Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Echocardiographic and biomarker characteristics in diabetes, coronary artery disease or both: insights from HOMAGE trial

Cardiovascular Diabetology volume 24, Article number: 111 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Coronary artery disease (CAD) and diabetes mellitus (DM) can induce changes in myocardial structure and function, thereby increasing the risk of heart failure (HF). We aimed to identify the alterations in echocardiographic variables and circulating biomarkers associated with DM, CAD, or both and to assess the effect of spironolactone on them.

Methods

The “Heart OMics in AGEing” (HOMAGE) trial evaluated the effect of spironolactone on circulating markers of fibrosis over 9 months of follow-up in people at risk for HF. From the initial population (N = 527) of the HOMAGE trial, a total of 495 participants (mean age 74 years, 25% women) were categorized according to clinical phenotype (DM-/CAD + vs. DM+/CAD- vs. DM+/CAD+), while the DM-/CAD- group was excluded due to the low sample size (N = 32). Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to assess the relations between variables and DM/CAD status.

Results

At baseline, participants with DM, whether or not they had CAD, showed lower markers of type I collagen synthesis (procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide; β [95% CI]: DM+/CAD-: -6.973 [-13.778; -0.167]; DM+/CAD+: -9.039 [-15.174; -2.903]), reduced left ventricular volumes (β [95% CI]: end-diastolic, DM+/CAD-: -6.323 [-9.696; -2.951]; DM+/CAD+: -2.503 [-5.531; 0.526]; end-systolic, DM+/CAD-: -2.905 [-4.817; -0.992]; DM+/CAD+: -1.400 [-3.120; 0.320]) and higher levels of galectin-3 (Exponential β [95% CI]: DM+/CAD-: 1.127 [1.050; 1.209]; DM+/CAD+: 1.118 [1.048; 1.192]), and growth differentiation factor-15 (Exponential β [95% CI]: DM+/CAD-: 1.542 [1.360; 1.747]; DM+/CAD+: 1.535 [1.370; 1.720]), along with an elevated E/e’ ratio (β [95% CI]: DM+/CAD-: 1.355 [0.462; 2.248]; DM+/CAD+: 0.879 [0.067; 1.690]), compared with DM-/CAD + individuals (all p < 0.05). At follow-up, the effect of spironolactone on echocardiographic variables and circulating biomarkers was not significantly different across DM/CAD phenotypes (all p-interaction > 0.05), except for a more pronounced reduction in GDF-15 in the DM+/CAD + group at the 1-month visit (p-interaction = 0.03).

Conclusions

Among HOMAGE trial participants, diabetes was a powerful driver of biomarker and echocardiographic alterations irrespectively of CAD. These alterations were mainly related to the domains of inflammation and diastolic function.

Graphic abstract

Summary of the study design and key findings. Abbreviations: CAD, coronary artery disease; DM, diabetes mellitus; LV, left ventricular; M0, baseline; M1, 1-month follow-up; M9, 9-month follow-up; PICP, procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide.

Introduction

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major risk factor for the development of heart failure (HF) [1]. CAD is a frequent complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) and the main mechanism by which diabetes causes changes to cardiac structure [2]. Nevertheless, DM can contribute, along with other risk factors (mainly hypertension), to left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and HF development, even in the absence of overt CAD [3, 4].

Previous studies have demonstrated that both DM and CAD possess unique proteomic profiles, particularly regarding inflammatory, immunological, and collagen catabolic processes, which could be instrumental in the development of HF [5, 6]. Anyway, how DM and CAD interact to affect cardiac remodelling and the onset of HF is not understood. If there are key pathophysiological differences between subjects with DM, CAD, or both, then specific disease progression traits, such as myocardial fibrosis, may give insights into the effect of specific treatments with the potential to delay or prevent the onset of HF. Notably, biomarkers can reflect key pathophysiological processes, offering valuable insights into the mechanisms contributing to the progression toward HF [7]. Specifically, procollagen peptides (i.e., type I and type III) and collagen type I C-terminal telopeptide (CITP) provide information on myocardial fibrosis and collagen turnover [8], while galectin-3 and growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) are involved in pro-inflammatory signalling [9, 10]. Natriuretic peptides and cardiac troponins are well-established indicators of myocardial stress and injury [11].

In the “Heart OMics in AGEing” (HOMAGE) trial, spironolactone reduced type I collagen metabolism and improved cardiac remodelling in people at risk for HF [8], with an excellent safety profile [12]. This study analysed data from the HOMAGE trial to investigate the echocardiographic and circulating biomarker profiles of patients with DM, CAD, or both, aiming to identify distinctive patterns associated with these conditions. Additionally, we explored whether the effects of spironolactone varied across the DM/CAD subgroups.

Methods

Trial design and study population

The design and main results of the HOMAGE trial have previously been reported [8, 13]. Briefly, the HOMAGE trial was a randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint, multicentre trial, investigating the effects of spironolactone on markers of collagen metabolism and cardiovascular structure and function in people at increased risk of developing HF. A total of 527 individuals aged > 65 years (amended to > 60 years) with established CAD or at least two criteria indicative of cardiovascular disease, including type 2 DM, hypertension under treatment, microalbuminuria, or an abnormal electrocardiogram (including LV hypertrophy, QRS duration > 120 ms, or abnormal Q-waves) were included. Additionally, patients were required to have plasma concentrations of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) between 125 and 1000 ng/L or brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) between 35 and 280 ng/mL (to exclude individuals at low risk of developing HF or those with advanced disease warranting further investigation). CAD was defined as a history of myocardial infarction, coronary arterial angioplasty, or coronary artery bypass, while DM was defined as requiring treatment with antidiabetic drugs. Patients with known HF, an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2, serum potassium > 5.0 mmol/L, LV ejection fraction < 45%, atrial fibrillation, prescribed loop diuretics, or cardiovascular events in the prior 3 months were excluded. Patients were randomly allocated to either spironolactone or control in addition to their background medical therapy. Spironolactone was initiated at 25 mg/day and titrated to 50 mg/day, if tolerated, on top of usual care. After randomization, patient visits were scheduled at 1 and 9 months, for clinical assessment, collection of blood samples, electrocardiogram, and echocardiographic examination [13].

The current post-hoc analysis included 495 participants categorized according to their clinical phenotype as having: (a) CAD without DM (DM-/CAD+; N = 276); (b) DM without CAD (DM+/CAD-; N = 104); (c) DM and CAD (DM+/CAD+; N = 115). The group of participants without DM and CAD (DM-/CAD-) was excluded from the analysis because of the low sample size (N = 32).

Echocardiography and circulating biomarkers

Echocardiograms were analysed offline by a single experienced operator using dedicated software (Echo PAC, GE Healthcare) and blinded to clinical data, according to current recommendations [14, 15]. The reproducibility of echocardiographic measurements is high, as previously reported [16]. Blind to clinical data and randomization, procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide (PICP) was measured by enzyme immunoassay (METRA; Quidel Corporation®; limit of detection [LoD] = 2 µg/L); while procollagen type III N-terminal propeptide (PIIINP) and CITP by radioimmunoassay (Orion Diagnostica®, Espoo, Finland; PIIINP: LoD = 0.3 µg/L; CITP: LoD = 0.4 µg/L). Galectin-3 was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (BG Medicine®, Inc., Waltham, USA; LoD = 1.13 µg/L, limit of quantitation [LoQ] = 1.32 µg/L). High-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT), NT-proBNP, and GDF-15 were measured by electro-chemi-luminescence (ELECSYS® 2010 analyser; Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany; hsTnT: LoD = 5 ng/L, LoQ = 13 ng/L; NT-proBNP: LoD = 5 pg/mL, LoQ = 50 pg/mL; GDF-15: LoD and LoQ = 400 ng/L). All intra-assay variations were < 10%.

Statistical analysis

Categorical variables are presented as frequencies (percentages) and continuous variables as median (25th and 75th percentiles). Comparisons of baseline characteristics between clinical phenotypes were analysed using analysis of variance, Kruskal–Wallis and χ2 tests, as appropriate. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to assess the relations between variables and DM/CAD status, after adjustment for potential confounders, including study treatment (spironolactone), age, sex, body mass index (BMI), hypertension status, eGFR, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), betablockers, and statins. Additionally, when evaluating the relationships between absolute changes in variables from baseline to 1 month and 9 months and DM/CAD status, further adjustments were made for the baseline values of the respective variables. Normality was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Variables that were not normally distributed were log-transformed prior to analysis, and the results of the regression analysis were expressed as the exponential transformation of the beta coefficients (Exp β). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to compare the absolute changes in echocardiographic variables and circulating biomarkers from baseline to 1 month and 9 months of follow-up between the control and spironolactone group, adjusting for confounders (study treatment, age, sex, BMI, hypertension status, and eGFR) as well as the baseline values of the studied variables. Interaction between spironolactone effect and clinical phenotypes was also assessed. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons to account for type I error, given the exploratory nature of this subanalysis.

The HOMAGE trial (NCT02556450) was approved by relevant ethics committees and regulatory bodies; all participants provided written, informed consent. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) and R software (the R Foundation for Statistical Computing) version 4.1.2. A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Baseline characteristics

The baseline characteristics of the study population according to DM/CAD status are shown in Table 1. Overall, the 495 participants included in the present analysis had a similar profile to those included in the HOMAGE trial (data not shown).

Among DM/CAD groups, participants with DM+/CAD- tended to be older, were more likely to be female, and had a larger prevalence of hypertension. Moreover, they had higher concentrations of galectin-3 and GDF-15, smaller LV volumes, higher LV mass index, and higher echocardiographic markers of elevated filling pressures (E/e’ ratio) (all p ≤0.01). Conversely, DM-/CAD + participants showed the higher markers of PICP (p ≤0.01). Spironolactone treatment was equally distributed across the DM/CAD phenotypes (50% for all).

Table 1 Baseline characteristics according to DM/CAD status
Full size table

Association of echocardiographic variables and circulating biomarkers with clinical phenotypes

At baseline, subjects with diabetes (DM+), regardless of the presence of coexistent CAD, exhibited a positive association with galectin-3, GDF-15 concentrations and E/e’ ratio, and an inverse association with PICP values, PICP/CITP ratio and LV volumes compared to participants without diabetes but with CAD (DM-/CAD+; reference group) (Table 2).

Table 2 Association between baseline biomarkers and echocardiography parameters and DM/CAD status
Full size table

At the 1-month follow-up, only GDF-15 absolute change was higher in subjects with diabetes compared to those without diabetes, irrespective of CAD status (Additional file 1: Table S1). No significant differences in the absolute change of echocardiographic variables or circulating biomarkers were observed between groups at 9 months follow-up (all p-values > 0.05) (Table 3).

Table 3 Association between absolute change from baseline in biomarkers and echocardiography parameters at the 9-month follow-up and DM/CAD status
Full size table

Effect of spironolactone

The effect of spironolactone on GDF-15 was greater in DM+/CAD + participants (p for interaction = 0.031) than in other clinical phenotypes at 1 month. At this timepoint, spironolactone had a greater effect on left atrial volume index (LAVI, mean difference [mdiff]: −1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] − 2.58 to − 0.02] ml/m2, p = 0.047), E/A ratio (mdiff: −0.13; [95% CI: −0.19 to − 0.07], p < 0.001), CITP (mdiff: 0.09, [95% CI: 0.03 to 0.15], p < 0.001) and PICP/CITP ratio (mdiff: -2.95, [95% CI: -4.73 to -1.17], p < 0.001) in DM-/CAD + subjects compared to other DM/CAD groups, although this differential effect never reach statistical significance (all p for interaction > 0.05) (Additional file 2: Table S2). At the 9-month follow-up, we found no significant treatment effect interaction across DM/CAD phenotypes, but only a slightly more pronounced effect of spironolactone on markers of collagen turnover (PICP, PICP/CITP ratio), galectin-3 and structural and functional cardiac remodelling variables (LAVI, LV mass, E/A ratio, and E/e’ ratio) in DM-/CAD + subjects (all p for interaction > 0.05) compared to other clinical phenotypes (Fig. 1; Additional file 3: Table S3).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Biomarker (A) and echocardiographic (B) changes with spironolactone at 1 month and 9 months follow-up by DM/CAD status. Continuous and dashed lines represent the change in the studied variable according to the treatment with spironolactone or placebo over follow-up, respectively. The measured values and their 95% confidence intervals at each time point are slightly offset to enhance readability. The interpolated line between the markers (squares or dots) represents the changing trend. p-values were adjusted for sex, age, body mass index, hypertension status, estimated glomerular filtration rate and baseline biomarkers/echocardiographic variables. Abbreviations: Adj-p, adjusted p-value; CAD, coronary artery disease; CITP, collagen type I C-terminal telopeptide; DM, diabetes mellitus; LAVI, left atrial volume index; LV, left ventricle; PICP, procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide

Full size image

Discussion

In this post-hoc analysis of the HOMAGE trial, we found that participants with diabetes, irrespective of the presence of CAD, had lower type I collagen synthesis (as demonstrated by lower PICP), and increased galectin-3 and GDF-15 levels at baseline as compared with DM-/CAD + individuals. In terms of cardiac structure and function, individuals with diabetes had smaller LV volumes and increased echocardiographic markers of LV filling pressure, without sizably impact of CAD status, compared with DM-/CAD + participants. Overall, the treatment with spironolactone did not show a meaningful differential effect on these alterations according to DM/CAD phenotype (Graphical abstract).

The interplay between diabetes and CAD

The development of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has been previously attributed to a comorbidities-induced low-grade chronic inflammatory state, such as that seen in DM or CAD. This condition triggers a reduction in nitric oxide availability and coronary microvascular endothelial dysfunction, which stiffens cardiomyocytes and causes interstitial fibrosis, leading to increased diastolic LV filling pressures and ultimately resulting in HF [17]. Observational studies, such as the Framingham Heart Study, demonstrated that participants with DM face a 2- to 4-fold higher risk of developing HF compared to those without DM, even after adjustment for other cardiovascular risk factors [18]. Myocardial ischemia is a common pathway by which DM causes structural heart disease and HF [19]. In this context, hyperglycaemia and hyperinsulinemia accelerate atherosclerosis by promoting cell proliferation and inflammation [20], whereas changes towards a more atherogenic lipid profile and endothelial dysfunction are responsible for a shift toward a pro-thrombotic state [21]. Once CAD is established, the association with DM doubles the risk of developing HF compared with non-diabetics [22]. However, when DM is combined with other risk factors, such as hypertension, it can lead to LV dysfunction and HF, even without significant epicardial CAD [3, 4]. Notably, the coexistence of conditions such as obesity and hypertension significantly contributes to cardiac dysfunction by inducing macrophage polarization towards the pro-inflammatory M1 phenotype, resulting in alterations in circulating glucose and fatty acid substrates, lipotoxicity, and tissue hypoxia, which ultimately drive cardiac injury and the progression to HF [23].

Galectin-3 and GDF-15

Galectin-3, a potent cytokine expressed in various cells, plays a key role in mediating the inflammatory response [9]. Elevated levels of galectin-3 have been associated with an increased risk of incident HF in at-risk individuals [24]. In patients with DM, a condition characterized by a heightened systemic proinflammatory state [25], there is a significant increase in circulating galectin-3 levels [26]. In experimental models of diabetic cardiomyopathy, galectin-3 promoted myocardial apoptosis, oxidative stress, inflammation, and fibrosis in vivo and in vitro by the mechanism of reduction of NF-κB p65 activation [27]. Our study observed an increase in galectin-3 concentration without a corresponding increase in type 1 collagen synthesis in participants with diabetes compared to those without, suggesting an early involvement of galectin-3-related proinflammation pathways in DM. This stage may precede the progression to cardiac and vascular fibrosis, potentially serving as an early marker for subclinical disease and a target for preventive treatments [28].

Similar to galectin-3, participants with diabetes in HOMAGE trial showed an increased level of GDF-15 compared to non diabetics, regardless of CAD status. Prior studies in populations with diabetes have demonstrated an increase in GDF-15 levels [29], which are associated with impaired myocardial energetics and function [30, 31], as well as with an increased risk of incident HF [32, 33]. Elevated levels of GDF-15 in patients with diabetes were also associated with LV diastolic dysfunction and the onset of diabetic cardiomyopathy [34]. Furthermore, GDF-15 has also pro-atherogenic effects [35], and may serve as an indicator for the potential onset of CAD [36]. An analysis from the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities) study suggested that GDF-15 can be used for HF risk stratification among individuals with DM, thus allowing a better selection of candidates for effective HF prevention [10]. GDF-15 has also showed to be able to predict diastolic dysfunction in the very long-term [37] and to be a key mediator of the signalling of anorexia in established HF [38]. The ongoing GARDEN-TIMI 74 trial (NCT 05492500) is evaluating the effects of blocking GDF-15 in HF using the monoclonal antibody ponsegromab, with positive outcomes potentially paving the way for its application in earlier stages of HF.

Echocardiographic alterations in subjects at risk of HF

Participants with diabetes in the HOMAGE trial had smaller LV volumes and higher indirect markers of raised LV filling pressures (E/e’ ratio) compared with non-diabetics. In DM, metabolic disturbances along with the influence of other risk factors can induce progressive changes in cardiac structure and function, including LV remodelling, and impaired LV systolic and diastolic function [39], ultimately serving as precursors to the development of HF [4, 40].

A recent clustering study involving two population-based cohorts revealed that participants with diastolic changes, characterized by a low LV end-diastolic volume and high E/e’ ratio, faced a higher risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality and HF hospitalization compared to individuals with predominantly normal echocardiographic parameters [41]. These patients also had elevated levels of circulating biomarkers related to inflammation, thus providing further biological plausibility for the hypothesized link between an increased systemic proinflammatory state, as seen in DM [25], and the development of diastolic dysfunction [17, 42, 43]. Another study in patients with diabetes showed that an echocardiographic phenotype characterized by diastolic dysfunction (marked by a high E/e’ ratio and small LV volumes) was associated with a higher risk of CV hospitalization or death, compared to diabetics without echocardiographic signs of subtle myocardial alterations [44]. In this setting, diastolic function impairment has previously been considered as an early marker of HF development [40, 45]. Our findings suggest that diabetes affects diastolic function relatively independently from CAD. DM may actually be the primary driver of biological and diastolic alterations, eventually leading to HFpEF.

The impact of spironolactone treatment

Previous analysis of the HOMAGE trial showed that DM did not significantly influence spironolactone effect, especially on proteomic markers [6]. In the analysis presented here, accounting for CAD does not alter the homogeneity of the spironolactone effect. Indeed, spironolactone treatment appears to similarly affect echocardiographic parameters and circulating biomarkers, regardless of DM/CAD status. The only outcome showing a significant interaction between DM/CAD status and treatment effect was GDF-15, with a trend towards more marked reduction at 1 month follow-up in the DM+/CAD + subgroup. Although we lack a definitive explanation for this finding, one possible interpretation could rely on the putative role of GDF-15 as an inflammation-induced central mediator of tissue tolerance and its increase during inflammatory states [46], such as CAD and DM. Indeed, the observed attenuation of GDF-15 levels in the DM+/CAD + subgroup might reflect a possible anti-inflammatory effect of spironolactone treatment [8, 47]. As GDF-15 levels were higher in DM+/CAD + patients at baseline, this suggests that this biomarker was more significantly reduced during the initial weeks of spironolactone treatment. Similarly, a more prominent effect of spironolactone on markers of collagen turnover was observed in the first month, as reported in the seminal HOMAGE paper [8]. However, this difference did not persist at later time points, raising questions about whether this result indicates a substantial differential biological impact of spironolactone in the short term or is simply due to chance.

Limitations

The main limitation of the current study is the post-hoc nature and the relatively moderate sample size; thus, it should be regarded as mechanistic and hypothesis-generating. Another notable limitation is the absence of a DM-/CAD- control group, due to the low sample size in this category (N = 32) within the studied cohort. Nonetheless, our analysis offers meaningful insights into the key differences between CAD and DM providing valuable information about the distinct alterations in echocardiographic variables and circulating biomarkers, as well as the effects of spironolactone on these parameters. The circulating levels of GDF-15 in the diabetic subgroup may have been impacted by metformin treatment (83%) [48]. However, this influence is unlikely to alter the demonstrated association between GDF-15 and the DM subgroup, a correlation also confirmed in other studies [29]. Due to the absence of a systematic examination to rule out ischemic cardiomyopathy in every patient, it’s possible that some individuals labelled as “no CAD” could actually have undetected coronary atherosclerosis, microvascular disease or may have experienced a silent myocardial infarction in the past, potentially leading to errors in group classification. In the HOMAGE trial, some participants with elevated glycated haemoglobin levels (HbA1c ≥ 6.5%) were not labelled as diabetics (4.5%), as the trial inclusion criteria only considered those on anti-diabetic medications. Conversely, the largest part of those classified as diabetics showed well-controlled HbA1c levels. This scenario might have nuanced the observed impact of diabetes on structural and functional cardiac alterations in the study. Nonetheless, this reflects the clinical practice, where some patients may not receive treatment despite being diabetic, while others are under strict management. The use of a historical cohort, where newer antidiabetic treatments such as SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists were not widely used, prevented us from evaluating their impact on circulating biomarkers and echocardiographic variables across DM subgroups. We did not investigate the full spectrum of potential biomarkers involved in cardiac injury and remodelling, such as soluble suppression of tumorigenicity 2 (sST2), which may have led to the omission of valuable additional information [49]. The HOMAGE study enrolled patients at risk for HF, all of whom were over 60 years old and had comorbidities, with hypertension being notably the most prevalent among those with DM. These factors may have acted as confounders and could have contributed to our findings. Another potential confounder that could have impacted our results is the use of different antidiabetic treatment regimens across the studied population [50]. Finally, the expected low number of HF events in the HOMAGE population prevented us from evaluating the differential impact of circulating biomarkers and echocardiographic variables on clinical outcomes.

Conclusions

Among participants in the HOMAGE trial, CAD did not alter the association of diabetes with circulating biomarkers and echocardiographic changes, thus suggesting that diabetes was the primary driver of cardiac alterations in this population. These alterations were mainly related to the domains of chronic inflammation and diastolic function. Treatment effect of spironolactone was not significantly different across DM/CAD phenotypes.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

CAD:

Coronary artery disease

CITP:

Collagen type I C-terminal telopeptide

DM:

Diabetes mellitus

GDF-15:

Growth differentiation factor-15

HF:

Heart failure

HFpEF:

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

HOMAGE:

Heart OMics in AGEing trial

NT-proBNP:

N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide

PICP:

Procollagen type I C-terminal propeptide

PIIINP:

Procollagen type-III N-terminal propeptide

References

  1. Gheorghiade M, Sopko G, De Luca L, Velazquez EJ, Parker JD, Binkley PF, Sadowski Z, Golba KS, Prior DL, Rouleau JL, Bonow RO. Navigating the crossroads of coronary artery disease and heart failure. Circulation. 2006;114(11):1202–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sarwar N, Gao P, Seshasai SR, Gobin R, Kaptoge S, Di Angelantonio E, Ingelsson E, Lawlor DA, Selvin E, Stampfer M, et al. Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies. Lancet. 2010;375(9733):2215–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Govind S, Saha S, Brodin LA, Ramesh SS, Arvind SR, Quintana M. Impaired myocardial functional reserve in hypertension and diabetes mellitus without coronary artery disease: searching for the possible link with congestive heart failure in the myocardial doppler in diabetes (MYDID) study II. Am J Hypertens. 2006;19(8):851–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Factor SM, Borczuk A, Charron MJ, Fein FS, van Hoeven KH, Sonnenblick EH. Myocardial alterations in diabetes and hypertension. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1996;31(Suppl):S133–142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Santos-Ferreira D, Diaz SO, Ferreira JP, Girerd N, Pellicori P, Mariottoni B, Cosmi F, Hazebroek M, Verdonschot JAJ, Cuthbert J, et al. Phenotyping patients with ischaemic heart disease at risk of developing heart failure: an analysis of the HOMAGE trial. ESC Heart Fail. 2024;11(1):209–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Verdonschot JAJ, Ferreira JP, Pellicori P, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Clark AL, Cosmi F, Cuthbert J, Girerd N, Mariottoni B, Petutschnigg J, et al. Proteomic mechanistic profile of patients with diabetes at risk of developing heart failure: insights from the HOMAGE trial. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2021;20(1):163.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ferreira JP, Verdonschot J, Collier T, Wang P, Pizard A, Bar C, Bjorkman J, Boccanelli A, Butler J, Clark A, et al. Proteomic bioprofiles and mechanistic pathways of progression to heart failure. Circ Heart Fail. 2019;12(5):e005897.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cleland JGF, Ferreira JP, Mariottoni B, Pellicori P, Cuthbert J, Verdonschot JAJ, Petutschnigg J, Ahmed FZ, Cosmi F, Brunner La Rocca HP, et al. The effect of spironolactone on cardiovascular function and markers of fibrosis in people at increased risk of developing heart failure: the heart ‘OMics’ in AGEing (HOMAGE) randomized clinical trial. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(6):684–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sciacchitano S, Lavra L, Morgante A, Ulivieri A, Magi F, De Francesco GP, Bellotti C, Salehi LB, Ricci A. Galectin-3: one molecule for an alphabet of diseases, from a to Z. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19(2).

  10. Eddy AC, Trask AJ. Growth differentiation factor-15 and its role in diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2021;57:11–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Seferovic P, Farmakis D, Bayes-Genis A, Ben Gal T, Bohm M, Chioncel O, Ferrari R, Filippatos G, Hill L, Jankowska E, et al. Biomarkers for the prediction of heart failure and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes: a position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur J Heart Fail. 2022;24(7):1162–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Monzo L, Ferreira JP, Cleland JGF, Pellicori P, Mariottoni B, Verdonschot JAJ, Hazebroek MR, Collier TJ, Cuthbert JJ, Pieske B, et al. Dyskalemia in people at increased risk for heart failure: findings from the heart ‘OMics’ in AGEing (HOMAGE) trial. ESC Heart Fail. 2022;9(6):4352–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Pellicori P, Ferreira JP, Mariottoni B, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Ahmed FZ, Verdonschot J, Collier T, Cuthbert JJ, Petutschnigg J, Mujaj B, et al. Effects of spironolactone on serum markers of fibrosis in people at high risk of developing heart failure: rationale, design and baseline characteristics of a proof-of-concept, randomised, precision-medicine, prevention trial. The heart OMics in AGing (HOMAGE) trial. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020;22(9):1711–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, Afilalo J, Armstrong A, Ernande L, Flachskampf FA, Foster E, Goldstein SA, Kuznetsova T, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015;28(1):1–e3914.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nagueh SF, Smiseth OA, Appleton CP, Byrd BF III, Dokainish H, Edvardsen T, Flachskampf FA, Gillebert TC, Klein AL, Lancellotti P, et al. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2016;29(4):277–314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Frikha Z, Girerd N, Huttin O, Courand PY, Bozec E, Olivier A, Lamiral Z, Zannad F, Rossignol P. Reproducibility in echocardiographic assessment of diastolic function in a population based study (the STANISLAS Cohort study). PLoS ONE. 2015;10(4):e0122336.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Paulus WJ, Tschope 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(4):263–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kannel WB, McGee DL. Diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The Framingham study. JAMA. 1979;241(19):2035–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dei Cas A, Khan SS, Butler J, Mentz RJ, Bonow RO, Avogaro A, Tschoepe D, Doehner W, Greene SJ, Senni M, et al. Impact of diabetes on epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes of patients with heart failure. JACC Heart Fail. 2015;3(2):136–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Basta G, Schmidt AM, De Caterina R. Advanced glycation end products and vascular inflammation: implications for accelerated atherosclerosis in diabetes. Cardiovasc Res. 2004;63(4):582–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Li Y, Liu Y, Liu S, Gao M, Wang W, Chen K, Huang L, Liu Y. Diabetic vascular diseases: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2023;8(1):152.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Lemesle G, Puymirat E, Bonello L, Simon T, Steg PG, Ferrieres J, Schiele F, Fauchier L, Henry P, Schurtz G, et al. Compared impact of diabetes on the risk of heart failure from acute myocardial infarction to chronic coronary artery disease. Diabetes Metab. 2022;48(1):101265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mouton AJ, Li X, Hall ME, Hall JE. Obesity, hypertension, and cardiac dysfunction: novel roles of immunometabolism in macrophage activation and inflammation. Circ Res. 2020;126(6):789–806.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Trippel TD, Mende M, Dungen HD, Hashemi D, Petutschnigg J, Nolte K, Herrmann-Lingen C, Binder L, Hasenfuss G, Pieske B, et al. The diagnostic and prognostic value of galectin-3 in patients at risk for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: results from the DIAST-CHF study. ESC Heart Fail. 2021;8(2):829–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Donath MY, Shoelson SE. Type 2 diabetes as an inflammatory disease. Nat Rev Immunol. 2011;11(2):98–107.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Weigert J, Neumeier M, Wanninger J, Bauer S, Farkas S, Scherer MN, Schnitzbauer A, Schaffler A, Aslanidis C, Scholmerich J, Buechler C. Serum galectin-3 is elevated in obesity and negatively correlates with glycosylated hemoglobin in type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(3):1404–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhu N, Zhu L, Huang B, Xiang W, Zhao X. Galectin-3 inhibition ameliorates Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Cardiomyopathy in mice. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:868372.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Bouffette S, Botez I, De Ceuninck F. Targeting galectin-3 in inflammatory and fibrotic diseases. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2023;44(8):519–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Dostalova I, Roubicek T, Bartlova M, Mraz M, Lacinova Z, Haluzikova D, Kavalkova P, Matoulek M, Kasalicky M, Haluzik M. Increased serum concentrations of macrophage inhibitory cytokine-1 in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus: the influence of very low calorie diet. Eur J Endocrinol. 2009;161(3):397–404.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Anderson EJ, Rodriguez E, Anderson CA, Thayne K, Chitwood WR, Kypson AP. Increased propensity for cell death in diabetic human heart is mediated by mitochondrial-dependent pathways. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2011;300(1):H118–124.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rijzewijk LJ, van der Meer RW, Lamb HJ, de Jong HW, Lubberink M, Romijn JA, Bax JJ, de Roos A, Twisk JW, Heine RJ, et al. Altered myocardial substrate metabolism and decreased diastolic function in nonischemic human diabetic cardiomyopathy: studies with cardiac positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(16):1524–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang TJ, Wollert KC, Larson MG, Coglianese E, McCabe EL, Cheng S, Ho JE, Fradley MG, Ghorbani A, Xanthakis V, et al. Prognostic utility of novel biomarkers of cardiovascular stress: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2012;126(13):1596–604.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Echouffo-Tcheugui JB, Daya N, Ndumele CE, Matsushita K, Hoogeveen RC, Ballantyne CM, Coresh J, Shah AM, Selvin E. Diabetes, GDF-15 and incident heart failure: the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. Diabetologia. 2022;65(6):955–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Dominguez-Rodriguez A, Abreu-Gonzalez P, Avanzas P. Usefulness of growth differentiation factor-15 levels to predict diabetic cardiomyopathy in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol. 2014;114(6):890–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang J, Wei L, Yang X, Zhong J. Roles of growth differentiation factor 15 in atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8(17):e012826.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Mei Y, Zhao Z, Lyu Y, Li Y. Circulating growth differentiation factor 15 levels and apolipoprotein B to apolipoprotein A1 ratio in coronary artery disease patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Lipids Health Dis. 2022;21(1):59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Monzo L, Xhaard C, Ferreira JP, Baudry G, Lamiral Z, Duarte K, Bozec E, Boivin JM, Huttin O, Rossignol P, Zannad F, Girerd N. Circulating growth differentiation factor-15 levels are associated with early echocardiographic signs of diastolic function impairment in the STANISLAS cohort: a 20-year follow-up study. Eur J Heart Fail. 2025. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1002/ejhf.3576.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Monzo L, Jarolim P, Borlaug BA, Benes J, Jurcova I, Jenca D, Kroupova K, Wohlfahrt P, Kotrc M, Melenovsky V. Growth differentiation factor-15 is associated with congestion-related anorexia and weight loss in advanced heart failure. JACC Heart Fail. 2025;13(2):315–29. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.jchf.2024.10.023.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Askin L, Yuce EI, Tanriverdi O. Myocardial performance index and cardiovascular diseases. Echocardiography. 2023;40(7):720–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. From AM, Scott CG, Chen HH. The development of heart failure in patients with diabetes mellitus and pre-clinical diastolic dysfunction a population-based study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(4):300–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kobayashi M, Huttin O, Magnusson M, Ferreira JP, Bozec E, Huby AC, Preud’homme G, Duarte K, Lamiral Z, Dalleau K, et al. Machine learning-derived echocardiographic phenotypes predict heart failure incidence in asymptomatic individuals. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022;15(2):193–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tromp J, Khan MA, Klip IT, Meyer S, de Boer RA, Jaarsma T, Hillege H, van Veldhuisen DJ, van der Meer P, Voors AA. Biomarker profiles in heart failure patients with preserved and reduced ejection fraction. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6(4).

  43. Mocan M, Mocan Hognogi LD, Anton FP, Chiorescu RM, Goidescu CM, Stoia MA, Farcas AD. Biomarkers of inflammation in left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. Dis Markers. 2019;2019:7583690.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Ernande L, Audureau E, Jellis CL, Bergerot C, Henegar C, Sawaki D, Czibik G, Volpi C, Canoui-Poitrine F, Thibault H, et al. Clinical implications of echocardiographic phenotypes of patients with diabetes mellitus. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(14):1704–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Galderisi M. Diastolic dysfunction and diabetic cardiomyopathy: evaluation by Doppler echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(8):1548–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Luan HH, Wang A, Hilliard BK, Carvalho F, Rosen CE, Ahasic AM, Herzog EL, Kang I, Pisani MA, Yu S, et al. GDF15 is an inflammation-Induced central mediator of tissue tolerance. Cell. 2019;178(5):1231–e12441211.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Bendtzen K, Hansen PR, Rieneck K, Spironolactone/Arthritis Study G. Spironolactone inhibits production of proinflammatory cytokines, including tumour necrosis factor-alpha and interferon-gamma, and has potential in the treatment of arthritis. Clin Exp Immunol. 2003;134(1):151–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Natali A, Nesti L, Venturi E, Shore AC, Khan F, Gooding K, Gates PE, Looker HC, Dove F, Goncalves I, et al. Metformin is the key factor in elevated plasma growth differentiation factor-15 levels in type 2 diabetes: a nested, case-control study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2019;21(2):412–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ciccone MM, Cortese F, Gesualdo M, Riccardi R, Di Nunzio D, Moncelli M, Iacoviello M, Scicchitano P. A novel cardiac bio-marker: ST2: a review. Molecules. 2013;18(12):15314–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Faienza MF, Scicchitano P, Lamparelli R, Zaza P, Cecere A, Brunetti G, Cortese F, Valente F, Delvecchio M, Giordano P, et al. Vascular and myocardial function in young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus: insulin pump therapy versus multiple daily injections insulin regimen. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2022;130(6):415–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Consortia

HOMAGE “Heart Omics in AGEing” consortium.

Funding

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Commission’s Seventh Framework programme under Grant Agreement No. 305507 (HOMAGE).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre d’Investigations Cliniques Plurithématique 1433 and Inserm U1116, CHRU Nancy, F-CRIN INI-CRCT (Cardiovascular and Renal Clinical Trialists), Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France

    Luca Monzo, Masatake Kobayashi, João Pedro Ferreira, Zohra Lamiral, Patrick Rossignol, Faiez Zannad & Nicolas Girerd

  2. Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

    Masatake Kobayashi

  3. Department of Surgery and Physiology, Cardiovascular Research and Development Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

    João Pedro Ferreira

  4. School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Christian Delles

  5. Department of Cardiology, Castle Hill Hospital, University of Hull, East Riding of Yorkshire, UK

    Andrew L. Clark

  6. Deutsches Herzzentrum der Charité, Klinik für Kardiologie, Angiologie & Intensivmedizin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany

    Frank Edelmann & Johannes Petutschnigg

  7. Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Frank Edelmann & Johannes Petutschnigg

  8. DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Frank Edelmann & Johannes Petutschnigg

  9. Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Physiology Universidad de Navarra and IdiSNA, CIMA Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

    Arantxa González

  10. CIBERCV, Carlos III Institute of Health, Madrid, Spain

    Arantxa González

  11. Department of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Stephane Heymans & Job A. J. Verdonschot

  12. Department of Medicine and Nephrology-Hemodialysis, Princess Grace Hospital, Monaco, Monaco

    Patrick Rossignol

  13. M-CRIN (Monaco Clinical Research Infrastructure Network), Monaco, Monaco

    Patrick Rossignol

  14. Monaco Private Hemodialysis Centre, Monaco, Monaco

    Patrick Rossignol

  15. Robertson Centre for Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Pierpaolo Pellicori & John G. F. Cleland

Authors
  1. Luca Monzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masatake Kobayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. João Pedro Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zohra Lamiral
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christian Delles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrew L. Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  7. Frank Edelmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  8. Arantxa González
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  9. Stephane Heymans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  10. Pierpaolo Pellicori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  11. Johannes Petutschnigg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  12. Job A. J. Verdonschot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  13. Patrick Rossignol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  14. John G. F. Cleland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  15. Faiez Zannad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  16. Nicolas Girerd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

on behalf of the HOMAGE “Heart Omics in AGEing” Trial Committees and Investigators

Contributions

LM, NG and FZ designed the study and drafted the manuscript. ZL, LM and NG analyzed the data. MK, JPF, FE, PP, JP and JAJV collected the data and substantially revised the manuscript. CD, SH, ALC, AG, PR, JGFC, FZ and NG gathered the funding, supervised the study at their respective location, interpreted the data and substantially revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Luca Monzo or Nicolas Girerd.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by all relevant ethics committees and regulatory bodies. All participants provided written informed consent prior to study-specific procedures.

Consent for publication

There is no data of individual persons included in the manuscript.

Competing interests

S.H. acknowledge the support from the Netherlands Cardiovascular Research Initiative, an initiative with support of the Dutch Heart Foundation, CVON Arena-PRIME, 2017-18, Double Dosis, 2020-B005; Furthermore, we acknowledge the support of FWO G091018N and FWO G0B5930N to S.H. SH provides independent scientific advice on early development in the field of heart failure for AstraZeneca, Ribocure, and CSL Behring, and its university receives research support from AstraZeneca and CSL Behring. F.Z. reports personal fees from Applied Therapeutics, Bayer, Boehringer, BMS, CVRx, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, Cellprothera, CEVA, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer and Servier, having stock options at G3 Pharmaceuticals and equities at Cereno Pharmaceutical, Cardiorenal and Eshmoun Clinical Research and being the founder of Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists. N.G. reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, Lilly, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Roche Diagnostics, NP Medical and Echosens. All other authors have nothing to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary Material 2

Supplementary Material 3

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monzo, L., Kobayashi, M., Ferreira, J.P. et al. Echocardiographic and biomarker characteristics in diabetes, coronary artery disease or both: insights from HOMAGE trial. Cardiovasc Diabetol 24, 111 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-025-02609-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12933-025-02609-8

Keywords

Cardiovascular Diabetology

ISSN: 1475-2840