Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Continuing Education
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Continuing Education
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleClinical Investigations

123I-MIBG Imaging for Prediction of Mortality and Potentially Fatal Events in Heart Failure: The ADMIRE-HFX Study

Jagat Narula, Myron Gerson, Gregory S. Thomas, Manuel D. Cerqueira and Arnold F. Jacobson
Journal of Nuclear Medicine July 2015, 56 (7) 1011-1018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.156406
Jagat Narula
1Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Myron Gerson
2University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gregory S. Thomas
3Long Beach Memorial, Long Beach, California, and University of California, Irvine, Orange, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Manuel D. Cerqueira
4Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arnold F. Jacobson
1Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    Lower mortality risk based on preserved myocardial innervation. Prediction of risk for composite endpoint of death or death-equivalent event is improved with addition of H/M. (A) Image from 37-y-old man with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, LVEF of 28%, and BNP of 378 ng/mL. Baseline 2-variable model predicted 21% (intermediate) 2-y risk. 123I-MIBG H/M was 1.69. Three-variable model (LVEF, BNP, and H/M) predicted 14% (intermediate) risk. Risk for all-cause mortality based on H/M alone (Fig. 4) was 6% (low). (B) Image from 51-y-old woman with ischemic HF, LVEF of 30%, and BNP of 166 ng/mL. Baseline 2-variable model estimated 13% (intermediate) 2-y risk for composite mortality endpoint. H/M was 1.80. Three-variable model (LVEF, BNP, and H/M) estimated 7% (low) risk. No subject in trial with H/M ≥ 1.80 experienced all-cause mortality.

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    Kaplan–Meier all-cause mortality survival curves based on H/Ms of <1.25, 1.25–1.64, and ≥1.65. Mortality risk is significantly stratified by dividing population on the basis of mean H/M (1.44) ± SD (0.20). Two-year mortality was 3.1% for H/M ≥ 1.65 (n = 147), 11.8% for H/M = 1.25–1.64 (n = 660), and 19.1% for H/M < 1.25 (n = 154).

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    Two-year all-cause mortality rate in relation to H/M intervals. Two-year all-cause mortality rates based on 0.1 increments of H/M show progressive decline from maximum of 29.4% for H/M < 1.10. There were no deaths among 47 subjects with H/M ≥ 1.80.

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    Occurrence of fatal and potentially fatal arrhythmic events (sudden death, resuscitated arrest, ICD defibrillation) (n = 70) in relation to H/M. Peak occurrence was in 1.30–1.39 range, with progressive decline for higher H/Ms. There were no fatal or potentially fatal arrhythmic events among subjects with H/M ≥ 1.80.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Baseline Clinical Characteristics of Study Subjects

    VariableNo. of subjects with dataAll subjectsAlive (n = 863)Dead (n = 101)P
    Age* (y)96462 ± 1262 ± 1267 ± 14<0.0001
    Male sex (%)964808085NS
    Ischemic etiology (%)964666570NS
    NYHA II (%)964838378NS
    Ejection fraction* (%)96427 ± 627 ± 625 ± 60.0004
    Systolic blood pressure* (mm Hg)963123 ± 19123 ± 19123 ± 20NS
    ICD at enrollment (%)9641920130.08
    ICD by death or end of study (%)9644344320.02
    QRS width* (ms)951120 ± 29119 ± 29126 ± 290.02
    ACEI (%)964727271NS
    ARB (%)964232322NS
    β blocker (%)9649292870.09
    Aldosterone blocker (%)964393936NS
    Digoxin (%)964242427NS
    Statin (%)964676767NS
    Sodium* (meq/dL)947139 ± 3139 ± 3139 ± 4NS
    Creatinine* (mg/dL)9461.20 ± 0.371.17 ± 0.341.41 ± 0.49<0.0001
    Glomerular filtration rate by MDRD* (mL/min)94668 ± 2169 ± 2059 ± 24<0.0001
    • ↵* Data are mean ± SD.

    • NS = not statistically significant; ACEI = angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB = angiotensin receptor blocker; MDRD = modification of diet in renal disease.

    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Cox Proportional Hazards Analysis for All-Cause Mortality

    ModelNo. of deathsVariableHRP
    Primary list of factors without H/M (n = 964)101 (10.5%)Age1.04 (1.02, 1.05)<0.001
    Primary list of factors with H/M (n = 961)101 (10.5%)H/M0.08 (0.03, 0.24)<0.001
    Age1.03 (1.01, 1.05)<0.001
    Secondary list of factors without H/M (n = 926)97 (10.5%)Age1.02 (1.00, 1.04)0.024
    Log BNP4.80 (3.10, 7.43)<0.001
    Secondary list of factors with H/M (n = 926)97 (10.5%)H/M0.23 (0.07, 0.76)0.016
    Age1.02 (1.00, 1.04)0.018
    Log BNP4.05 (2.56, 6.39)<0.001
    • Data in parentheses are 95% CI.

    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Multivariate Logistic Regression Model and ROC Curve Analysis for 1-Year All-Cause Mortality

    FactorSignificant variableOdds ratio estimateROC AUCP for AUC difference
    Primary list without H/M (n = 899)Age1.031 (1.005, 1.058)0.583 (0.490, 0.677)
    Primary list with H/M (n = 898)Age1.028 (1.002, 1.056)0.684 (0.608, 0.760)0.027
    H/M0.034 (0.006, 0.186)
    Secondary list without H/M (n = 864)Log BNP6.049 (3.172, 11.535)0.740 (0.670, 0.811)
    Secondary list with H/M (n = 863)Log BNP4.859 (2.476, 9.537)0.754 (0.687, 0.821)0.302
    H/M0.130 (0.021, 0.818)
    • Data in parentheses are 95% CI.

    • View popup
    TABLE 4

    Multivariate Logistic Regression Model and ROC Curve Analysis for 2-Year All-Cause Mortality

    FactorSignificant variablesOdds ratio estimateROC AUCP for AUC difference
    Primary list without H/M (n = 760)Age1.041 (1.021, 1.062)0.650 (0.587, 0.713)
    Lipid-lowering drugs at baseline0.574 (0.353, 0.934)
    NYHA classification1.708 (1.006, 2.899)
    Primary list with H/M (n = 759)Age1.039 (1.019, 1.060)0.687 (0.628, 0.746)0.058
    Lipid-lowering drugs at baseline0.565 (0.344, 0.928)
    H/M0.070 (0.020, 0.238)
    Secondary list without H/M (n = 731)Age1.02 (1.00, 1.05)0.751 (0.697, 0.805)
    Lipid-lowering drugs at baseline0.55 (0.33, 0.92)
    Log BNP5.45 (3.26, 9.12)
    Secondary list with H/MAge1.03 (1.00, 1.047)0.757 (0.704, 0.810)0.475
    Lipid-lowering drugs at baseline0.54 (0.32, 0.91)
    Log BNP4.56 (2.67, 7.77)
    H/M0.19 (0.05, 0.73)
    • Data in parentheses are 95% CI.

    • View popup
    TABLE 5

    Multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards Model for Composite of All-Cause Mortality, Resuscitation, and ICD Defibrillation Using Secondary List of Factors

    ModelNumber of eventsVariableHRP
    Without H/M (n = 926)130 (14.0%)LVEF0.96 (0.93, 0.99)0.002
    Log BNP3.07 (2.14, 4.41)<0.001
    With H/M (n = 924)129 (14.0%)H/M0.24 (0.08, 0.68)0.008
    LVEF0.96 (0.94, 0.99)0.004
    Log BNP2.56 (1.76, 3.72)<0.001
    • Data in parentheses are 95% CI.

    • View popup
    TABLE 6

    Multivariate Logistic Regression Model for 2-Year Composite of All-Cause Mortality, Resuscitation, and ICD Defibrillation Using Secondary List of Factors

    ModelSignificant variableOdds ratio estimateROC AUC
    Without H/M (n = 735)History of hypertension1.70 (1.08, 2.66)0.728* (0.681, 0.776)
    Lipid-lowering drugs at baseline0.61 (0.39, 0.97)
    LVEF0.95 (0.92, 0.98)
    Log BNP3.62 (2.37, 5.52)
    With H/M (n = 734)Log BNP3.03 (1.96, 4.69)0.733* (0.686, 0.779)
    History of hypertension1.62 (1.03, 2.54)
    Lipid-lowering drugs at baseline0.613 (0.387, 0.973)
    LVEF0.956 (0.926, 0.988)
    H/M0.227 (0.069, 0.743)
    • ↵* P = 0.408.

    • Data in parentheses are 95% CI.

    • View popup
    TABLE 7

    Net Reclassification Improvement Analysis

    Model with LVEF, log BNP, and H/M
    Model with LVEF and log BNPLow probability (<8%)Intermediate probability (8%–24%)High probability (>24%)
    Subjects with events
     Low probability (<8%)940
     Intermediate probability (8%–24%)2509
     High probability (>24%)0350
    Subjects without events
     Low probability (<8%)180290
     Intermediate probability (8%–24%)7134729
     High probability (>24%)028113
    • Net gain in reclassification (event) = 8/127 = 0.063 (P = 0.059). Net gain in reclassification (no event) = 41/797 = 0.051 (P = 0.001). Net reclassification improvement: 0.114 (P = 0.002). Table includes only subjects with results for all 3 variables.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 56 (7)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 56, Issue 7
July 1, 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
123I-MIBG Imaging for Prediction of Mortality and Potentially Fatal Events in Heart Failure: The ADMIRE-HFX Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
123I-MIBG Imaging for Prediction of Mortality and Potentially Fatal Events in Heart Failure: The ADMIRE-HFX Study
Jagat Narula, Myron Gerson, Gregory S. Thomas, Manuel D. Cerqueira, Arnold F. Jacobson
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jul 2015, 56 (7) 1011-1018; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.115.156406

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
123I-MIBG Imaging for Prediction of Mortality and Potentially Fatal Events in Heart Failure: The ADMIRE-HFX Study
Jagat Narula, Myron Gerson, Gregory S. Thomas, Manuel D. Cerqueira, Arnold F. Jacobson
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jul 2015, 56 (7) 1011-1018; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.115.156406
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Nuclear Imaging of the Cardiac Sympathetic Nervous System: A Disease-Specific Interpretation in Heart Failure
  • Simplified Quantification and Acquisition Protocol for 123I-MIBG Dynamic SPECT
  • Quantification and Determination of Normal 123I-Meta Iodobenzylguanidine Heart-to-Mediastinum Ratio (HMR) from Cardiac SPECT/CT and Correlation with Planar HMR
  • Variability in Heart-to-Mediastinum Ratio from Planar 123I-MIBG Images of a Thorax Phantom for 6 Common {gamma}-Camera Models
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Left Ventricular Strain from Myocardial Perfusion PET Imaging: Method Development and Comparison to 2-Dimensional Echocardiography
  • Prognostic Role of 68Ga-PSMA11 PET–Based Response in Patients with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Taxane-Based Chemotherapy
  • Radioimmunoscintigraphy and Pretreatment Dosimetry of 131I-Omburtamab for Planning Treatment of Leptomeningeal Disease
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • cardiac 123I metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging
  • neurohormones
  • prognosis
  • ventricular arrhythmias
SNMMI

© 2023 Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Powered by HighWire