Coronary Artery Calcium Score and Risk Classification for Coronary Heart Disease Prediction: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

By Tamar S. Polonsky, R. McClelland, N. Jorgensen, D. Bild, G. Burke, Alan D. Guerci, P. Greenland. Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), 2010

1,077 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Context Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) has been shown to predict future coronary heart disease (CHD) events. However, the extent to which adding CACS to traditional CHD risk factors improves classification of risk is unclear. Objective To determine whether adding CACS to a prediction model based on traditional risk factors improves classification of risk. Design, Setting and Participants CACS was measured by computed tomography on 6,814 participants from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA), a population-based cohort without known cardiovascular disease. Recruitment spanned July 2000 to September 2002; follow-up extended through May 2008. Participants with diabetes were excluded for the primary analysis. Five-year risk estimates for incident CHD were categorized as 0-<3%, 3-<10%, and ≥10% using Cox proportional hazards models. Model 1 used age, gender, tobacco use, systolic blood pressure, antihypertensive medication use, total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and race/ethnicity. Model 2 used these risk factors plus CACS. We calculated the net reclassification improvement (NRI) and compared the distribution of risk using Model 2 versus Model 1. Main Outcome Measures Incident CHD events Results Over 5.8 years median follow-up, 209 CHD events occurred, of which 122 were myocardial infarction, death from CHD, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. Model 2 resulted in significant improvements in risk prediction compared to Model 1 (NRI=0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.34, P<0.001). With Model 1, 69% of the cohort was classified in the highest or lowest risk categories, compared to 77% with Model 2. An additional 23% of those who experienced events were reclassified to high risk, and an additional 13% without events were reclassified to low risk using Model 2. Conclusions In the MESA cohort, addition of CACS to a prediction model based on traditional risk factors significantly improved the classification of risk and placed more individuals in the most extreme risk categories.

Subfields: Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Nephrology, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/58f78b4d4eb36612be7705e5ebb94db609c27d15

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

  1. Michael J. Pencina
  2. I. Neeland

Citations in the corpus