Dataset Information

Quantifying the contribution of established risk factors to cardiovascular mortality differences between Russia and Norway.

ABSTRACT: Surprisingly few attempts have been made to quantify the simultaneous contribution of well-established risk factors to CVD mortality differences between countries. We aimed to develop and critically appraise an approach to doing so, applying it to the substantial CVD mortality gap between Russia and Norway using survey data in three cities and mortality risks from the Emerging Risk Factor Collaboration. We estimated the absolute and relative differences in CVD mortality at ages 40-69 years between countries attributable to the risk factors, under the counterfactual that the age- and sex-specific risk factor profile in Russia was as in Norway, and vice-versa. Under the counterfactual that Russia had the Norwegian risk factor profile, the absolute age-standardized CVD mortality gap would decline by 33.3% (95% CI 25.1-40.1) among men and 22.1% (10.4-31.3) among women. In relative terms, the mortality rate ratio (Russia/Norway) would decline from 9-10 to 7-8. Under the counterfactual that Norway had the Russian risk factor profile, the mortality gap reduced less. Well-established CVD risk factors account for a third of the male and around a quarter of the female CVD mortality gap between Russia and Norway. However, these estimates are based on widely held epidemiological assumptions that deserve further scrutiny.

SUBMITTER: Trias-Llimos S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7695740 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quantifying the contribution of established risk factors to cardiovascular mortality differences between Russia and Norway.

Trias-Llimós Sergi S Pennells Lisa L Tverdal Aage A Kudryavtsev Alexander V AV Malyutina Sofia S Hopstock Laila A LA Iakunchykova Olena O Nikitin Yuri Y Magnus Per P Kaptoge Stephen S Di Angelantonio Emanuele E Leon David A DA

Scientific reports 20201127 1

Surprisingly few attempts have been made to quantify the simultaneous contribution of well-established risk factors to CVD mortality differences between countries. We aimed to develop and critically appraise an approach to doing so, applying it to the substantial CVD mortality gap between Russia and Norway using survey data in three cities and mortality risks from the Emerging Risk Factor Collaboration. We estimated the absolute and relative differences in CVD mortality at ages 40-69 years betwe ...[more]

PMID: 33247203

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality is substantially higher in Russia than in neighbouring Norway. We aimed to compare blood pressure- and lipid-lowering medication use and proportion meeting treatment targets between general population samples in the two countries in those with CVD and diabetes. METHODS:The study population was adults aged 40-69?years reporting a diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and/or diabetes participating in cross-sectional population-based studies in Russia (Know Your Heart (KYH) 2015-18?N?=?626) and Norway (The Tromsø Study 2015-16 (Tromsø 7) N?=?1353). Reported medications were coded according to the 2016 WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification system. Treatment targets were defined using the Joint European Societies guidelines for CVD prevention in clinical practice (2016). RESULTS:Age- and sex-standardized prevalence of use of lipid-lowering medications was higher in Tromsø 7 for all three conditions with a disproportionately large difference in those reporting MI (+?48% (95% CI 39, 57%)). Proportion meeting treatment targets for LDL cholesterol was poor in both studies (age- and sex-standardized prevalence of control KYH vs Tromsø 7: MI 5.1% vs 10.1%; stroke 11.6% vs 5.8%; diabetes 24.9% vs 23.3%). Use of antihypertensive medication was higher in KYH for stroke (+?40% (95% CI 30, 50%)) and diabetes (+?27% (95% CI 19, 34%)) groups but approximately equal for the MI group (-?1% (95% CI -1, 1%)). Proportion meeting blood pressure targets was lower in KYH vs Tromsø 7 (MI 51.8% vs 76.3%; stroke 49.5% vs 69.6%; diabetes 51.9% vs 63.9%). CONCLUSIONS:We identified different patterns of medication use in people with CVD and diabetes. However despite higher use of lipid-lowering medication in the Norwegian study treatment to target for total cholesterol was poor in both Russian and Norwegian studies. In contrast we found higher levels of use of antihypertensive medications in the Russian study but also that less participants met treatment targets for blood pressure. Further work should investigate what factors are responsible for this seeming paradox and how management of modifiable risk factors for secondary prevention could be improved.

Project description:Introduction: Several lines of evidence reveal that cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer share similar common pathological milieus. The prevalence of the two diseases is growing as the population ages and the burden of shared risk factors increases. In this respect, we hypothesise that tumour biomarkers can be potential predictors of CVD outcomes in the general population. Methods: We measured six tumour biomarkers (AFP, CA125, CA15-3, CA19-9, CEA and CYFRA 21-1) and determined their predictive value for CVD in the Prevention of Renal and Vascular End-stage Disease (PREVEND) study. A total of 8,592 subjects were enrolled in the study. Results: The levels of CEA significantly predicted CV morbidity and mortality, with hazard ratios (HRs) of HR 1.28 (95% CI 1.08-1.53), respectively. Two biomarkers (CA15-3 and CEA) showed statistical significance in predicting all-cause mortality, with HRs 1.58 (95% CI 1.18-2.12) and HR 1.60 (95% CI 1.30-1.96), when adjusted for shared risk factors and prevalent CVD. Furthermore, biomarkers seem to be sex specific. CYFRA 21-1 presented as an independent predictor of CV morbidity and mortality in female, but not in male gender, with HR 1.82 (95% CI 1.40-2.35). When it comes to all-cause mortality, both CYFRA and CEA show statistical significance in male gender, with HR 1.64 (95% CI 1.28-3.12) and HR 1.55 (95% CI 1.18-2.02), while only CEA showed statistical significance in female gender, with HR 1.64 (95% CI 1.20-2.24). Lastly, CA15-3 and CEA strongly predicted CV mortality with HR 3.01 (95% CI 1.70-5.32) and HR 1.82 (95% CI 1.30-2.56). On another hand, CA 15-3 also presented as an independent predictor of heart failure (HF) with HR 1.67 (95% CI 1.15-2.42). Conclusion: Several tumour biomarkers demonstrated independent prognostic value for CV events and all-cause mortality in a large cohort from the general population. These findings support the notion that CVD and cancer are associated with similar pathological milieus.

Dataset Information

Quantifying the contribution of established risk factors to cardiovascular mortality differences between Russia and Norway.

Publications

Quantifying the contribution of established risk factors to cardiovascular mortality differences between Russia and Norway.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets