Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparing patients who had lower versus those who had higher NT-proBNP at the follow-up visit

From: The combined role of NT-proBNP and LV-GLS in the detection of early subtle chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity in breast cancer female patients

Variables Patients with lower FU NT-proBNP (n = 23) Patients with higher FU NT-proBNP (n = 50)
  Baseline FU p value Baseline FU p value
2D-LVEF 61.3 ± 5.8 62.5 ± 7.1 0.47 61.8 ± 4.7 59.3 ± 4.4 0.012
Mean delta 2D-LVEF 1.2 ± 7.7 − 2.5 ± 6.9
3D-LVEF 60.6 ± 5.6 60.3 ± 6.7 0.87 62.4 ± 5.8 59.0 ± 6.4 0.01
Mean delta 3D-LVEF − 0.3 ± 8.3 − 2.7 ± 6.9
2D LV-GLS − 21.0 ± 1.9 − 20.1 ± 1.7 0.055 − 21.7 ± 2.4 − 19.4 ± 2.2 <0.001
Mean delta 2D LV-GLS − 0.3 ± 0.6 − 2.3 ± 1.8
Median NT-proBNP, (range), pg/ml 37.5 (66.0) 32.1 (62.9) <0.001 23.7 (446.2) 91.5 (949.5) <0.001
Median NT-proBNP change (range), pg/ml − 5.5 (15.6) 46.1 (515.4)
  1. FU follow-up, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, GLS global longitudinal strain