Cargando…

Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review

OBJECTIVE: To compare the strengths and limitations of cardiovascular risk scores available for clinicians in assessing the global (absolute) risk of cardiovascular disease. DESIGN: Review of cardiovascular risk scores. DATA SOURCES: Medline (1966 to May 2009) using a mixture of MeSH terms and free...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liew, S M, Doust, J, Glasziou, P
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Group 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072200/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21474616
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2010.220442
_version_ 1782201523523026944
author Liew, S M
Doust, J
Glasziou, P
author_facet Liew, S M
Doust, J
Glasziou, P
author_sort Liew, S M
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the strengths and limitations of cardiovascular risk scores available for clinicians in assessing the global (absolute) risk of cardiovascular disease. DESIGN: Review of cardiovascular risk scores. DATA SOURCES: Medline (1966 to May 2009) using a mixture of MeSH terms and free text for the keywords ‘cardiovascular’, ‘risk prediction’ and ‘cohort studies’. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: A study was eligible if it fulfilled the following criteria: (1) it was a cohort study of adults in the general population with no prior history of cardiovascular disease and not restricted by a disease condition; (2) the primary objective was the development of a cardiovascular risk score/equation that predicted an individual's absolute cardiovascular risk in 5–10 years; (3) the score could be used by a clinician to calculate the risk for an individual patient. RESULTS: 21 risk scores from 18 papers were identified from 3536 papers. Cohort size ranged from 4372 participants (SHS) to 1591209 records (QRISK2). More than half of the cardiovascular risk scores (11) were from studies with recruitment starting after 1980. Definitions and methods for measuring risk predictors and outcomes varied widely between scores. Fourteen cardiovascular risk scores reported data on prior treatment, but this was mainly limited to antihypertensive treatment. Only two studies reported prior use of lipid-lowering agents. None reported on prior use of platelet inhibitors or data on treatment drop-ins. CONCLUSIONS: The use of risk-factor-modifying drugs—for example, statins—and disease-modifying medication—for example, platelet inhibitors—was not accounted for. In addition, none of the risk scores addressed the effect of treatment drop-ins—that is, treatment started during the study period. Ideally, a risk score should be derived from a population free from treatment. The lack of accounting for treatment effect and the wide variation in study characteristics, predictors and outcomes causes difficulties in the use of cardiovascular risk scores for clinical treatment decision.
format Text
id pubmed-3072200
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BMJ Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30722002011-04-18 Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review Liew, S M Doust, J Glasziou, P Heart Systematic Review OBJECTIVE: To compare the strengths and limitations of cardiovascular risk scores available for clinicians in assessing the global (absolute) risk of cardiovascular disease. DESIGN: Review of cardiovascular risk scores. DATA SOURCES: Medline (1966 to May 2009) using a mixture of MeSH terms and free text for the keywords ‘cardiovascular’, ‘risk prediction’ and ‘cohort studies’. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: A study was eligible if it fulfilled the following criteria: (1) it was a cohort study of adults in the general population with no prior history of cardiovascular disease and not restricted by a disease condition; (2) the primary objective was the development of a cardiovascular risk score/equation that predicted an individual's absolute cardiovascular risk in 5–10 years; (3) the score could be used by a clinician to calculate the risk for an individual patient. RESULTS: 21 risk scores from 18 papers were identified from 3536 papers. Cohort size ranged from 4372 participants (SHS) to 1591209 records (QRISK2). More than half of the cardiovascular risk scores (11) were from studies with recruitment starting after 1980. Definitions and methods for measuring risk predictors and outcomes varied widely between scores. Fourteen cardiovascular risk scores reported data on prior treatment, but this was mainly limited to antihypertensive treatment. Only two studies reported prior use of lipid-lowering agents. None reported on prior use of platelet inhibitors or data on treatment drop-ins. CONCLUSIONS: The use of risk-factor-modifying drugs—for example, statins—and disease-modifying medication—for example, platelet inhibitors—was not accounted for. In addition, none of the risk scores addressed the effect of treatment drop-ins—that is, treatment started during the study period. Ideally, a risk score should be derived from a population free from treatment. The lack of accounting for treatment effect and the wide variation in study characteristics, predictors and outcomes causes difficulties in the use of cardiovascular risk scores for clinical treatment decision. BMJ Group 2011-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC3072200/ /pubmed/21474616 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2010.220442 Text en © 2011, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Liew, S M
Doust, J
Glasziou, P
Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
title Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
title_full Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
title_fullStr Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
title_full_unstemmed Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
title_short Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
title_sort cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: a review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072200/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21474616
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2010.220442
work_keys_str_mv AT liewsm cardiovascularriskscoresdonotaccountfortheeffectoftreatmentareview
AT doustj cardiovascularriskscoresdonotaccountfortheeffectoftreatmentareview
AT glaszioup cardiovascularriskscoresdonotaccountfortheeffectoftreatmentareview