Cargando…

Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of risk scores (Framingham, Assign and QRISK2) in predicting high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in individuals rather than populations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This study included 1.8 million persons without CVD and prior stat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Staa, Tjeerd-Pieter, Gulliford, Martin, Ng, Edmond S.-W., Goldacre, Ben, Smeeth, Liam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4182667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25271417
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106455
_version_ 1782337580496322560
author van Staa, Tjeerd-Pieter
Gulliford, Martin
Ng, Edmond S.-W.
Goldacre, Ben
Smeeth, Liam
author_facet van Staa, Tjeerd-Pieter
Gulliford, Martin
Ng, Edmond S.-W.
Goldacre, Ben
Smeeth, Liam
author_sort van Staa, Tjeerd-Pieter
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of risk scores (Framingham, Assign and QRISK2) in predicting high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in individuals rather than populations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This study included 1.8 million persons without CVD and prior statin prescribing using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. This contains electronic medical records of the general population registered with a UK general practice. Individual CVD risks were estimated using competing risk regression models. Individual differences in the 10-year CVD risks as predicted by risk scores and competing risk models were estimated; the population was divided into 20 subgroups based on predicted risk. CVD outcomes occurred in 69,870 persons. In the subgroup with lowest risks, risk predictions by QRISK2 were similar to individual risks predicted using our competing risk model (99.9% of people had differences of less than 2%); in the subgroup with highest risks, risk predictions varied greatly (only 13.3% of people had differences of less than 2%). Larger deviations between QRISK2 and our individual predicted risks occurred with calendar year, different ethnicities, diabetes mellitus and number of records for medical events in the electronic health records in the year before the index date. A QRISK2 estimate of low 10-year CVD risk (<15%) was confirmed by Framingham, ASSIGN and our individual predicted risks in 89.8% while an estimate of high 10-year CVD risk (≥20%) was confirmed in only 48.6% of people. The majority of cases occurred in people who had predicted 10-year CVD risk of less than 20%. CONCLUSIONS: Application of existing CVD risk scores may result in considerable misclassification of high risk status. Current practice to use a constant threshold level for intervention for all patients, together with the use of different scoring methods, may inadvertently create an arbitrary classification of high CVD risk.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4182667
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41826672014-10-07 Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk? van Staa, Tjeerd-Pieter Gulliford, Martin Ng, Edmond S.-W. Goldacre, Ben Smeeth, Liam PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of risk scores (Framingham, Assign and QRISK2) in predicting high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in individuals rather than populations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This study included 1.8 million persons without CVD and prior statin prescribing using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. This contains electronic medical records of the general population registered with a UK general practice. Individual CVD risks were estimated using competing risk regression models. Individual differences in the 10-year CVD risks as predicted by risk scores and competing risk models were estimated; the population was divided into 20 subgroups based on predicted risk. CVD outcomes occurred in 69,870 persons. In the subgroup with lowest risks, risk predictions by QRISK2 were similar to individual risks predicted using our competing risk model (99.9% of people had differences of less than 2%); in the subgroup with highest risks, risk predictions varied greatly (only 13.3% of people had differences of less than 2%). Larger deviations between QRISK2 and our individual predicted risks occurred with calendar year, different ethnicities, diabetes mellitus and number of records for medical events in the electronic health records in the year before the index date. A QRISK2 estimate of low 10-year CVD risk (<15%) was confirmed by Framingham, ASSIGN and our individual predicted risks in 89.8% while an estimate of high 10-year CVD risk (≥20%) was confirmed in only 48.6% of people. The majority of cases occurred in people who had predicted 10-year CVD risk of less than 20%. CONCLUSIONS: Application of existing CVD risk scores may result in considerable misclassification of high risk status. Current practice to use a constant threshold level for intervention for all patients, together with the use of different scoring methods, may inadvertently create an arbitrary classification of high CVD risk. Public Library of Science 2014-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4182667/ /pubmed/25271417 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106455 Text en © 2014 van Staa et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
van Staa, Tjeerd-Pieter
Gulliford, Martin
Ng, Edmond S.-W.
Goldacre, Ben
Smeeth, Liam
Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?
title Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?
title_full Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?
title_fullStr Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?
title_full_unstemmed Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?
title_short Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk Using Framingham, ASSIGN and QRISK2: How Well Do They Predict Individual Rather than Population Risk?
title_sort prediction of cardiovascular risk using framingham, assign and qrisk2: how well do they predict individual rather than population risk?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4182667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25271417
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106455
work_keys_str_mv AT vanstaatjeerdpieter predictionofcardiovascularriskusingframinghamassignandqrisk2howwelldotheypredictindividualratherthanpopulationrisk
AT gullifordmartin predictionofcardiovascularriskusingframinghamassignandqrisk2howwelldotheypredictindividualratherthanpopulationrisk
AT ngedmondsw predictionofcardiovascularriskusingframinghamassignandqrisk2howwelldotheypredictindividualratherthanpopulationrisk
AT goldacreben predictionofcardiovascularriskusingframinghamassignandqrisk2howwelldotheypredictindividualratherthanpopulationrisk
AT smeethliam predictionofcardiovascularriskusingframinghamassignandqrisk2howwelldotheypredictindividualratherthanpopulationrisk