Literature DB >> 36254303

Cholesterol and Hypertension Treatment Improve Coronary Risk Prediction but Not Time-Dependent Covariates or Competing Risks.

Isaac Subirana1,2, Anna Camps-Vilaró1,2, Roberto Elosua2,3,4, Jaume Marrugat1,2, Helena Tizón-Marcos2,5,6, Ivan Palomo7, Irene R Dégano1,2,3.   

Abstract

Background and Aims: Cardiovascular (CV) risk functions are the recommended tool to identify high-risk individuals. However, their discrimination ability is not optimal. While the effect of biomarkers in CV risk prediction has been extensively studied, there are no data on CV risk functions including time-dependent covariates together with other variables. Our aim was to examine the effect of including time-dependent covariates, competing risks, and treatments in coronary risk prediction.
Methods: Participants from the REGICOR population cohorts (North-Eastern Spain) aged 35-74 years without previous history of cardiovascular disease were included (n = 8470). Coronary and stroke events and mortality due to other CV causes or to cancer were recorded during follow-up (median = 12.6 years). A multi-state Markov model was constructed to include competing risks and time-dependent classical risk factors and treatments (2 measurements). This model was compared to Cox models with basal measurement of classical risk factors, treatments, or competing risks. Models were cross-validated and compared for discrimination (area under ROC curve), calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test), and reclassification (categorical net reclassification index).
Results: Cancer mortality was the highest cumulative-incidence event. Adding cholesterol and hypertension treatment to classical risk factors improved discrimination of coronary events by 2% and reclassification by 7-9%. The inclusion of competing risks and/or 2 measurements of risk factors provided similar coronary event prediction, compared to a single measurement of risk factors.
Conclusion: Coronary risk prediction improves when cholesterol and hypertension treatment are included in risk functions. Coronary risk prediction does not improve with 2 measurements of covariates or inclusion of competing risks.
© 2022 Subirana et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  coronary disease; longitudinal studies; risk assessment; risk factors

Year:  2022        PMID: 36254303      PMCID: PMC9569159          DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S374581

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 1179-1349            Impact factor:   5.814


  28 in total

1.  [Relative validity of the 10-year cardiovascular risk estimate in a population cohort of the REGICOR study].

Authors:  Jaume Marrugat; Joan Vila; José Miguel Baena-Díez; María Grau; Joan Sala; Rafel Ramos; Isaac Subirana; Montserrat Fitó; Roberto Elosua
Journal:  Rev Esp Cardiol       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 4.753

2.  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

3.  Derivation and validation of a set of 10-year cardiovascular risk predictive functions in Spain: the FRESCO Study.

Authors:  Jaume Marrugat; Isaac Subirana; Rafel Ramos; Joan Vila; Alejandro Marín-Ibañez; María Jesús Guembe; Fernando Rigo; María José Tormo Díaz; Conchi Moreno-Iribas; Joan Josep Cabré; Antonio Segura; José Miguel Baena-Díez; Agustín Gómez de la Cámara; José Lapetra; María Grau; Miquel Quesada; María José Medrano; Paulino González Diego; Guiem Frontera; Diana Gavrila; Eva Ardanaz Aicua; Josep Basora; José María García; Manuel García-Lareo; José Antonio Gutierrez; Eduardo Mayoral; Joan Sala; Ralph D'Agostino; Roberto Elosua
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 4.018

4.  A unified inference procedure for a class of measures to assess improvement in risk prediction systems with survival data.

Authors:  Hajime Uno; Lu Tian; Tianxi Cai; Isaac S Kohane; L J Wei
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Mark Cobain; Joseph M Massaro; William B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Incremental Value of Repeated Risk Factor Measurements for Cardiovascular Disease Prediction in Middle-Aged Korean Adults: Results From the NHIS-HEALS (National Health Insurance System-National Health Screening Cohort).

Authors:  In-Jeong Cho; Ji Min Sung; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Namsik Chung; Hyeon Chang Kim
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2017-11

7.  Prediction of cardiovascular risk using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: how well do they predict individual rather than population risk?

Authors:  Tjeerd-Pieter van Staa; Martin Gulliford; Edmond S-W Ng; Ben Goldacre; Liam Smeeth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Development and validation of QRISK3 risk prediction algorithms to estimate future risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Julia Hippisley-Cox; Carol Coupland; Peter Brindle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-05-23

9.  Effect of competing mortality risks on predictive performance of the QRISK3 cardiovascular risk prediction tool in older people and those with comorbidity: external validation population cohort study.

Authors:  Shona Livingstone; Daniel R Morales; Peter T Donnan; Katherine Payne; Alexander J Thompson; Ji-Hee Youn; Bruce Guthrie
Journal:  Lancet Healthy Longev       Date:  2021-06

10.  SCORE2 risk prediction algorithms: new models to estimate 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease in Europe.

Authors: 
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 35.855

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.