Literature DB >> 34463125

Predictive Accuracy of a Clinical and Genetic Risk Model for Atrial Fibrillation.

Shaan Khurshid1,2,3, Nina Mars4, Christopher M Haggerty5,6, Qiuxi Huang7,8, Lu-Chen Weng2,3, Dustin N Hartzel9, Kathryn L Lunetta7,8, Jeffrey M Ashburner10, Christopher D Anderson11,12,3, Emelia J Benjamin13,14,8, Veikko Salomaa15, Patrick T Ellinor2,16,3, Brandon K Fornwalt5,6, Samuli Ripatti4,17,18, Ludovic Trinquart7,8, Steven A Lubitz2,16,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) risk estimation using clinical factors with or without genetic information may identify AF screening candidates more accurately than the guideline-based age threshold of ≥65 years.
METHODS: We analyzed 4 samples across the United States and Europe (derivation: UK Biobank; validation: FINRISK, Geisinger MyCode Initiative, and Framingham Heart Study). We estimated AF risk using the CHARGE-AF (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology AF) score and a combination of CHARGE-AF and a 1168-variant polygenic score (Predict-AF). We compared the utility of age, CHARGE-AF, and Predict-AF for predicting 5-year AF by quantifying discrimination and calibration.
RESULTS: Among 543 093 individuals, 8940 developed AF within 5 years. In the validation sets, CHARGE-AF (C index range, 0.720-0.824) and Predict-AF (0.749-0.831) had largely comparable discrimination, both favorable to continuous age (0.675-0.801). Calibration was similar using CHARGE-AF (slope range, 0.67-0.87) and Predict-AF (0.65-0.83). Net reclassification improvement using Predict-AF versus CHARGE-AF was modest (net reclassification improvement range, 0.024-0.057) but more favorable among individuals aged <65 years (0.062-0.11). Using Predict-AF among 99 530 individuals aged ≥65 years across each sample, 70 849 had AF risk <5%, of whom 69 067 (97.5%) did not develop AF, whereas 28 681 had AF risk ≥5%, of whom 2264 (7.9%) developed AF. Of 11 379 individuals aged <65 years with AF risk ≥5%, 435 (3.8%) developed AF before age 65 years, with roughly half (46.9%) meeting anticoagulation criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: AF risk estimation using clinical factors may prioritize individuals for AF screening more precisely than the age threshold endorsed in current guidelines. The additional value of genetic predisposition is modest but greatest among younger individuals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aging; atrial fibrillation; genetic predisposition to disease; genomics; risk assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34463125      PMCID: PMC8530935          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCGEN.121.003355

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Genom Precis Med        ISSN: 2574-8300


  52 in total

Review 1.  Population-Based Screening for Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Shaan Khurshid; Jeffrey S Healey; William F McIntyre; Steven A Lubitz
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 17.367

2.  Index for rating diagnostic tests.

Authors:  W J YOUDEN
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1950-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  AF-SCREEN international collaboration.

Authors:  Ben Freedman
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 29.983

4.  Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers.

Authors:  Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Screening for Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Authors:  Susan J Curry; Alex H Krist; Douglas K Owens; Michael J Barry; Aaron B Caughey; Karina W Davidson; Chyke A Doubeni; John W Epling; Alex R Kemper; Martha Kubik; C Seth Landefeld; Carol M Mangione; Maureen G Phipps; Michael Pignone; Michael Silverstein; Melissa A Simon; Chien-Wen Tseng; John B Wong
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 6.  Screening strategies for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Nicky J Welton; Alexandra McAleenan; Howard Hz Thom; Philippa Davies; Will Hollingworth; Julian Pt Higgins; George Okoli; Jonathan Ac Sterne; Gene Feder; Diane Eaton; Aroon Hingorani; Christopher Fawsitt; Trudie Lobban; Peter Bryden; Alison Richards; Reecha Sofat
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 4.014

7.  A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing.

Authors:  Gonçalo R Abecasis; David Altshuler; Adam Auton; Lisa D Brooks; Richard M Durbin; Richard A Gibbs; Matt E Hurles; Gil A McVean
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Genetic Risk Prediction of Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Steven A Lubitz; Xiaoyan Yin; Henry J Lin; Matthew Kolek; J Gustav Smith; Stella Trompet; Michiel Rienstra; Natalia S Rost; Pedro L Teixeira; Peter Almgren; Christopher D Anderson; Lin Y Chen; Gunnar Engström; Ian Ford; Karen L Furie; Xiuqing Guo; Martin G Larson; Kathryn L Lunetta; Peter W Macfarlane; Bruce M Psaty; Elsayed Z Soliman; Nona Sotoodehnia; David J Stott; Kent D Taylor; Lu-Chen Weng; Jie Yao; Bastiaan Geelhoed; Niek Verweij; Joylene E Siland; Sekar Kathiresan; Carolina Roselli; Dan M Roden; Pim van der Harst; Dawood Darbar; J Wouter Jukema; Olle Melander; Jonathan Rosand; Jerome I Rotter; Susan R Heckbert; Patrick T Ellinor; Alvaro Alonso; Emelia J Benjamin
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 39.918

9.  Improved polygenic prediction by Bayesian multiple regression on summary statistics.

Authors:  Luke R Lloyd-Jones; Jian Zeng; Julia Sidorenko; Loïc Yengo; Gerhard Moser; Kathryn E Kemper; Huanwei Wang; Zhili Zheng; Reedik Magi; Tõnu Esko; Andres Metspalu; Naomi R Wray; Michael E Goddard; Jian Yang; Peter M Visscher
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Mobile Personal Health Monitoring for Automated Classification of Electrocardiogram Signals in Elderly.

Authors:  Luis J Mena; Vanessa G Félix; Alberto Ochoa; Rodolfo Ostos; Eduardo González; Javier Aspuru; Pablo Velarde; Gladys E Maestre
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 2.238

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Somatic Mutations in Cardiovascular Disease.

Authors:  J Brett Heimlich; Alexander G Bick
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 17.367

2.  ECG-Based Deep Learning and Clinical Risk Factors to Predict Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Shaan Khurshid; Samuel Friedman; Christopher Reeder; Paolo Di Achille; Nathaniel Diamant; Pulkit Singh; Lia X Harrington; Xin Wang; Mostafa A Al-Alusi; Gopal Sarma; Andrea S Foulkes; Patrick T Ellinor; Christopher D Anderson; Jennifer E Ho; Anthony A Philippakis; Puneet Batra; Steven A Lubitz
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Prediction performance and fairness heterogeneity in cardiovascular risk models.

Authors:  Uri Kartoun; Shaan Khurshid; Bum Chul Kwon; Aniruddh P Patel; Puneet Batra; Anthony Philippakis; Amit V Khera; Patrick T Ellinor; Steven A Lubitz; Kenney Ng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  Natural Language Processing to Improve Prediction of Incident Atrial Fibrillation Using Electronic Health Records.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Ashburner; Yuchiao Chang; Xin Wang; Shaan Khurshid; Christopher D Anderson; Kumar Dahal; Dana Weisenfeld; Tianrun Cai; Katherine P Liao; Kavishwar B Wagholikar; Shawn N Murphy; Steven J Atlas; Steven A Lubitz; Daniel E Singer
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 6.106

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.