Jong-Ho Park1, Hyung-Min Kwon2, Bruce Ovbiagele3. 1. Department of Neurology, Myongji Hospital, Goyang, South Korea; Department of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States. 2. Department of Neurology, SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea. 3. Department of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States. Electronic address: Ovibes@musc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, Pooled Cohort Risk (PCR) equations, which incorporate new sex- and race-specific estimates of the 10-year risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) including stroke, for ASCVD-free adults were introduced. Given the importance of secondary stroke prevention and benefit of a potential tool to readily identify stroke patients at high intermediate-term vascular risk for appropriate treatment, we evaluated the prediction and discrimination of the PCR and Framingham Cardiovascular Risk (FCR) equations after a recent stroke. METHOD: We conducted an analysis of Vitamin Intervention for Stroke Prevention dataset of 3555 recent non-cardioembolic stroke patients aged ≥ 35 years and followed for 2 years. Subjects were categorized as having low-PCR/low-FCR (<20%), high-PCR/high-FCR (≥ 20%), and known-ASCVD. Independent associations of high-PCR/high-FCR with recurrent stroke (primary outcome) and stroke/coronary heart disease (CHD)/vascular death (secondary outcomes) were assessed. RESULTS: Both PCR and FCR were independently related to both outcomes: compared with low-PCR, high-PCR was associated with stroke (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.25-2.57) and stroke/CHD/vascular death (2.05; 1.55-2.70). Compared with low-FCR, high-FCR was associated with stroke (2.06; 1.34-3.16) and stroke/CHD/vascular death (1.57; 1.12-2.20). The c-statistic of PCR/FCR as a continuous variable for stroke was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.54-0.58) and 0.56 (0.54-0.57), respectively and for stroke/CHD/vascular death was 0.62 (0.60-0.63) and 0.61 (0.59-0.63), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both PCR and FCR are significant predictors of recurrent vascular events among patients after a recent non-cardioembolic stroke, but neither one of them is an optimal model for discriminating intermediate-term ASCVD prediction among stroke patients already receiving secondary stroke prevention.
BACKGROUND: Recently, Pooled Cohort Risk (PCR) equations, which incorporate new sex- and race-specific estimates of the 10-year risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) including stroke, for ASCVD-free adults were introduced. Given the importance of secondary stroke prevention and benefit of a potential tool to readily identify strokepatients at high intermediate-term vascular risk for appropriate treatment, we evaluated the prediction and discrimination of the PCR and Framingham Cardiovascular Risk (FCR) equations after a recent stroke. METHOD: We conducted an analysis of Vitamin Intervention for Stroke Prevention dataset of 3555 recent non-cardioembolic strokepatients aged ≥ 35 years and followed for 2 years. Subjects were categorized as having low-PCR/low-FCR (<20%), high-PCR/high-FCR (≥ 20%), and known-ASCVD. Independent associations of high-PCR/high-FCR with recurrent stroke (primary outcome) and stroke/coronary heart disease (CHD)/vascular death (secondary outcomes) were assessed. RESULTS: Both PCR and FCR were independently related to both outcomes: compared with low-PCR, high-PCR was associated with stroke (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.25-2.57) and stroke/CHD/vascular death (2.05; 1.55-2.70). Compared with low-FCR, high-FCR was associated with stroke (2.06; 1.34-3.16) and stroke/CHD/vascular death (1.57; 1.12-2.20). The c-statistic of PCR/FCR as a continuous variable for stroke was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.54-0.58) and 0.56 (0.54-0.57), respectively and for stroke/CHD/vascular death was 0.62 (0.60-0.63) and 0.61 (0.59-0.63), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both PCR and FCR are significant predictors of recurrent vascular events among patients after a recent non-cardioembolic stroke, but neither one of them is an optimal model for discriminating intermediate-term ASCVD prediction among strokepatients already receiving secondary stroke prevention.
Authors: Maryam Kavousi; Maarten J G Leening; David Nanchen; Philip Greenland; Ian M Graham; Ewout W Steyerberg; M Arfan Ikram; Bruno H Stricker; Albert Hofman; Oscar H Franco Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Paul Muntner; Lisandro D Colantonio; Mary Cushman; David C Goff; George Howard; Virginia J Howard; Brett Kissela; Emily B Levitan; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Monika M Safford Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Neil J Stone; Jennifer G Robinson; Alice H Lichtenstein; C Noel Bairey Merz; Conrad B Blum; Robert H Eckel; Anne C Goldberg; David Gordon; Daniel Levy; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Patrick McBride; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Karol Watson; Peter W F Wilson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson; Harmon S Jordan; Lev Nevo; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gustavo Saposnik; Robert Cote; Muhammad Mamdani; Stavroula Raptis; Kevin E Thorpe; Jiming Fang; Donald A Redelmeier; Larry B Goldstein Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-06-28 Impact factor: 9.910