title: Biomarkers for coronary heart disease clinical risk prediction: a critical appraisal. Counterpoint.
abstract: The following Point/Counterpoint articles were derived from a debate presentation sponsored by the American Society for Preventive Cardiology at the March 2010 meeting of the American Heart Association Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, titled "Should We Focus on Novel Risk Marker and Screening Tests to Better Predict and Prevent Cardiovascular Disease?" Dr. James de Lemos presented the pro side, titled "Novel Risk Markers and Screening Tests Will Improve the Prediction and PRevention of Cardiovascular Disease," and Dr. Donald Lloyd-Jones advocated the con side, titled "Better Implementation of Existing Knowledge Will Save More Lives Than All of the Novel Biomarkers in the World." The following articles include points from the debate, rebuttal, and questions raised by the audience. We thank all authors for sharing this debate with the readership.
authors.affiliation: Departments of Medicine, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
authors.forename: John T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Wilkins
authors.forename: Donald M
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Lloyd-Jones
mesh_terms: D015415:Biomarkers; D002097:C-Reactive Protein / Q000032:analysis; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000235:genetics; D005838:Genotype; D006801:Humans; D020097:Natriuretic Peptide, Brain / Q000097:blood; D010446:Peptide Fragments / Q000097:blood; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D018570:Risk Assessment; D014336:Troponin / Q000097:blood
chemical_list: D015415:Biomarkers; D010446:Peptide Fragments; D014336:Troponin; C109794:pro-brain natriuretic peptide (1-76); D020097:Natriuretic Peptide, Brain; D002097:C-Reactive Protein