RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Prediction of Multiple Individual Primary Cardiovascular Events Using Pooled Cohorts
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.08.01.23293525
DO 10.1101/2023.08.01.23293525
A1 Sussman, Jeremy B.
A1 Whitney, Rachael T.
A1 Burke, James F.
A1 Hayward, Rodney A.
A1 Galecki, Andrzej
A1 Sidney, Stephen
A1 Allen, Norrina Bai
A1 Gottesman, Rebecca F.
A1 Heckbert, Susan R.
A1 Longstreth, William T.
A1 Psaty, Bruce M
A1 Elkind, Mitchell S.V.
A1 Levine, Deborah A.
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/08/02/2023.08.01.23293525.abstract
AB Introduction Most current clinical risk prediction scores for cardiovascular disease prevention use a composite outcome. Risk prediction scores for specific cardiovascular events could identify people who are at higher risk for some events than others informing personalized care and trial recruitment. We sought to predict risk for multiple different events, describe how those risks differ, and examine if these differences could improve treatment priorities.Methods We used participant-level data from five cohort studies. We included participants between 40 and 79 years old who had no history of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or heart failure (HF). We made separate models to predict 10-year rates of first atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), first fatal or nonfatal MI, first fatal or nonfatal stroke, new-onset HF, fatal ASCVD, fatal MI, fatal stroke, and all-cause mortality using established ASCVD risk factors. To limit overfitting, we used elastic net regularization with alpha = 0.75. We assessed the models for calibration, discrimination, and for correlations between predicted risks for different events. We also estimated the potential impact of varying treatment based on patients who are high risk for some ASCVD events, but not others.Results Our study included 24,505 people; 55.6% were women, and 20.7% were non-Hispanic Black. Our models had C-statistics between 0.75 for MI and 0.85 for HF, good calibration, and minimal overfitting. The models were least similar for fatal stroke and all MI (0.58). In 1,840 participants whose risk of MI but not stroke or all-cause mortality was in the top quartile, we estimate one blood pressure-lowering medication would have a 2.4% chance of preventing any ASCVD event per 10 years. A moderate-strength statin would have a 2.1% chance. In 1,039 participants who had top quartile risk of stroke but not MI or mortality, a blood pressure-lowering medication would have a 2.5% chance of preventing an event, but a moderate-strength statin, 1.6%.Conclusion We developed risk scores for eight key clinical events and found that cardiovascular risk varies somewhat for different clinical events. Future work could determine if tailoring decisions by risk of separate events can improve care.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialN/AFunding StatementThis research project is supported by a grant R01 NS102715 from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Service. The NINDS was not involved in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication except one representative (author RFG) of the funding agency reviewed the manuscript. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke or the National Institutes of Health. This research was supported by contracts HHSN268201200036C, HHSN268200800007C, HHSN268201800001C, N01HC55222, N01HC85079, N01HC85080, N01HC85081, N01HC85082, N01HC85083, N01HC85086, 75N92021D00006, and grants U01HL080295 and U01HL130114 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), with additional contribution from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS). Additional support was provided by R01AG023629 from the National Institute on Aging (NIA). A full list of principal CHS investigators and institutions can be found at CHS-NHLBI.org. The content of this manuscript is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health The Framingham Heart Study (FHS) is conducted and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) in collaboration with Boston University (Contract No. N01-HC-25195, HHSN268201500001I and 75N92019D00031). This manuscript was not prepared in collaboration with investigators of the Framingham Heart Study and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the Framingham Heart Study, Boston University, or NHLBI. The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis study (MESA) is conducted and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) in collaboration with MESA investigators. Support for MESA is provided by contracts N01-HC95159, N01-HC-95160, N01-HC-95161, N01-HC-95162, N01-HC-95163, N01-HC-95164, N01-HC-95165, N01-HC95166, N01-HC-95167, N01-HC-95168, N01-HC-95169 and CTSA UL1-RR-024156. The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study has been funded in whole or in part with Federal funds from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, under Contract nos. (75N92022D00001, 75N92022D00002, 75N92022D00003, 75N92022D00004, 75N92022D00005). Additionally, Dr. Gottesman was supported by the NINDS intramural research program. The authors thank the staff and participants of the ARIC study for their important contributions. The Northern Manhattan Stroke (NOMAS) study has been funded at least in part with federal funds from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke by R01 NS29993, AG066162 and AG057709.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This research was reviewed and considered exempt by the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData referred to in this manuscript is owned by each respective study cohort. Data will be made available by request with proper data sharing agreements in place with the cohorts' institutions.