S-EPMC5837662 - Risk score overestimation: the impact of individual cardiovascular risk factors and preventive therapies on the performance of the American Heart Association-American College of Cardiology-Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease risk score in a modern multi-ethnic cohort. - OmicsDI

Unknown

Dataset Information

Risk score overestimation: the impact of individual cardiovascular risk factors and preventive therapies on the performance of the American Heart Association-American College of Cardiology-Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease risk score in a modern multi-ethnic cohort.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To evaluate the 2013 American Heart Association (AHA)-American College of Cardiology (ACC)-Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk score among four different race/ethnic groups and to ascertain which factors are most associated with risk overestimation by the AHA-ACC-ASCVD score.

Methods and results

The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA), a prospective community-based cohort, was used to examine calibration and discrimination of the AHA-ACC-ASCVD risk score in 6441 White, Black, Chinese, and Hispanic Americans (aged 45-79 years and free of known ASCVD at baseline). Using univariable and multivariable absolute risk regression, we modelled the impact of individual risk factors on the discordance between observed and predicted 10-year ASCVD risk. Overestimation was observed in all race/ethnic groups in MESA and was highest among Chinese (252% for women and 314% for men) and lowest in White women (72%) and Hispanic men (67%). Higher age, Chinese race/ethnicity (when compared with White), systolic blood pressure (treated and untreated), diabetes, alcohol use, exercise, lipid-lowering medication, and aspirin use were all associated with more risk overestimation, whereas family history was associated with less risk overestimation in a multivariable model (all P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The AHA-ACC-ASCVD risk score overestimates ASCVD risk among men, women, and all four race/ethnic groups evaluated in a modern American primary prevention cohort. Clinicians treating patients similar to those in MESA, particularly older individuals and those with factors associated with more risk overestimation, may consider interpreting absolute ASCVD risk estimates with caution.

SUBMITTER: DeFilippis AP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5837662 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Risk score overestimation: the impact of individual cardiovascular risk factors and preventive therapies on the performance of the American Heart Association-American College of Cardiology-Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease risk score in a modern multi-ethnic cohort.

DeFilippis Andrew Paul AP Young Rebekah R McEvoy John W JW Michos Erin D ED Sandfort Veit V Kronmal Richard A RA McClelland Robyn L RL Blaha Michael J MJ

European heart journal 20170201 8

<h4>Aims</h4>To evaluate the 2013 American Heart Association (AHA)-American College of Cardiology (ACC)-Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk score among four different race/ethnic groups and to ascertain which factors are most associated with risk overestimation by the AHA-ACC-ASCVD score.<h4>Methods and results</h4>The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA), a prospective community-based cohort, was used to examine calibration and discrimination of the AHA-ACC-ASCVD risk sc ...[more]

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology pooled cohort equations (PCEs) are used for predicting 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Pooled cohort equation risk prediction capabilities across self-reported leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) levels and the change in model performance with addition of LTPA to the PCE are unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate PCE risk prediction performance across self-reported LTPA levels and the change in model performance by adding LTPA to the existing PCE model.Design, setting, and participantsIndividual-level pooling of data from 3 longitudinal cohort studies-Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities, Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, and Cardiovascular Health Study-was performed. A total of 18 824 participants were stratified into 4 groups based on self-reported LTPA levels: inactive (0 metabolic equivalent of task [MET]-min/wk), less than guideline-recommended (<500 MET-min/wk), guideline-recommended (500-1000 MET-min/week), and greater than guideline-recommended (>1000 MET-min/wk). Pooled cohort equation risk discrimination was studied using the C statistic and reclassification capabilities were studied using the Greenwood Nam-D'Agostino χ2 goodness-of-fit test. Change in risk discrimination and reclassification on adding LTPA to PCEs was evaluated using change in C statistic, integrated discrimination index, and categorical net reclassification index.Main outcomes and measuresAdjudicated ASCVD events during 10-year follow-up.ResultsAmong 18 824 participants studied, 10 302 were women (54.7%); mean (SD) age was 57.6 (8.2) years. A total of 5868 participants (31.2%) were inactive, 3849 (20.4%) had less than guideline-recommended LTPA, 3372 (17.9%) had guideline-recommended LTPA, and 5735 (30.5%) had greater than guideline-recommended LTPA level. Higher LTPA levels were associated with a lower risk of ASCVD after adjustment for risk factors (hazard ratio [HR] per 1-SD higher LTPA, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96). Across LTPA groups, PCE risk discrimination (C statistic, 0.76-0.78) and risk calibration (all χ2 P > .10) was similar. Addition of LTPA to the PCE model resulted in no significant change in the C statistic (0.0005; 95% CI, -0.0004 to 0.0015; P = .28) and categorical net reclassification index (-0.003; 95% CI, -0.010 to 0.010; P = .95), but a minimal improvement in the integrated discrimination index (0.0008; 95% CI, 0.0002-0.0013; P = .005) was observed. Similar results were noted when cohort-specific coefficients were used for creating the baseline model.Conclusions and relevanceHigher self-reported LTPA levels appear to be associated with lower ASCVD risk and increasing LTPA promotes cardiovascular wellness. These findings suggest the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology PCEs are accurate at estimating the probability of 10-year ASCVD risk regardless of LTPA level. The addition of self-reported LTPA to PCEs does not appear to be associated with improvement in risk prediction model performance.

