Literature DB >> 24681960

Comparison of application of the ACC/AHA guidelines, Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines, and European Society of Cardiology guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in a European cohort.

Maryam Kavousi1, Maarten J G Leening2, David Nanchen3, Philip Greenland4, Ian M Graham5, Ewout W Steyerberg6, M Arfan Ikram7, Bruno H Stricker8, Albert Hofman1, Oscar H Franco1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines introduced a prediction model and lowered the threshold for treatment with statins to a 7.5% 10-year hard atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Implications of the new guideline's threshold and model have not been addressed in non-US populations or compared with previous guidelines.
OBJECTIVE: To determine population-wide implications of the ACC/AHA, the Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP-III), and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines using a cohort of Dutch individuals aged 55 years or older. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We included 4854 Rotterdam Study participants recruited in 1997-2001. We calculated 10-year risks for "hard" ASCVD events (including fatal and nonfatal coronary heart disease [CHD] and stroke) (ACC/AHA), hard CHD events (fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, CHD mortality) (ATP-III), and atherosclerotic CVD mortality (ESC). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Events were assessed until January 1, 2012. Per guideline, we calculated proportions of individuals for whom statins would be recommended and determined calibration and discrimination of risk models.
RESULTS: The mean age was 65.5 (SD, 5.2) years. Statins would be recommended for 96.4% (95% CI, 95.4%-97.1%; n = 1825) of men and 65.8% (95% CI, 63.8%-67.7%; n = 1523) of women by the ACC/AHA, 52.0% (95% CI, 49.8%-54.3%; n = 985) of men and 35.5% (95% CI, 33.5%-37.5%; n = 821) of women by the ATP-III, and 66.1% (95% CI, 64.0%-68.3%; n = 1253) of men and 39.1% (95% CI, 37.1%-41.2%; n = 906) of women by ESC guidelines. With the ACC/AHA model, average predicted risk vs observed cumulative incidence of hard ASCVD events was 21.5% (95% CI, 20.9%-22.1%) vs 12.7% (95% CI, 11.1%-14.5%) for men (192 events) and 11.6% (95% CI, 11.2%-12.0%) vs 7.9% (95% CI, 6.7%-9.2%) for women (151 events). Similar overestimation occurred with the ATP-III model (98 events in men and 62 events in women) and ESC model (50 events in men and 37 events in women). The C statistic was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.63-0.71) in men and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.64-0.73) in women for hard ASCVD (ACC/AHA), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.62-0.72) in men and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.63-0.75) in women for hard CHD (ATP-III), and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.70-0.82) in men and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.83) in women for CVD mortality (ESC). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this European population aged 55 years or older, proportions of individuals eligible for statins differed substantially among the guidelines. The ACC/AHA guideline would recommend statins for nearly all men and two-thirds of women, proportions exceeding those with the ATP-III or ESC guidelines. All 3 risk models provided poor calibration and moderate to good discrimination. Improving risk predictions and setting appropriate population-wide thresholds are necessary to facilitate better clinical decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24681960     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.2632

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  102 in total

1.  The Rotterdam Study: 2016 objectives and design update.

Authors:  Albert Hofman; Guy G O Brusselle; Sarwa Darwish Murad; Cornelia M van Duijn; Oscar H Franco; André Goedegebure; M Arfan Ikram; Caroline C W Klaver; Tamar E C Nijsten; Robin P Peeters; Bruno H Ch Stricker; Henning W Tiemeier; André G Uitterlinden; Meike W Vernooij
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-09-19       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Screening asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes is recommended: Pro.

Authors:  Mario Petretta; Alberto Cuocolo
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  The new cholesterol and blood pressure guidelines: perspective on the path forward.

Authors:  Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Population Effect of Differences in Cholesterol Guidelines in Eastern Europe and the United States.

Authors:  Jerry C Lee; Tomasz Zdrojewski; Michael J Pencina; Adam Wyszomirski; Mateusz Lachacz; Grzegorz Opolski; Piotr Bandosz; Marcin Rutkowski; Zbigniew Gaciong; Bogdan Wyrzykowski; Ann M Navar
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 14.676

5.  The new lipid guidelines: what do primary care clinicians think?

Authors:  Sina Jamé; Eve Wittenberg; Michael B Potter; Kirsten E Fleischmann
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 4.965

6.  Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Women.

Authors:  Rebeccah A McKibben; Mahmoud Al Rifai; Lena M Mathews; Erin D Michos
Journal:  Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep       Date:  2015-12-29

7.  Evaluation of the Pooled Cohort Risk Equations for Cardiovascular Risk Prediction in a Multiethnic Cohort From the Women's Health Initiative.

Authors:  Samia Mora; Nanette K Wenger; Nancy R Cook; Jingmin Liu; Barbara V Howard; Marian C Limacher; Simin Liu; Karen L Margolis; Lisa W Martin; Nina P Paynter; Paul M Ridker; Jennifer G Robinson; Jacques E Rossouw; Monika M Safford; JoAnn E Manson
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 21.873

8.  Cardiovascular Disease Risk Among Older Immigrants in the United States: A Comparison of Risk Measures.

Authors:  Tina R Sadarangani; Deborah Chyun; Chau Trinh-Shevrin; Gary Yu; Christine Kovner
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Nurs       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 2.083

Review 9.  Headed in the right direction but at risk for miscalculation: a critical appraisal of the 2013 ACC/AHA risk assessment guidelines.

Authors:  Nivee P Amin; Seth S Martin; Michael J Blaha; Khurram Nasir; Roger S Blumenthal; Erin D Michos
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 10.  Targeting LDL Cholesterol: Beyond Absolute Goals Toward Personalized Risk.

Authors:  Morton Leibowitz; Chandra Cohen-Stavi; Sanjay Basu; Ran D Balicer
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.