Dataset Information

Common clinical practice versus new PRIM score in predicting coronary heart disease risk.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To compare the new Patient Rule Induction Method (PRIM) Score and common clinical practice with the Framingham Point Score for classification of individuals with respect to coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. METHODS AND RESULTS:PRIM Score and the Framingham Point Score were estimated for 11,444 participants from the Copenhagen City Heart Study. Gender specific cumulative incidences and 10 year absolute CHD risks were estimated for subsets defined by age, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, blood pressure, diabetes and smoking categories. PRIM defined seven mutually exclusive subsets in women and men, with cumulative incidences of CHD from 0.01 to 0.22 in women, and from 0.03 to 0.26 in men. PRIM versus Framingham Point Score found 11% versus 4% of all women, and 31% versus 35% of all men to have 10 year CHD risks>20%. Among women ? 65 years with hypertension and/or with diabetes, 10 year CHD risk>20% was found for 100% with PRIM scoring but for only 18% with the Framingham Point Score. CONCLUSION:Compared to the PRIM Score, common clinical practice with the Framingham Point Score underestimates CHD risk in women, especially in women?65 years with hypertension and/or with diabetes.

SUBMITTER: Frikke-Schmidt R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3117128 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Common clinical practice versus new PRIM score in predicting coronary heart disease risk.

Frikke-Schmidt Ruth R Tybjærg-Hansen Anne A Schnohr Peter P Jensen Gorm B GB Nordestgaard Børge G BG

Atherosclerosis 20100727 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare the new Patient Rule Induction Method (PRIM) Score and common clinical practice with the Framingham Point Score for classification of individuals with respect to coronary heart disease (CHD) risk.<h4>Methods and results</h4>PRIM Score and the Framingham Point Score were estimated for 11,444 participants from the Copenhagen City Heart Study. Gender specific cumulative incidences and 10 year absolute CHD risks were estimated for subsets defined by age, total cholester ...[more]

PMID: 20728887

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePolygenic risk scores comprising millions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) could be useful for population-wide coronary heart disease (CHD) screening.ObjectiveTo determine whether a polygenic risk score improves prediction of CHD compared with a guideline-recommended clinical risk equation.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study of the predictive accuracy of a previously validated polygenic risk score was assessed among 4847 adults of white European ancestry, aged 45 through 79 years, participating in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and 2390 participating in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) from 1996 through December 31, 2015, the final day of follow-up. The performance of the polygenic risk score was compared with that of the 2013 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association pooled cohort equations.ExposuresGenetic risk was computed for each participant by summing the product of the weights and allele dosage across 6 630 149 SNPs. Weights were based on an international genome-wide association study.Main outcomes and measuresPrediction of 10-year first CHD events (including myocardial infarctions, fatal coronary events, silent infarctions, revascularization procedures, or resuscitated cardiac arrest) assessed using measures of model discrimination, calibration, and net reclassification improvement (NRI).ResultsThe study population included 4847 adults from the ARIC study (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [5.6] years; 56.4% women) and 2390 adults from the MESA cohort (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [9.6] years; 52.2% women). Incident CHD events occurred in 696 participants (14.4%) and 227 participants (9.5%), respectively, over median follow-up of 15.5 years (interquartile range [IQR], 6.3 years) and 14.2 (IQR, 2.5 years) years. The polygenic risk score was significantly associated with 10-year CHD incidence in ARIC with hazard ratios per SD increment of 1.24 (95% CI, 1.15 to 1.34) and in MESA, 1.38 (95% CI, 1.21 to 1.58). Addition of the polygenic risk score to the pooled cohort equations did not significantly increase the C statistic in either cohort (ARIC, change in C statistic, -0.001; 95% CI, -0.009 to 0.006; MESA, 0.021; 95% CI, -0.0004 to 0.043). At the 10-year risk threshold of 7.5%, the addition of the polygenic risk score to the pooled cohort equations did not provide significant improvement in reclassification in either ARIC (NRI, 0.018, 95% CI, -0.012 to 0.036) or MESA (NRI, 0.001, 95% CI, -0.038 to 0.076). The polygenic risk score did not significantly improve calibration in either cohort.Conclusions and relevanceIn this analysis of 2 cohorts of US adults, the polygenic risk score was associated with incident coronary heart disease events but did not significantly improve discrimination, calibration, or risk reclassification compared with conventional predictors. These findings suggest that a polygenic risk score may not enhance risk prediction in a general, white middle-aged population.

Dataset Information

Common clinical practice versus new PRIM score in predicting coronary heart disease risk.

Publications

Common clinical practice versus new PRIM score in predicting coronary heart disease risk.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets