Development and validation of the American Heart Association's prevent equations

Document Type

Article

Department

Office of the Provost; Cardiology

Abstract

Background: Multivariable equations are recommended by primary prevention guidelines to assess absolute risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, current equations have several limitations. Therefore, we developed and validated the AHA Predicting Risk of CVD EVENTs (PREVENT) equations among US adults aged 30-79 years without known CVD.
Methods: The derivation sample included individual-level participant data from 25 datasets (N=3,281,919) between 1992-2017. The primary outcome was CVD (atherosclerotic CVD [ASCVD] and heart failure [HF]). Predictors included traditional risk factors (smoking status, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, anti-hypertensive or statin use, diabetes) and estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]. Models were sex-specific, race-free, developed on the age-scale, and adjusted for competing risk of non-CVD death. Analyses were conducted in each dataset and meta-analyzed. Discrimination was assessed using Harrell's C-statistic. Calibration was calculated as the slope of the observed vs. predicted risk by decile. Additional equations to predict each CVD subtype (ASCVD, HF) and include optional predictors (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio [UACR], hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]), and social deprivation index [SDI]) were also developed. External validation was performed in 3,330,085 participants from 21 additional datasets.
Results: Among 6,612,004 adults included, mean (SD) age was 53 (12) years and 56% were female. Over a mean (SD) follow-up of 4.8 (3.1) years, there were 211,515 incident total CVD events. The median C-statistics in external validation for CVD were 0.794 (interquartile interval [IQI]: 0.763-0.809) in female and 0.757 (0.727-0.778) in male participants. The calibration slopes were 1.03 (IQI 0.81 -1.16) and 0.94 (0.81-1.13) among females and males, respectively. Similar estimates for discrimination and calibration were observed for ASCVD- and HF-specific models. The improvement in discrimination was small but statistically significant when UACR, HbA1c, and SDI were added together to the base model to total CVD (ΔC-statistic [IQI] 0.004 [0.004, 0.005] and 0.005 [0.004, 0.007] among females and males, respectively). Calibration improved significantly when UACR was added to the base model among those with marked albuminuria (>300mg/g) (1.05 [0.84-1.20] vs. 1.39 [1.14-1.65], p=0.01).
Conclusions: PREVENT equations accurately and precisely predicted risk for incident CVD and CVD subtypes in a large, diverse, and contemporary sample of US adults using routinely available clinical variables.

Comments

Volume, issue and pagination are not provided by the author/publisher.

Publication (Name of Journal)

Circulation

DOI

10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067626

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS