TY - JOUR
T1 - Blood biomarkers for the prediction of outcome after cardiac arrest
T2 - an international prospective observational study within the Targeted Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trial
AU - Moseby-Knappe, Marion
AU - Levin, Helena
AU - Ullén, Susann
AU - Zetterberg, Henrik
AU - Blennow, Kaj
AU - Lagebrant, Alice
AU - Dankiewicz, Josef
AU - Jakobsen, Janus C.
AU - Lilja, Gisela
AU - Nichol, Alistair D.
AU - Eastwood, Glenn
AU - Ainscough, Kate
AU - Thomas, Matthew J.C.
AU - Grejs, Anders M.
AU - Keeble, Thomas R.
AU - Rylander, Christian
AU - Düring, Joachim
AU - Wise, Matt P.
AU - Hovdenes, Jan
AU - Storm, Christian
AU - Borgquist, Ola
AU - Cariou, Alain
AU - Deye, Nicolas
AU - Lascarrou, Jean Baptiste
AU - Bannard-Smith, Jonathan
AU - Undén, Johan
AU - Vignon, Philippe
AU - Legriel, Stéphane
AU - Šmíd, Ondřej
AU - Pogson, David
AU - Karasek, Jiri
AU - McGuigan, Peter J.
AU - Joannidis, Michael
AU - Kirkegaard, Hans
AU - Bewley, Jeremy
AU - Christensen, Steffen
AU - Maccaroni, Maria Rita
AU - Valerianova, Anna
AU - Lundin, Andreas
AU - Lybeck, Anna
AU - Leithner, Christoph
AU - Varhaník, Filip
AU - Sweet, Katie
AU - Walden, Andrew
AU - Friberg, Hans
AU - Cronberg, Tobias
AU - Nielsen, Niklas
AU - TTM2 biobank study investigators
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2025/12/11
Y1 - 2025/12/11
N2 - BACKGROUND: Prognostication of recovery in patients who are unconscious following cardiac arrest can be guided by concentrations of brain injury biomarkers in the blood. The optimal biomarker and cutoff concentrations for the prediction of outcome remain unknown. In this study, we aimed to evaluate which biomarker of brain injury is most accurate for predicting functional outcome after cardiac arrest, and to evaluate cutoff levels for the prediction of good and poor outcome.METHODS: This study was a prospective, international, observational biomarker study within the international Targeted Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trial including adults aged 18 years or older with a presumed cardiac cause or unknown cause of arrest. Patients were recruited from 24 European hospitals. Serum samples were collected at 0, 24, 48, and 72 h after admission to intensive care units. Concentrations of neuron-specific enolase, S100, neurofilament light, and glial fibrillary acidic protein were analysed with Elecsys electrochemiluminescence immunoassays. The primary outcome was 6-month good (modified Rankin Scale 0-3) or poor (modified Rankin Scale 4-6) functional outcome. Prognostic accuracy was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The biomarker with the highest AUROC at each timepoint was compared with that of the second highest marker using DeLong's test. As pre-specified, to account for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni correction, a p value of less than 0·0125 was considered statistically significant.FINDINGS: Between April, 2018, and January, 2020, 113 (12%) of 932 eligible patients were excluded due to death, missed sampling, or missing outcome data. 661 (81%) of 819 included patients were male and 158 (19%) were female, the mean age was 64 years (SD 13), and 418 (51%) had a poor outcome. In patients who were unconscious, neurofilament light predicted functional outcome with AUROCs at 0, 24, 48, and 72 h of 0·77 (95% CI 0·73-0·80), 0·92 (0·90-0·94), 0·93 (0·91-0·95), and 0·93 (0·91-0·95), respectively. Glial fibrillary acidic protein achieved an AUROC of 0·74 (95% CI 0·70-0·77) at 0 h, 0·87 (0·84-0·90) at 24 h, 0·87 (0·84-0·90) at 48 h, and 0·87 (0·84-0·91) at 72 h. Neuron-specific enolase predicted functional outcome with an AUROC of 0·61 (95% CI 0·56-0·65) at 0 h, 0·78 (0·75-0·82) at 24 h, 0·85 (0·81-0·88) at 48 h, and 0·86 (0·82-0·89) at 72 h. S100 achieved an AUROC of 0·74 (95% CI 0·71-0·78) at 0 h, 0·84 (0·81-0·87) at 24 h, 0·79 (0·75-0·82) at 48 h, and 0·78 (0·74-0·82) at 72 h. Neurofilament light had a statistically significantly higher AUROC than the second highest marker, glial fibrillary acidic protein, at 24, 48, and 72 h (p<0·0001), but not at 0 h (p=0·27).INTERPRETATION: Neurofilament light is a highly accurate predictor of long-term outcome after cardiac arrest and superior to other relevant biomarkers evaluated in this study.FUNDING: The Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet), the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation, the Stig and Ragna Gorthon Foundation, the Knutsson Foundation, the Laerdal Foundation, the Hans-Gabriel and Alice Trolle-Wachtmeister Foundation for Medical Research, the Bundy Academy at Lund University, Regional Research Support in Skåne, the Swedish Government, and Roche Diagnostics International.
AB - BACKGROUND: Prognostication of recovery in patients who are unconscious following cardiac arrest can be guided by concentrations of brain injury biomarkers in the blood. The optimal biomarker and cutoff concentrations for the prediction of outcome remain unknown. In this study, we aimed to evaluate which biomarker of brain injury is most accurate for predicting functional outcome after cardiac arrest, and to evaluate cutoff levels for the prediction of good and poor outcome.METHODS: This study was a prospective, international, observational biomarker study within the international Targeted Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trial including adults aged 18 years or older with a presumed cardiac cause or unknown cause of arrest. Patients were recruited from 24 European hospitals. Serum samples were collected at 0, 24, 48, and 72 h after admission to intensive care units. Concentrations of neuron-specific enolase, S100, neurofilament light, and glial fibrillary acidic protein were analysed with Elecsys electrochemiluminescence immunoassays. The primary outcome was 6-month good (modified Rankin Scale 0-3) or poor (modified Rankin Scale 4-6) functional outcome. Prognostic accuracy was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The biomarker with the highest AUROC at each timepoint was compared with that of the second highest marker using DeLong's test. As pre-specified, to account for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni correction, a p value of less than 0·0125 was considered statistically significant.FINDINGS: Between April, 2018, and January, 2020, 113 (12%) of 932 eligible patients were excluded due to death, missed sampling, or missing outcome data. 661 (81%) of 819 included patients were male and 158 (19%) were female, the mean age was 64 years (SD 13), and 418 (51%) had a poor outcome. In patients who were unconscious, neurofilament light predicted functional outcome with AUROCs at 0, 24, 48, and 72 h of 0·77 (95% CI 0·73-0·80), 0·92 (0·90-0·94), 0·93 (0·91-0·95), and 0·93 (0·91-0·95), respectively. Glial fibrillary acidic protein achieved an AUROC of 0·74 (95% CI 0·70-0·77) at 0 h, 0·87 (0·84-0·90) at 24 h, 0·87 (0·84-0·90) at 48 h, and 0·87 (0·84-0·91) at 72 h. Neuron-specific enolase predicted functional outcome with an AUROC of 0·61 (95% CI 0·56-0·65) at 0 h, 0·78 (0·75-0·82) at 24 h, 0·85 (0·81-0·88) at 48 h, and 0·86 (0·82-0·89) at 72 h. S100 achieved an AUROC of 0·74 (95% CI 0·71-0·78) at 0 h, 0·84 (0·81-0·87) at 24 h, 0·79 (0·75-0·82) at 48 h, and 0·78 (0·74-0·82) at 72 h. Neurofilament light had a statistically significantly higher AUROC than the second highest marker, glial fibrillary acidic protein, at 24, 48, and 72 h (p<0·0001), but not at 0 h (p=0·27).INTERPRETATION: Neurofilament light is a highly accurate predictor of long-term outcome after cardiac arrest and superior to other relevant biomarkers evaluated in this study.FUNDING: The Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet), the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation, the Stig and Ragna Gorthon Foundation, the Knutsson Foundation, the Laerdal Foundation, the Hans-Gabriel and Alice Trolle-Wachtmeister Foundation for Medical Research, the Bundy Academy at Lund University, Regional Research Support in Skåne, the Swedish Government, and Roche Diagnostics International.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105025003527&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S2213-2600(25)00363-7
DO - 10.1016/S2213-2600(25)00363-7
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 41391459
AN - SCOPUS:105025003527
SN - 2213-2600
JO - The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
JF - The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
ER -