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

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

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

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