Interpreting Hemoglobin A1C in Combination With Conventional Risk Factors for Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk

Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events, but its use for prediction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in combination with conventional risk factors has not been well defined

Population Impact & Efficiency of Benefit‐Targeted Versus Risk‐Targeted Statin Prescribing for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND: Benefit-targeted statin prescribing may be superior to risk-targeted statin prescribing (the current standard), but the impact and efficiency of this approach are unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) using an open-source model (the Prevention Impact and Efficiency Model) to compare targeting of statin therapy according to expected benefit (benefit-targeted) versus baseline risk (risk-targeted) in terms of projected population-level impact and efficiency. Impact was defined as relative % reduction in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the US population for the given strategy compared to current statin treatment patterns; and efficiency as the number needed to treat over 10 years (NNT10, average and maximum) to prevent each atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease event. Benefit-targeted moderate-intensity statin therapy at a treatment threshold of 2.3% expected 10-year absolute risk reduction could produce a 5.7% impact (95% confidence interval, 4.8-6.7). This is approximately equivalent to the potential impact of risk-targeted therapy at a treatment threshold of 5% 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk (5.6% impact [4.7-6.6]). Whereas the estimated maximum NNT10 is much improved for benefit-targeted versus risk-targeted therapy at these equivalent-impact thresholds (43.5 vs 180), the average NNT10 is nearly equivalent (24.2 vs 24.6). Reaching 10% impact (half the Healthy People 2020 impact objective, loosely defined) is theoretically possible with benefit-targeted moderate-intensity statins of persons with expected absolute risk reduction >2.3% if we expand age eligibility and account for treatment of all persons with diabetes mellitus or with low-density lipoprotein >190 mg/dL (impact=12.4%; average NNT10=23.0). CONCLUSIONS: Benefit-based targeting of statin therapy provides modest gains in efficiency over risk-based prescribing and could theoretically help attain approximately half of the Healthy People 2020 impact goal with reasonable efficiency

Cardiovascular genetic risk testing for targeting statin therapy in the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Background: It is unclear whether testing for novel risk factors, such as a cardiovascular genetic risk score (cGRS), improves clinical decision making or health outcomes when used for targeting statin initiation in the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Our objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of cGRS testing to inform clinical decision making about statin initiation in individuals with low-to-intermediate (2.5%-7.5%) 10-year predicted risk of ASCVD. Methods and Results: We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of testing for a 27-single-nucleotide polymorphism cGRS comparing 4 test/treat strategies: Treat all, treat none, test/treat if cGRS is high, and test/treat if cGRS is intermediate or high. We tested a set of clinical scenarios of men and women, aged 45 to 65 years, with 10-year ASCVD risks between 2.5% and 7.5%. Our primary outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Under base case assumptions for statin disutility and cost, the preferred strategy is to treat all patients with ASCVD risk >2.5% without cGRS testing. For certain clinical scenarios, such as a 57-year-old man with a 10-year ASCVD risk of 7.5%, cGRS testing can be cost-effective under a limited set of assumptions; for example, when statins cost $15 per month and statin disutility is 0.013 (ie, willing to trade 3 months of life in perfect health to avoid 20 years of statin therapy), the preferred strategy (using a willingness-to-pay threshold of$50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained) is to test and treat if cGRS is intermediate or high. Overall, the results were not sensitive to assumptions about statin efficacy and harms. Conclusions: Testing for a 27-single-nucleotide polymorphism cGRS is generally not a cost-effective approach for targeting statin therapy in the primary prevention of ASCVD for low- to intermediate-risk patients

Coronary Heart Disease and Ischemic Stroke Polygenic Risk Scores and atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in a Diverse, Population-Based Cohort Study

The predictive ability of coronary heart disease (CHD) and ischemic stroke (IS) polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been evaluated individually, but whether they predict the combined outcome of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains insufficiently researched. It is also unclear whether associations of the CHD and IS PRS with ASCVD are independent of subclinical atherosclerosis measures. 7,286 White and 2,016 Black participants from the population-based Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study who were free of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes at baseline were included. We computed previously validated CHD and IS PRS consisting of 1,745,179 and 3,225,583 genetic variants, respectively. Cox proportional hazards models were used to test the association between each PRS and ASCVD, adjusting for traditional risk factors, ankle-brachial index, carotid intima media thickness, and carotid plaque. The hazard ratios (HR) for the CHD and IS PRS were significant with HR of 1.50 (95% CI: 1.36-1.66) and 1.31 (95% CI: 1.18-1.45) respectively for the risk of incident ASCVD per standard deviation increase in CHD and IS PRS among White participants after adjusting for traditional risk factors. The HR for the CHD PRS was not significant with an HR of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.79-1.13) for the risk of incident ASCVD in Black participants. The HR for the IS PRS was significant with an HR of 1.26 (95%CI: 1.05-1.51) for the risk of incident ASCVD in Black participants. The association of the CHD and IS PRS with ASCVD was not attenuated in White participants after adjustment for ankle-brachial index, carotid intima media thickness, and carotid plaque. The CHD and IS PRS do not cross-predict well, and predict better the outcome for which they were created than the composite ASCVD outcome. Thus, the use of the composite outcome of ASCVD may not be ideal for genetic risk prediction

Coronary heart disease and ischemic stroke polygenic risk scores and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in a diverse, population-based cohort study

The predictive ability of coronary heart disease (CHD) and ischemic stroke (IS) polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been evaluated individually, but whether they predict the combined outcome of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains insufficiently researched. It is also unclear whether associations of the CHD and IS PRS with ASCVD are independent of subclinical atherosclerosis measures. 7,286 White and 2,016 Black participants from the population-based Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study who were free of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes at baseline were included. We computed previously validated CHD and IS PRS consisting of 1,745,179 and 3,225,583 genetic variants, respectively. Cox proportional hazards models were used to test the association between each PRS and ASCVD, adjusting for traditional risk factors, ankle-brachial index, carotid intima media thickness, and carotid plaque. The hazard ratios (HR) for the CHD and IS PRS were significant with HR of 1.50 (95% CI: 1.36–1.66) and 1.31 (95% CI: 1.18–1.45) respectively for the risk of incident ASCVD per standard deviation increase in CHD and IS PRS among White participants after adjusting for traditional risk factors. The HR for the CHD PRS was not significant with an HR of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.79–1.13) for the risk of incident ASCVD in Black participants. The HR for the IS PRS was significant with an HR of 1.26 (95%CI: 1.05–1.51) for the risk of incident ASCVD in Black participants. The association of the CHD and IS PRS with ASCVD was not attenuated in White participants after adjustment for ankle-brachial index, carotid intima media thickness, and carotid plaque. The CHD and IS PRS do not cross-predict well, and predict better the outcome for which they were created than the composite ASCVD outcome. Thus, the use of the composite outcome of ASCVD may not be ideal for genetic risk prediction

The effects on public health of climate change adaptation responses: a systematic review of evidence from low- and middle-income countries.

Climate change adaptation responses are being developed and delivered in many parts of the world in the absence of detailed knowledge of their effects on public health. Here we present the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature reporting the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The review used the 'Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative' database (comprising 1682 publications related to climate change adaptation responses) that was constructed through systematic literature searches in Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar (2013-2020). For this study, further screening was performed to identify studies from LMICs reporting the effects on human health of climate change adaptation responses. Studies were categorised by study design and data were extracted on geographic region, population under investigation, type of adaptation response and reported health effects. The review identified 99 studies (1117 reported outcomes), reporting evidence from 66 LMICs. Only two studies were ex ante formal evaluations of climate change adaptation responses. Papers reported adaptation responses related to flooding, rainfall, drought and extreme heat, predominantly through behaviour change, and infrastructural and technological improvements. Reported (direct and intermediate) health outcomes included reduction in infectious disease incidence, improved access to water/sanitation and improved food security. All-cause mortality was rarely reported, and no papers were identified reporting on maternal and child health. Reported maladaptations were predominantly related to widening of inequalities and unforeseen co-harms. Reporting and publication-bias seems likely with only 3.5% of all 1117 health outcomes reported to be negative. Our review identified some evidence that climate change adaptation responses may have benefits for human health but the overall paucity of evidence is concerning and represents a major missed opportunity for learning. There is an urgent need for greater focus on the funding, design, evaluation and standardised reporting of the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses to enable evidence-based policy action

The effects on public health of climate change adaptation responses: a systematic review of evidence from low- and middle-income countries

Climate change adaptation responses are being developed and delivered in many parts of the world in the absence of detailed knowledge of their effects on public health. Here we present the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature reporting the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The review used the 'Global Adaptation Mapping Initiative' database (comprising 1682 publications related to climate change adaptation responses) that was constructed through systematic literature searches in Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar (2013–2020). For this study, further screening was performed to identify studies from LMICs reporting the effects on human health of climate change adaptation responses. Studies were categorised by study design and data were extracted on geographic region, population under investigation, type of adaptation response and reported health effects. The review identified 99 studies (1117 reported outcomes), reporting evidence from 66 LMICs. Only two studies were ex ante formal evaluations of climate change adaptation responses. Papers reported adaptation responses related to flooding, rainfall, drought and extreme heat, predominantly through behaviour change, and infrastructural and technological improvements. Reported (direct and intermediate) health outcomes included reduction in infectious disease incidence, improved access to water/sanitation and improved food security. All-cause mortality was rarely reported, and no papers were identified reporting on maternal and child health. Reported maladaptations were predominantly related to widening of inequalities and unforeseen co-harms. Reporting and publication-bias seems likely with only 3.5% of all 1117 health outcomes reported to be negative. Our review identified some evidence that climate change adaptation responses may have benefits for human health but the overall paucity of evidence is concerning and represents a major missed opportunity for learning. There is an urgent need for greater focus on the funding, design, evaluation and standardised reporting of the effects on health of climate change adaptation responses to enable evidence-based policy action

Interpreting Hemoglobin A1C in Combination With Conventional Risk Factors for Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk

BACKGROUND: Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events, but its use for prediction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in combination with conventional risk factors has not been well defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: To understand the effect of HbA1C on CVD risk in the context of other CVD risk factors, we analyzed HbA1C and other CVD risk factor measurements in 2000 individuals aged 40-79 years old without pre-existing diabetes or cardiovascular disease from the 2011-2012 NHANES survey. The resulting regression model was used to predict the HbA1C distribution based on individual patient characteristics. We then calculated post-test 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk incorporating the actual versus predicted HbA1C, according to established methods, for a set of example scenarios. Age, gender, race/ethnicity and traditional cardiovascular risk factors were significant predictors of HbA1C in our model, with the expected HbA1C distribution being significantly higher in non-Hispanic black, non-Hispanic Asian and Hispanic individuals than non-Hispanic white/other individuals. Incorporating the expected HbA1C distribution into pretest ASCVD risk has a modest effect on post-test ASCVD risk. In the patient examples we assessed, having an HbA1C < 5.7% reduced post-test risk by 0.4%-2.0% points, whereas having an HbA1C ≥ 6.5% increased post-test risk by 1.0%-2.5% points, depending on the scenario. The post-test risk increase from having an HbA1C ≥ 6.5 % tends to approximate the risk increase from being five years older in age. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1C has modest effects on predicted ASCVD risk when considered in the context of conventional risk factors