BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic studies have shown that C-reactive protein (CRP) is a risk factor for coronary heart disease. Whether routine measurement of CRP has a role in the prediction of future coronary disease in everyday clinical practice has not yet been investigated. METHODS: Within the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort study of 7983 men and women 55 years and older, we conducted a nested case-control study to investigate the value of CRP in coronary disease prediction. Data are based on 157 participants who experienced a myocardial infarction during follow-up and 500 randomly selected controls. High-sensitivity CRP and traditional cardiovascular risk factors were measured at baseline. RESULTS: The age- and sex-adjusted relative risk of myocardial infarction for subjects in the highest quartile of the population distribution of CRP compared with the lowest quartile was 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.4). After additional adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the increase in risk largely disappeared (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-2.2). Adding CRP to a coronary disease risk function based on risk factors that are routinely assessed in clinical practice or to the Framingham risk function did not improve the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of these risk functions. Sensitivity and specificity of both risk functions, computed after dichotomizing the estimated disease probabilities using prespecified cutoff points, hardly improved when CRP was added. CONCLUSION: Measurement of CRP in elderly people has no additional value in coronary disease risk prediction when traditional cardiovascular risk factors are known.
BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic studies have shown that C-reactive protein (CRP) is a risk factor for coronary heart disease. Whether routine measurement of CRP has a role in the prediction of future coronary disease in everyday clinical practice has not yet been investigated. METHODS: Within the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort study of 7983 men and women 55 years and older, we conducted a nested case-control study to investigate the value of CRP in coronary disease prediction. Data are based on 157 participants who experienced a myocardial infarction during follow-up and 500 randomly selected controls. High-sensitivity CRP and traditional cardiovascular risk factors were measured at baseline. RESULTS: The age- and sex-adjusted relative risk of myocardial infarction for subjects in the highest quartile of the population distribution of CRP compared with the lowest quartile was 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.4). After additional adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the increase in risk largely disappeared (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-2.2). Adding CRP to a coronary disease risk function based on risk factors that are routinely assessed in clinical practice or to the Framingham risk function did not improve the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of these risk functions. Sensitivity and specificity of both risk functions, computed after dichotomizing the estimated disease probabilities using prespecified cutoff points, hardly improved when CRP was added. CONCLUSION: Measurement of CRP in elderly people has no additional value in coronary disease risk prediction when traditional cardiovascular risk factors are known.
Authors: Kiran Musunuru; Brian G Kral; Roger S Blumenthal; Valentin Fuster; Catherine Y Campbell; Ty J Gluckman; Richard A Lange; Eric J Topol; James T Willerson; Milind Y Desai; Michael H Davidson; Samia Mora Journal: Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med Date: 2008-08-19
Authors: Veena S Rao; Natesha B Kadarinarasimhiah; Shibu John; Sridhara Hebbagodi; Jayashree Shanker; Vijay V Kakkar Journal: Int J Vasc Med Date: 2010-06-28
Authors: Paul Elliott; John C Chambers; Weihua Zhang; Robert Clarke; Jemma C Hopewell; John F Peden; Jeanette Erdmann; Peter Braund; James C Engert; Derrick Bennett; Lachlan Coin; Deborah Ashby; Ioanna Tzoulaki; Ian J Brown; Shahrul Mt-Isa; Mark I McCarthy; Leena Peltonen; Nelson B Freimer; Martin Farrall; Aimo Ruokonen; Anders Hamsten; Noha Lim; Philippe Froguel; Dawn M Waterworth; Peter Vollenweider; Gerard Waeber; Marjo-Riitta Jarvelin; Vincent Mooser; James Scott; Alistair S Hall; Heribert Schunkert; Sonia S Anand; Rory Collins; Nilesh J Samani; Hugh Watkins; Jaspal S Kooner Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-07-01 Impact factor: 56.272