Project description:The 2019 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Prevention Guidelines emphasize reduction in dietary sodium, cholesterol, refined carbohydrates, saturated fat and sweetened beverages. We hypothesized that implementing this dietary pattern could reduce cardiovascular risk in a cohort of volunteers in an urban African American (AA) community church, during a 5-week ACC/AHA-styled nutrition intervention, assessed by measuring risk markers and adherence, called HEART-LENS (Helping Everyone Assess Risk Today Lenten Nutrition Study). The study population consisted of 53 volunteers who committed to eat only home-delivered non-dairy vegetarian meals (average daily calories 1155, sodium 1285 mg, cholesterol 0 mg; 58% carbohydrate, 17% protein, 25% fat). Body mass index (BMI) and fasting serum markers of cardiometabolic and risk factors were measured, with collection of any dietary deviation. Of 53 volunteers, 44 (mean age 60.2 years, 37 women) completed the trial (88%); 1 was intolerant of the meals, 1 completed both blood draws but did not eat delivered food, and 7 did not return for the tests. Adherence to the diet was reported at 93% in the remaining 44. Cardiometabolic risk factors improved significantly, highlighted by a marked reduction in serum insulin (-43%, p = 0.000), hemoglobin A1c (6.2% to 6.0%, p = 0.000), weight and BMI (-10.2 lbs, 33 to 31 kg/m2, p = 0.000), but with small reductions of fasting glucose (-6%, p = 0.405) and triglyceride levels (-4%, p = 0.408). Additionally, improved were trimethylamine-N-oxide (5.1 to 2.9 µmol/L, -43%, p = 0.001), small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) (24.2 to 19.1 mg/dL, -21%, p = 0.000), LDL (121 to 104 mg/dL, -14%, p = 0.000), total cholesterol (TC) (190 to 168 mg/dL, -12%, p = 0.000), and lipoprotein (a) (LP(a)) (56 to 51 mg/dL, -11%, p = 0.000); high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) was widely variable but reduced by 16% (2.5 to 2.1 ng/mL, p = NS) in 40 subjects without inflammatory conditions. Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator (suPAR) levels were not significantly changed. The ACC/AHA pooled cohort atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk scores were calculated for 41 and 36 volunteers, respectively, as the ASCVD risk could not be calculated for 3 subjects with low lipid fractions at baseline and 8 subjects after intervention (p = 0.184). In the remaining subjects, the mean 10-year risk was reduced from 10.8 to 8.7%, a 19.4% decrease (p = 0.006), primarily due to a 14% decrease in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and a 10 mm Hg (6%) reduction in systolic blood pressure. In this prospective 5-week non-dairy vegetarian nutrition intervention with good adherence consistent with the 2019 ACC/AHA Guidelines in an at-risk AA population, markers of cardiovascular risk, cardiometabolism, and body weight were significantly reduced, including obesity, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc) density, LP(a), inflammation, and ingestion of substrates mediating production of trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO). Albeit reduced, hs-CRP and suPAR, were not lowered consistently. This induced a significant decrease in the 10-year ASCVD risk in this AA cohort. If widely adopted, this could dramatically reduce and possibly eradicate, the racial disparity in ASCVD events and mortality, if 19% of the 21% increase is eliminated by this lifestyle change.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The impact of replacing the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP)/Adult Treatment Program (ATP) III cholesterol guidelines with the new 2013 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is unclear. METHODS:We used risk factor and 10-year clinical event rate data from MESA, combined with estimates of efficacy of moderate and high-intensity statin therapy from meta-analyses of statin primary prevention trials to estimate (a) the change in number of subjects eligible for drug therapy and (2) the anticipated reduction in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events and increment in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) associated with the change in cholesterol guidelines. RESULTS:Of the 6,814 MESA participants, 5,437 were not on statins at baseline and had complete data for analysis (mean age 61.4±10.3). Using the NCEP/ATP III guidelines, 1,334 (24.5%) would have been eligible for statin therapy compared with 3,015 (55.5%) under the new ACC/AHA guidelines. Among the subset of newly eligible, 127/1,742 (7.3%) had an ASCVD event during 10years of follow-up. Assuming 10years of moderate-intensity statin therapy, the estimated absolute reduction in ASCVD events for the newly eligible group was 2.06% (number needed to treat [NNT] 48.6) and the estimated absolute increase in T2DM was 0.90% (number needed to harm [NNH] 110.7). Assuming 10years of high-intensity statin therapy, the corresponding estimates for reductions in ASCVD and increases in T2DM were as follows: ASCVD 2.70% (NNT 37.5) and T2DM 2.60% (NNH 38.6). The estimated effects of moderate-intensity statins on 10-year risk for ASCVD and T2DM in participants eligible for statins under the NCEP/ATP III were as follows: 3.20% (NNT 31.5) and 1.06% (NNH 94.2), respectively. CONCLUSION:Substituting the NCEP/ATP III cholesterol guidelines with the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol guidelines in MESA more than doubled the number of participants eligible for statin therapy. If the new ACC/AHA cholesterol guidelines are adopted and extend the primary prevention population eligible for treatment, the risk-benefit profile is much better for moderate-intensity than high-intensity statin treatment.

Project description:BackgroundOver 10 years, achieving and maintaining 2017 ACC/AHA guideline goals could prevent 3.0 million (UR, 1.1-5.1 million), 0.5 million (UR, 0.2-0.7 million), and 1.4 million (UR, 0.6-2.0 million) cardiovascular disease (CVD) events compared with maintaining current blood pressure (BP) levels, achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report goals, and achieving 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee goals, respectively. We estimated the number of cardiovascular disease events prevented and treatment-related serious adverse events incurred over 10 years among US adults with hypertension by achieving 2017 ACC/AHA guideline-recommended BP goals compared with (1) current BP levels, (2) achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report BP goals, and (3) achieving 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee panel member report BP goals.MethodsUS adults aged ≥45 years with an indication for BP treatment were grouped according to recommendations for antihypertensive drug therapy in the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline, 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report, and 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee. Population sizes were estimated from the 2011 to 2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. Rates for fatal and nonfatal CVD events (stroke, coronary heart disease, or heart failure) were estimated from the REGARDS (REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke) study, weighted to the US population. CVD risk reductions with treatment to BP goals and risk for serious adverse events were obtained from meta-analyses of BP-lowering trials. CVD events prevented and treatment-related nonfatal serious adverse events over 10 years were calculated. Uncertainty surrounding main data inputs was expressed in uncertainty ranges (UR).ResultsOver ten years, achieving and maintaining 2017 ACC/AHA guideline goals compared with current BP levels, achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report goals, or achieving 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee goals could prevent 3.0 million (UR, 1.1-5.1 million), 0.5 million (UR, 0.2-0.7 million), or 1.4 million (UR, 0.6-2.0 million) CVD events, respectively. Compared with current BP levels, achieving and maintaining 2017 goals could prevent 71.9 (UR, 26.6-122.3) CVD events per 1000 treated. Achieving 2017 guideline BP goals compared with current BP levels could also lead to nearly 3.3 million more serious adverse events over 10 years (UR, 2.2-4.4 million).ConclusionsAchieving and maintaining 2017 ACC/AHA BP goals could prevent a greater number of CVD events than achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report or 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee BP goals but could also lead to more serious adverse events.

Project description:ImportanceThe 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Cholesterol Management Guideline recommends moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin therapy in eligible patients.ObjectiveTo examine adoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline in US cardiology practices.Design, setting, and participantsAmong 161 cardiology practices, trends in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) were analyzed before (September 1, 2012, to November 1, 2013) and after (February 1, 2014, to April 1, 2015) publication of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline among 4 mutually exclusive risk groups within the ACC Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry. Interrupted time series analysis was used to evaluate for differences in trend in use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin LLT use in hierarchical logistic regression models. Participants were a population-based sample of 1 105 356 preguideline patients (2 431 192 patient encounters) and 1 116 472 postguideline patients (2 377 219 patient encounters). Approximately 97% of patients had atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).ExposuresModerate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin LLT use before and after publication of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline.Main outcomes and measuresTime trend in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin LLT.ResultsIn the study cohort, the mean (SD) age was 69.6 (12.1) years among 1 105 356 patients (40.2% female) before publication of the guideline and 70.0 (11.9) years among 1 116 472 patients (39.8% female) after publication of the guideline. Although there was a trend toward increasing use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statins overall and in the ASCVD cohort, such a trend was already present before publication of the guideline. No significant difference in trend in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statins was observed in other groups. The use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin therapy was 62.1% (before publication of the guideline) and 66.6% (after publication of the guideline) in the overall cohort, 62.7% (before publication) and 67.0% (after publication) in the ASCVD cohort, 50.6% (before publication) and 52.3% (after publication) in the cohort with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (ie, ≥190 mg/dL), 52.4% (before publication) and 55.2% (after publication) in the diabetes cohort, and 41.9% (before publication) and 46.9% (after publication) in the remaining group with 10-year ASCVD risk of 7.5% or higher. In hierarchical logistic regression models, there was a significant increase in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statins in the overall cohort (4.8%) and in the ASCVD cohort (4.3%) (P < .01 for slope for both). There was no significant change for other risk cohorts. Nonstatin LLT use remained unchanged in the preguideline and postguideline periods in the hierarchical logistic regression models for all of the risk groups.Conclusions and relevanceAdoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA Cholesterol Management Guideline in cardiology practices was modest. Timely interventions are needed to improve guideline-concordant practice to reduce the burden of ASCVD.

Project description:ImportanceClinical decisions are ideally based on evidence generated from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical outcomes, but historically, few clinical guideline recommendations have been based entirely on this type of evidence.ObjectiveTo determine the class and level of evidence (LOE) supporting current major cardiovascular society guideline recommendations, and changes in LOE over time.Data sourcesCurrent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) clinical guideline documents (2008-2018), as identified on cardiovascular society websites, and immediate predecessors to these guideline documents (1999-2014), as referenced in current guideline documents.Study selectionComprehensive guideline documents including recommendations organized by class and LOE.Data extraction and synthesisThe number of recommendations and the distribution of LOE (A [supported by data from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT], B [supported by data from observational studies or a single RCT], and C [supported by expert opinion only]) were determined for each guideline document.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportion of guideline recommendations supported by evidence from multiple RCTs (LOE A).ResultsAcross 26 current ACC/AHA guidelines (2930 recommendations; median, 121 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 76-155]), 248 recommendations (8.5%) were classified as LOE A, 1465 (50.0%) as LOE B, and 1217 (41.5%) as LOE C. The median proportion of LOE A recommendations was 7.9% (25th-75th percentiles, 0.9%-15.2%). Across 25 current ESC guideline documents (3399 recommendations; median, 130 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 111-154]), 484 recommendations (14.2%) were classified as LOE A, 1053 (31.0%) as LOE B, and 1862 (54.8%) as LOE C. When comparing current guidelines with prior versions, the proportion of recommendations that were LOE A did not increase in either ACC/AHA (median, 9.0% [current] vs 11.7% [prior]) or ESC guidelines (median, 15.1% [current] vs 17.6% [prior]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines, only a small percentage were supported by evidence from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT. This pattern does not appear to have meaningfully improved from 2008 to 2018.