin Sci 2009; 118: 137–145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Chen X, Shang XS, Wang YB, Fu ZH, Gao Y, Feng T. Correlation between GDF‐15 gene polymorphism and the formation of collateral circulation in acute ST‐elevation myocardial infarction. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2017; 63: 1049–1054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Chen Z, Xie F, Ma G, Feng Y, Qian Q, Liu N. Study of the association between growth differentiation factor 15 gene polymorphism and coronary artery disease in a Chinese population. Mol Biol Rep 2011; 38: 5085–5091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Teng M‐S, Hsu LA, Juan SH, Lin WC, Lee MC, Su CW, Wu S, Ko YL. A GDF15 3′ UTR variant, rs1054564, results in allele‐specific translational repression of GDF15 by hsa‐miR‐1233‐3p. PLoS ONE 2017; 12: e0183187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Hsu L‐A, Wu S, Juang JM, Chiang FT, Teng MS, Lin JF, Huang HL, Ko YL. Growth differentiation factor 15 may predict mortality of peripheral and coronary artery diseases and correlate with their risk factors. Mediators Inflamm 2017: 9398401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Zimmers TA, Jin X, Hsiao EC, McGrath S, Esquela AF, Koniaris LG. Growth differentiation factor‐15/macrophage inhibitory cytokine‐1 induction after kidney and lung injury. Shock 2005; 23: 543–548. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Bauskin AR, Brown DA, Junankar S, Rasiah KK, Eggleton S, Hunter M, Liu T, Smith D, Kuffner T, Pankhurst GJ, Johnen H, Russell PJ, Barret W, Stricker PD, Grygiel JJ, Kench JG, Henshall SM, Sutherland RL, Breit SN. The propeptide mediates formation of stromal stores of PROMIC‐1: role in determining prostate cancer outcome. Cancer Res 2005; 65: 2330–2336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Seidah NG, Sadr MS, Chrétien M, Mbikay M. The multifaceted proprotein convertases: their unique, redundant, complementary, and opposite functions. J Biol Chem 2013; 288: 21473–21481. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Li JJ, Liu J, Lupino K, Liu X, Zhang L, Pei L. Growth differentiation factor 15 maturation requires proteolytic cleavage by PCSK3, ‐5, and ‐6. Mol Cell Biol 2018; 38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Li S, Wang Y, Cao B, Wu Y, Ji L, Li YX, Liu M, Zhao Y, Qiao J, Wang H, Wang H, Han C, Wang YL. Maturation of growth differentiation factor 15 in human placental trophoblast cells depends on the interaction with matrix metalloproteinase‐26. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2014; 99: E2277–E2287. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Chapman HA, Riese RJ, Shi G‐P. Emerging roles for cysteine proteases in human biology. Annu Rev Physiol 1997; 59: 63–88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Arturo G‐T, Henry TD, Sangiorgi G, Spagnoli LG, Mauriello A, Conover C, Schwartz RS. Extracellular proteases in atherosclerosis and restenosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2005; 25: 1119–1127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Bauskin AR, Jiang L, Luo XW, Wu L, Brown DA, Breit SN. The TGF‐β superfamily cytokine MIC‐1/GDF15: secretory mechanisms facilitate creation of latent stromal stores. J Interferon Cytokine Res 2010; 30: 389–397. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Paulus WJ, Tschöpe C. A novel paradigm for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: comorbidities drive myocardial dysfunction and remodeling through coronary microvascular endothelial inflammation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 62: 263–271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Parsanathan R, Jain SK. Novel invasive and noninvasive cardiac‐specific biomarkers in obesity and cardiovascular diseases. Metab Syndr Relat Disord 2019; 18: 10–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Piek A, Du W, de Boer RA, Silljé HHW. Novel heart failure biomarkers: why do we fail to exploit their potential? Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2018; 55: 246–263. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Richter B, Koller L, Hohensinner PJ, Zorn G, Brekalo M, Berger R, Mörtl D, Maurer G, Pacher R, Huber K, Wojta J, Hülsmann M, Niessner A. A multi‐biomarker risk score improves prediction of long‐term mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. Int J Cardiol 2013; 168: 1251–1257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Böttner M, Laaff M, Schechinger B, Rappold G, Unsicker K, Suter‐Crazzolara C. Characterization of the rat, mouse, and human genes of growth/differentiation factor‐15/macrophage inhibiting cytokine‐1 (GDF‐15/MIC‐1). Gene 1999; 237: 105–111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Böttner M, Suter‐Crazzolara C, Schober A, Unsicker K. Expression of a novel member of the TGF‐β superfamily, growth/differentiation factor‐15/macrophage‐inhibiting cytokine‐1 (GDF‐15/MIC‐1) in adult rat tissues. Cell Tissue Res 1999; 297: 103–110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. de Lemos JA, McGuire DK, Drazner MH. B‐type natriuretic peptide in cardiovascular disease. Lancet 2003; 362: 316–322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Omland T, Røsjø H, Giannitsis E, Agewall S. Troponins in heart failure. Clin Chim Acta 2015; 443: 78–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Saunders JT, Nambi V, de Lemos JA, Chambless LE, Virani SS, Boerwinkle E, Hoogeveen RC, Liu X, Astor BC, Mosley TH, Folsom AR, Heiss G, Coresh J, Ballantyne CM. Cardiac troponin T measured by a highly sensitive assay predicts coronary heart disease, heart failure, and mortality in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Circulation 2011; 123: 1367–1376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Xue Y, Clopton P, Peacock WF, Maisel AS. Serial changes in high‐sensitive troponin I predict outcome in patients with decompensated heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 2011; 13: 37–42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. McCarthy CP, Januzzi JL. Soluble ST2 in heart failure. Heart Fail Clin 2018; 14: 41–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Dong R, Zhang M, Hu Q, Zheng S, Soh A, Zheng Y, Yuan H. Galectin‐3 as a novel biomarker for disease diagnosis and a target for therapy (Review). Int J Mol Med 2018; 41: 599–614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. van Kimmenade RR, Januzzi JL Jr, Ellinor PT, Sharma UC, Bakker JA, Low AF, Martinez A, Crijns HJ, MacRae CA, Menheere PP, Pinto YM. Utility of amino‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide, galectin‐3, and apelin for the evaluation of patients with acute heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 1217–1224. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Kempf T, von Haehling S, Peter T, Allhoff T, Cicoira M, Doehner W, Ponikowski P, Filippatos GS, Rozentryt P, Drexler H, Anker SD, Wollert KC. Prognostic utility of growth differentiation factor‐15 in patients with chronic heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50: 1054–1060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Daniels LB, Clopton P, Laughlin GA, Maisel AS, Barrett‐Connor E. Growth‐differentiation factor‐15 is a robust, independent predictor of 11‐year mortality risk in community‐dwelling older adults: the Rancho Bernardo Study. Circulation 2011; 123: 2101–2110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Liu T, Bauskin AR, Zaunders J, Brown DA, Pankhurst S, Russell PJ, Breit SN. Macrophage inhibitory cytokine 1 reduces cell adhesion and induces apoptosis in prostate cancer cells. Cancer Res 2003; 63: 5034–5040. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Chen S‐J, Karan D, Johansson SL, Lin FF, Zeckser J, Singh AP, Batra SK, Lin MF. Prostate‐derived factor as a paracrine and autocrine factor for the proliferation of androgen receptor‐positive human prostate cancer cells. Prostate 2007; 67: 557–571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Li P‐X, Wong J, Ayed A, Ngo D, Brade AM, Arrowsmith C, Austin RC, Klamut HJ. Placental transforming growth factor‐β is a downstream mediator of the growth arrest and apoptotic response of tumor cells to DNA damage and p53 overexpression. J Biol Chem 2000; 275: 20127–20135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Baek SJ, Kim KS, Nixon JB, Wilson LC, Eling TE. Cyclooxygenase inhibitors regulate the expression of a TGF‐β superfamily member that has proapoptotic and antitumorigenic activities. Mol Pharmacol 2001; 59: 901–908. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Schiegnitz E, Kämmerer PW, Koch FP, Krüger M, Berres M, al‐Nawas B. GDF 15 as an anti‐apoptotic, diagnostic and prognostic marker in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2012; 48: 608–614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Jones MF, Li XL, Subramanian M, Shabalina SA, Hara T, Zhu Y, Huang J, Yang Y, Wakefield LM, Prasanth KV, Lal A. Growth differentiation factor‐15 encodes a novel microRNA 3189 that functions as a potent regulator of cell death. Cell Death Differ 2015; 22: 1641–1653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. Lee S‐H, Bahn JH, Choi CK, Whitlock NC, English AE, Safe S, Baek SJ. ESE‐1/EGR‐1 pathway plays a role in tolfenamic acid‐induced apoptosis in colorectal cancer cells. Mol Cancer Ther 2008; 7: 3739–3750. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Yamaguchi K, Lee S‐H, Eling TE, Baek SJ. Identification of nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug‐activated gene (NAG‐1) as a novel downstream target of phosphatidylinositol 3‐kinase/AKT/GSK‐3β pathway. J Biol Chem 2004; 279: 49617–49623. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Li S, Ma Y‐M, Zheng P‐S, Zhang P. GDF15 promotes the proliferation of cervical cancer cells by phosphorylating AKT1 and Erk1/2 through the receptor ErbB2. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2018; 37: 80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Roth P, Junker M, Tritschler I, Mittelbronn M, Dombrowski Y, Breit SN, Tabatabai G, Wick W, Weller M, Wischhusen J. GDF‐15 contributes to proliferation and immune escape of malignant gliomas. Clin Cancer Res 2010; 16: 3851–3859. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Heger J, Schiegnitz E, von Waldthausen D, Anwar MM, Piper HM, Euler G. Growth differentiation factor 15 acts anti‐apoptotic and pro‐hypertrophic in adult cardiomyocytes. J Cell Physiol 2010; 224: 120–126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. D'Uva G, Aharonov A, Lauriola M, Kain D, Yahalom‐Ronen Y, Carvalho S, Weisinger K, Bassat E, Rajchman D, Yifa O, Lysenko M, Konfino T, Hegesh J, Brenner O, Neeman M, Yarden Y, Leor J, Sarig R, Harvey RP, Tzahor E. ERBB2 triggers mammalian heart regeneration by promoting cardiomyocyte dedifferentiation and proliferation. Nat Cell Biol 2015; 17: 627–638. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Leach JP, Martin JF. Cardiomyocyte proliferation for therapeutic regeneration. Curr Cardiol Rep 2018; 20: 63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Li J, Gao E, Vite A, Yi R, Gomez L, Goossens S, van Roy F, Radice GL. Alpha‐catenins control cardiomyocyte proliferation by regulating Yap activity. Circ Res 2015; 116: 70–79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Wang J, Liu S, Heallen T, Martin JF. The Hippo pathway in the heart: pivotal roles in development, disease, and regeneration. Nat Rev Cardiol 2018; 15: 672–684. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105. Ikeda S, Sadoshima J. Regulation of myocardial cell growth and death by the Hippo pathway. Circ J 2016; 80: 1511–1519. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Pefani D‐E, Pankova D, Abraham AG, Grawenda AM, Vlahov N, Scrace S, O'Neill E. TGF‐β targets the Hippo pathway scaffold RASSF1A to facilitate YAP/SMAD2 nuclear translocation. Mol Cell 2016; 63: 156–166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107. Szeto SG, Narimatsu M, Lu M, He X, Sidiqi AM, Tolosa MF, Chan L, de Freitas K, Bialik JF, Majumder S, Boo S, Hinz B, Dan Q, Advani A, John R, Wrana JL, Kapus A, Yuen DA. YAP/TAZ are mechanoregulators of TGF‐β–Smad signaling and renal fibrogenesis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2016; 27: 3117–3128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108. Ben Mimoun S, Mauviel A. Molecular mechanisms underlying TGF‐ß/Hippo signaling crosstalks—role of baso‐apical epithelial cell polarity. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 2018; 98: 75–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Tardiff JC. Cardiac hypertrophy: stressing out the heart. J Clin Invest 2006; 116: 1467–1470. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110. Kou H, Jin X, Gao D, Ma R, Dong X, Wei J, Wang X. Association between growth differentiation factor 15 and left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients and healthy adults. Clin Exp Hypertens 2018; 40: 8–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Xu X, Nie Y, Wang FF, Bai Y, Lv ZZ, Zhang YY, Li ZJ, Gao W. Growth differentiation factor (GDF)‐15 blocks norepinephrine‐induced myocardial hypertrophy via a novel pathway involving inhibition of epidermal growth factor receptor transactivation. J Biol Chem 2014; 289: 10084–10094. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Xu J, Kimball TR, Lorenz JN, Brown DA, Bauskin AR, Klevitsky R, Hewett TE, Breit SN, Molkentin JD. GDF15/MIC‐1 functions as a protective and antihypertrophic factor released from the myocardium in association with SMAD protein activation. Circ Res 2006; 98: 342–350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. Ago T, Sadoshima J. GDF15, a cardioprotective TGF‐β superfamily protein. Circ Res 2006; 98: 294–297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Zhang Y, Liang X, Liao S, Wang W, Wang J, Li X, Ding Y, Liang Y, Gao F, Yang M, Fu Q, Xu A, Chai YH, He J, Tse HF, Lian Q. Potent paracrine effects of human induced pluripotent stem cell‐derived mesenchymal stem cells attenuate doxorubicin‐induced cardiomyopathy. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 11235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115. Wehman B, Sharma S, Pietris N, Mishra R, Siddiqui OT, Bigham G, Li T, Aiello E, Murthi S, Pittenger M, Griffith B, Kaushal S. Mesenchymal stem cells preserve neonatal right ventricular function in a porcine model of pressure overload. Am J Physiol Circ Physiol 2016; 310: H1816–H1826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Bauersachs J, Widder JD. Endothelial dysfunction in heart failure. Pharmacol Rep 2008; 60: 119–126. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Lam CSP, Lund LH. Microvascular endothelial dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Heart 2016; 102: 257–259. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Alem MM. Endothelial dysfunction in chronic heart failure: assessment, findings, significance, and potential therapeutic targets. Int J Mol Sci 2019; 20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119. Mazagova M, Buikema H, Landheer SW, Vavrinec P, Buiten A, Henning RH, Deelman LE. Growth differentiation factor 15 impairs aortic contractile and relaxing function through altered caveolar signaling of the endothelium. Am J Physiol Circ Physiol 2013; 304: H709–H718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120. Paulus WJ, Tschöpe C. A novel paradigm for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 62: 263–271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121. Lind L, Wallentin L, Kempf T, Tapken H, Quint A, Lindahl B, Olofsson S, Venge P, Larsson A, Hulthe J, Elmgren A, Wollert KC. Growth‐differentiation factor‐15 is an independent marker of cardiovascular dysfunction and disease in the elderly: results from the Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors (PIVUS) Study. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 2346–2353. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122. Wang S, Li M, Zhang W, Hua H, Wang N, Zhao J, Ge J, Jiang X, Zhang Z, Ye D, Yang C. Growth differentiation factor 15 promotes blood vessel growth by stimulating cell cycle progression in repair of critical‐sized calvarial defect. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 9027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123. Park H, Kim C‐H, Jeong J‐H, Park M, Kim KS. GDF15 contributes to radiation‐induced senescence through the ROS‐mediated p16 pathway in human endothelial cells. Oncotarget 2016; 7: 9634–9644. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124. Wu Q, Jiang D, Matsuda JL, Ternyak K, Zhang B, Chu HW. Cigarette smoke induces human airway epithelial senescence via growth differentiation factor 15 production. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2016; 55: 429–438. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125. Zeisberg EM, Tarnavski O, Zeisberg M, Dorfman AL, McMullen J, Gustafsson E, Chandraker A, Yuan X, Pu WT, Roberts AB, Neilson EG, Sayegh MH, Izumo S, Kalluri R. Endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition contributes to cardiac fibrosis. Nat Med 2007; 13: 952–961. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126. Li Y, Lui KO, Zhou B. Reassessing endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition in cardiovascular diseases. Nat Rev Cardiol 2018; 15: 445–456. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127. Min K‐W, Liggett JL, Silva G, Wu WW, Wang R, Shen RF, Eling TE, Baek SJ. NAG‐1/GDF15 accumulates in the nucleus and modulates transcriptional regulation of the Smad pathway. Oncogene 2016; 35: 377–388. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128. Min K‐W, Zhang X, Imchen T, Baek SJ. A peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor ligand MCC‐555 imparts anti‐proliferative response in pancreatic cancer cells by PPARγ‐independent up‐regulation of KLF4. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2012; 263: 225–232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129. Li C, Wang J, Kong J, Tang J, Wu Y, Xu E, Zhang H, Lai M. GDF15 promotes EMT and metastasis in colorectal cancer. Oncotarget 2016; 7: 860–872. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130. Jiang G, Liu C, Zhang W. IL‐17A and GDF15 are able to induce epithelial‐mesenchymal transition of lung epithelial cells in response to cigarette smoke. Exp Ther Med 2018; 16: 12–20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131. Liu Y. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of renal fibrosis. Nat Rev Nephrol 2011; 7: 684–696. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132. Duffield JS. Cellular and molecular mechanisms in kidney fibrosis. J Clin Invest 2014; 124: 2299–2306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133. Travers JG, Kamal FA, Robbins J, Yutzey KE, Blaxall BC. Cardiac Fibrosis. Circ Res 2016; 118: 1021–1040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134. Brown RD, Ambler SK, Mitchell MD, Long CS. The cardiac fibroblast: therapeutic target in myocardial remodeling and failure. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2005; 45: 657–687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135. Khan R, Sheppard R. Fibrosis in heart disease: understanding the role of transforming growth factor‐β1 in cardiomyopathy, valvular disease and arrhythmia. Immunology 2006; 118: 10–24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136. Janicki JS, Brower GL. The role of myocardial fibrillar collagen in ventricular remodeling and function. J Card Fail 2002; 8: S319–S325. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137. Lok SI, Winkens B, Goldschmeding R, van Geffen A, Nous FM, van Kuik J, van der Weide P, Klöpping C, Kirkels JH, Lahpor JR, Doevendans PA, de Jonge N, de Weger RA. Circulating growth differentiation factor‐15 correlates with myocardial fibrosis in patients with non‐ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy and decreases rapidly after left ventricular assist device support. Eur J Heart Fail 2012; 14: 1249–1256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138. Wang F‐F, Chen BX, Yu HY, Mi L, Li ZJ, Gao W. Correlation between growth differentiation factor‐15 and collagen metabolism indicators in patients with myocardial infarction and heart failure. J Geriatr Cardiol 2016; 13: 88–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139. Kim Y‐I, Shin H‐W, Chun Y‐S, Park J‐W. CST3 and GDF15 ameliorate renal fibrosis by inhibiting fibroblast growth and activation. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2018; 500: 288–295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140. Kim Y‐I, Shin HW, Chun YS, Cho CH, Koh J, Chung DH, Park JW. Epithelial cell‐derived cytokines CST3 and GDF15 as potential therapeutics for pulmonary fibrosis. Cell Death Dis 2018; 9: 506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141. Ishige T, Nishimura M, Satoh M, Fujimoto M, Fukuyo M, Semba T, Kado S, Tsuchida S, Sawai S, Matsushita K, Togawa A, Matsubara H, Kaneda A, Nomura F. Combined secretomics and transcriptomics revealed cancer‐derived GDF15 is involved in diffuse‐type gastric cancer progression and fibroblast activation. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 21681. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142. Luan HH, Wang A, Hilliard BK, Carvalho F, Rosen CE, Ahasic AM, Herzog EL, Kang I, Pisani MA, Yu S, Zhang C, Ring AM, Young LH, Medzhitov R. GDF15 is an inflammation‐induced central mediator of tissue tolerance. Cell 2019; 178: 1231–1244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143. Frangogiannis NG. Regulation of the inflammatory response in cardiac repair. Circ Res 2012; 110: 159–173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144. Frangogiannis NG. The inflammatory response in myocardial injury, repair, and remodelling. Nat Rev Cardiol 2014; 11: 255–265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145. Frangogiannis NG. The mechanistic basis of infarct healing. Antioxid Redox Signal 2006; 8: 1907–1939. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146. Gao X‐M, Ming Z, Su Y, Fang L, Kiriazis H, Xu Q, Dart AM, du XJ. Infarct size and post‐infarct inflammation determine the risk of cardiac rupture in mice. Int J Cardiol 2010; 143: 20–28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147. Kempf T, Zarbock A, Widera C, Butz S, Stadtmann A, Rossaint J, Bolomini‐Vittori M, Korf‐Klingebiel M, Napp LC, Hansen B, Kanwischer A, Bavendiek U, Beutel G, Hapke M, Sauer MG, Laudanna C, Hogg N, Vestweber D, Wollert KC. GDF‐15 is an inhibitor of leukocyte integrin activation required for survival after myocardial infarction in mice. Nat Med 2011; 17: 581–588. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148. Schlittenhardt D, Schober A, Strelau J, Bonaterra GA, Schmiedt W, Unsicker K, Metz J, Kinscherf R. Involvement of growth differentiation factor‐15/macrophage inhibitory cytokine‐1 (GDF‐15/MIC‐1) in oxLDL‐induced apoptosis of human macrophages in vitro and in arteriosclerotic lesions. Cell Tissue Res 2004; 318: 325–333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149. Bonaterra GA, Zügel S, Thogersen J, Walter SA, Haberkorn U, Strelau J, Kinscherf R. Growth differentiation factor‐15 deficiency inhibits atherosclerosis progression by regulating interleukin‐6‐dependent inflammatory response to vascular injury. J Am Heart Assoc 2012; 1: e002550. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150. Ahmad T, Wang T, O'Brien EC, Samsky MD, Pura JA, Lokhnygina Y, Rogers JG, Hernandez AF, Craig D, Bowles DE, Milano CA, Shah SH, Januzzi JL, Felker GM, Patel CB. Effects of left ventricular assist device support on biomarkers of cardiovascular stress, fibrosis, fluid homeostasis, inflammation, and renal injury. JACC Hear Fail 2015; 3: 30–39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151. Metra M, Ponikowski P, Cotter G, Davison BA, Felker GM, Filippatos G, Greenberg BH, Hua TA, Severin T, Unemori E, Voors AA, Teerlink JR. Effects of serelaxin in subgroups of patients with acute heart failure: results from RELAX‐AHF. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 3128–3136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152. Cotter G, Voors AA, Prescott MF, Felker GM, Filippatos G, Greenberg BH, Pang PS, Ponikowski P, Milo O, Hua TA, Qian M, Severin TM, Teerlink JR, Metra M, Davison BA. Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF‐15) in patients admitted for acute heart failure: results from the RELAX‐AHF study. Eur J Heart Fail 2015; 17: 1133–1143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153. Eschenhagen T, Bolli R, Braun T, Field LJ, Fleischmann BK, Frisén J, Giacca M, Hare JM, Houser S, Lee RT, Marbán E, Martin JF, Molkentin JD, Murry CE, Riley PR, Ruiz‐Lozano P, Sadek HA, Sussman MA, Hill JA. Cardiomyocyte regeneration. Circulation 2017; 136: 680–686. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154. Celermajer DS. Endothelial dysfunction: does it matter? Is it reversible? J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 30: 325–333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155. Pillai ICL, Li S, Romay M, Lam L, Lu Y, Huang J, Dillard N, Zemanova M, Rubbi L, Wang Y, Lee J, Xia M, Liang O, Xie YH, Pellegrini M, Lusis AJ, Deb A. Cardiac fibroblasts adopt osteogenic fates and can be targeted to attenuate pathological heart calcification. Cell Stem Cell 2017; 20: 218–232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156. Cheng H‐M, Wang J‐J, Chen C‐H. The role of vascular calcification in heart failure and cognitive decline. Pulse 2017; 5: 144–153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157. Nance JW, Crane GM, Halushka MK, Fishman EK, Zimmerman SL. Myocardial calcifications: pathophysiology, etiologies, differential diagnoses, and imaging findings. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2015; 9: 58–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158. Lala A, Desai AS. The role of coronary artery disease in heart failure. Heart Fail Clin 2014; 10: 353–365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159. Madhavan MV, Tarigopula M, Mintz GS, Maehara A, Stone GW, Généreux P. Coronary artery calcification: pathogenesis and prognostic implications. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63: 1703–1714. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160. Bakhshi H, Ambale‐Venkatesh B, Yang X, Ostovaneh MR, Wu CO, Budoff M, Bahrami H, Wong ND, Bluemke DA, Lima JAC. Progression of coronary artery calcium and incident heart failure: the multi‐ethnic study of atherosclerosis. J Am Heart Assoc 2017; 6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161. Leening MJG, Elias‐Smale SE, Kavousi M, Felix JF, Deckers JW, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M, Hofman A, Steyerberg EW, Stricker BH, Witteman JC. Coronary calcification and the risk of heart failure in the elderly. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012; 5: 874–880. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162. Liu W, Zhang Y, Yu CM, Ji QW, Cai M, Zhao YX, Zhou YJ. Current understanding of coronary artery calcification. J Geriatr Cardiol 2015; 12: 668–675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163. Johnen H, Kuffner T, Brown DA, Wu BJ, Stocker R, Breit SN. Increased expression of the TGF‐b superfamily cytokine MIC‐1/GDF15 protects ApoE−/− mice from the development of atherosclerosis. Cardiovasc Pathol 2012; 21: 499–505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164. Yao Y, Jumabay M, Ly A, Radparvar M, Cubberly MR, Boström KI. A role for the endothelium in vascular calcification. Circ Res 2013; 113: 495–504. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165. Sánchez‐Duffhues G, García de Vinuesa A, van de Pol V, Geerts ME, de Vries MR, Janson SG, van Dam H, Lindeman JH, Goumans MJ, ten Dijke P. Inflammation induces endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition and promotes vascular calcification through downregulation of BMPR2. J Pathol 2019; 247: 333–346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from ESC Heart Failure are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES