Literature DB >> 18342687

Laboratory-based versus non-laboratory-based method for assessment of cardiovascular disease risk: the NHANES I Follow-up Study cohort.

Thomas A Gaziano1, Cynthia R Young, Garrett Fitzmaurice, Sidney Atwood, J Michael Gaziano.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Around 80% of all cardiovascular deaths occur in developing countries. Assessment of those patients at high risk is an important strategy for prevention. Since developing countries have limited resources for prevention strategies that require laboratory testing, we assessed if a risk prediction method that did not require any laboratory tests could be as accurate as one requiring laboratory information.
METHODS: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) was a prospective cohort study of 14 407 US participants aged between 25-74 years at the time they were first examined (between 1971 and 1975). Our follow-up study population included participants with complete information on these surveys who did not report a history of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, angina) or cancer, yielding an analysis dataset N=6186. We compared how well either method could predict first-time fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease events in this cohort. For the laboratory-based model, which required blood testing, we used standard risk factors to assess risk of cardiovascular disease: age, systolic blood pressure, smoking status, total cholesterol, reported diabetes status, and current treatment for hypertension. For the non-laboratory-based model, we substituted body-mass index for cholesterol.
FINDINGS: In the cohort of 6186, there were 1529 first-time cardiovascular events and 578 (38%) deaths due to cardiovascular disease over 21 years. In women, the laboratory-based model was useful for predicting events, with a c statistic of 0.829. The c statistic of the non-laboratory-based model was 0.831. In men, the results were similar (0.784 for the laboratory-based model and 0.783 for the non-laboratory-based model). Results were similar between the laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based models in both men and women when restricted to fatal events only.
INTERPRETATION: A method that uses non-laboratory-based risk factors predicted cardiovascular events as accurately as one that relied on laboratory-based values. This approach could simplify risk assessment in situations where laboratory testing is inconvenient or unavailable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18342687      PMCID: PMC2864150          DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60418-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  26 in total

1.  Overall C as a measure of discrimination in survival analysis: model specific population value and confidence interval estimation.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-07-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Validation of the Framingham coronary heart disease prediction scores: results of a multiple ethnic groups investigation.

Authors:  R B D'Agostino; S Grundy; L M Sullivan; P Wilson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-07-11       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Prevention of cardiovascular disease in developing countries.

Authors:  Lars H Lindholm; Shanthi Mendis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-09-01       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Simple scoring scheme for calculating the risk of acute coronary events based on the 10-year follow-up of the prospective cardiovascular Münster (PROCAM) study.

Authors:  Gerd Assmann; Paul Cullen; Helmut Schulte
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-01-22       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Evaluating the yield of medical tests.

Authors:  F E Harrell; R M Califf; D B Pryor; K L Lee; R A Rosati
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1982-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project.

Authors:  R M Conroy; K Pyörälä; A P Fitzgerald; S Sans; A Menotti; G De Backer; D De Bacquer; P Ducimetière; P Jousilahti; U Keil; I Njølstad; R G Oganov; T Thomsen; H Tunstall-Pedoe; A Tverdal; H Wedel; P Whincup; L Wilhelmsen; I M Graham
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 29.983

7.  Predictive value for the Chinese population of the Framingham CHD risk assessment tool compared with the Chinese Multi-Provincial Cohort Study.

Authors:  Jing Liu; Yuling Hong; Ralph B D'Agostino; Zhaosu Wu; Wei Wang; Jiayi Sun; Peter W F Wilson; William B Kannel; Dong Zhao
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-06-02       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 8.  Prevention of cardiovascular disease in high-risk individuals in low-income and middle-income countries: health effects and costs.

Authors:  Stephen S Lim; Thomas A Gaziano; Emmanuela Gakidou; K Srinath Reddy; Farshad Farzadfar; Rafael Lozano; Anthony Rodgers
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study.

Authors:  Salim Yusuf; Steven Hawken; Stephanie Ounpuu; Tony Dans; Alvaro Avezum; Fernando Lanas; Matthew McQueen; Andrzej Budaj; Prem Pais; John Varigos; Liu Lisheng
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004 Sep 11-17       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  World Health Organization (WHO) and International Society of Hypertension (ISH) risk prediction charts: assessment of cardiovascular risk for prevention and control of cardiovascular disease in low and middle-income countries.

Authors:  Shanthi Mendis; Lars H Lindholm; Giuseppe Mancia; Judith Whitworth; Michael Alderman; Stephen Lim; Tony Heagerty
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.844

View more
  132 in total

1.  Pediatric metabolic syndrome predicts adulthood metabolic syndrome, subclinical atherosclerosis, and type 2 diabetes mellitus but is no better than body mass index alone: the Bogalusa Heart Study and the Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study.

Authors:  Costan G Magnussen; Juha Koskinen; Wei Chen; Russell Thomson; Michael D Schmidt; Sathanur R Srinivasan; Mika Kivimäki; Noora Mattsson; Mika Kähönen; Tomi Laitinen; Leena Taittonen; Tapani Rönnemaa; Jorma S A Viikari; Gerald S Berenson; Markus Juonala; Olli T Raitakari
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Comparability of total cardiovascular disease risk estimates using laboratory and non-laboratory based assessments in urban-dwelling South Africans: the CRIBSA study.

Authors:  Nasheeta Peer; Carl Lombard; Krisela Steyn; Thomas Gaziano; Naomi Levitt
Journal:  S Afr Med J       Date:  2014-08-13

3.  Impact of metformin, oral contraceptives, and lifestyle modification on polycystic ovary syndrome in obese adolescent women: do we need a new drug?

Authors:  Richard S Legro
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 5.958

4.  Distribution and Performance of Cardiovascular Risk Scores in a Mixed Population of HIV-Infected and Community-Based HIV-Uninfected Individuals in Uganda.

Authors:  Anthony N Muiru; Prossy Bibangambah; Linda Hemphill; Ruth Sentongo; June-Ho Kim; Virginia A Triant; David R Bangsberg; Alexander C Tsai; Jeffrey N Martin; Jessica E Haberer; Yap Boum; Jorge Plutzky; Peter W Hunt; Samson Okello; Mark J Siedner
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 3.731

Review 5.  Preventing CVD in resource-poor areas: perspectives from the 'real-world'.

Authors:  Simon Stewart; Karen Sliwa
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 32.419

6.  High total serum cholesterol, medication coverage and therapeutic control: an analysis of national health examination survey data from eight countries.

Authors:  Gregory A Roth; Stephan D Fihn; Ali H Mokdad; Wichai Aekplakorn; Toshihiko Hasegawa; Stephen S Lim
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2010-09-03       Impact factor: 9.408

7.  Depressive Symptoms and Longitudinal Changes in Cognition: Women's Health Initiative Study of Cognitive Aging.

Authors:  Joseph S Goveas; Mark A Espeland; Patricia E Hogan; Hilary A Tindle; Regina A Shih; Jane M Kotchen; Jennifer G Robinson; Deborah E Barnes; Susan M Resnick
Journal:  J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 2.680

8.  A cardiovascular disease risk prediction algorithm for use with the Medicare current beneficiary survey.

Authors:  Hassan Fouayzi; Arlene S Ash; Amy K Rosen
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Improving global vascular risk prediction with behavioral and anthropometric factors. The multiethnic NOMAS (Northern Manhattan Cohort Study).

Authors:  Ralph L Sacco; Minesh Khatri; Tatjana Rundek; Qiang Xu; Hannah Gardener; Bernadette Boden-Albala; Marco R Di Tullio; Shunichi Homma; Mitchell S V Elkind; Myunghee C Paik
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-12-08       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 10.  Subclinical cardiovascular disease assessment in persons with diabetes.

Authors:  Haider Javed Warraich; Khurram Nasir
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.