Value of Progression of Coronary Artery Calcification for Risk Prediction of Coronary and Cardiovascular Events: Result of the HNR Study (Heinz Nixdorf Recall)

BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) allows estimation of coronary artery calcium (CAC) progression. We evaluated several progression algorithms in our unselected, population-based cohort for risk prediction of coronary and cardiovascular events. METHODS: In 3281 participants (45–74 years of age), free from cardiovascular disease until the second visit, risk factors, and CTs at baseline (b) and after a mean of 5.1 years (5y) were measured. Hard coronary and cardiovascular events, and total cardiovascular events including revascularization, as well, were recorded during a follow-up time of 7.8±2.2 years after the second CT. The added predictive value of 10 CAC progression algorithms on top of risk factors including baseline CAC was evaluated by using survival analysis, C-statistics, net reclassification improvement, and integrated discrimination index. A subgroup analysis of risk in CAC categories was performed. RESULTS: We observed 85 (2.6%) hard coronary, 161 (4.9%) hard cardiovascular, and 241 (7.3%) total cardiovascular events. Absolute CAC progression was higher with versus without subsequent coronary events (median, 115 [Q1–Q3, 23–360] versus 8 [0–83], P<0.0001; similar for hard/total cardiovascular events). Some progression algorithms added to the predictive value of baseline CT and risk assessment in terms of C-statistic or integrated discrimination index, especially for total cardiovascular events. However, CAC progression did not improve models including CAC(5y) and 5-year risk factors. An excellent prognosis was found for 921 participants with double-zero CAC(b)=CAC(5y)=0 (10-year coronary and hard/total cardiovascular risk: 1.4%, 2.0%, and 2.8%), which was for participants with incident CAC 1.8%, 3.8%, and 6.6%, respectively. When CAC(b) progressed from 1 to 399 to CAC(5y)≥400, coronary and total cardiovascular risk were nearly 2-fold in comparison with subjects who remained below CAC(5y)=400. Participants with CAC(b)≥400 had high rates of hard coronary and hard/total cardiovascular events (10-year risk: 12.0%, 13.5%, and 30.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CAC progression is associated with coronary and cardiovascular event rates, but adds only weakly to risk prediction. What counts is the most recent CAC value and risk factor assessment. Therefore, a repeat scan >5 years after the first scan may be of additional value, except when a double-zero CT scan is present or when the subjects are already at high risk.