Key result
Comprehensive CT-based CVD screening fails to reduce all-cause mortality compared to usual care.
Why the study?
Does invitation to comprehensive cardiovascular screening reduce all-cause mortality in men aged 60-64 years?
RCT (n=31,268)
Single-blind
1:4 allocation based on computer-generated random numbers
Yes
Does invitation to comprehensive cardiovascular screening reduce all-cause mortality in men aged 60-64 years?
Hazard Ratio: 0.94 (95% CI 0.86–1.03)
Absolute Event Rate: 9.3% vs 9.9%
p-value: p=0.169
Invitation to comprehensive cardiovascular screening in men aged 60-64 years did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality at 7 years but increased the risk of severe bleeding.
Background and aims Limited data suggest a benefit of population-based screening for cardiovascular disease (CVD) with respect to mortality. Methods A population-based, parallel-randomized controlled trial of Danish men aged 60-64 years randomized 1:4 to invitation to screening for subclinical CVD or no invitation (control group) were performed. Allocation was based on computer-generated random numbers and stratified on municipality. Only the control group was blinded. The screening included coronary artery calcification score, aneurysms, atrial fibrillation, peripheral arterial disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolemia. Intervention included statin, aspirin and surveillance. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Results 31,268 participants were randomized; 25,322 men in the control arm and 5,946 in the invited arm, of whom 3,720 attended and were screened (62·6%). In intention-to-treat analyses, after a median follow-up of 7·0 years, 555 (9.3%) men in the intervention group and 2,509 (9·9%) men in the control group had died; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.94 (95% CI: 0·86;1·03), p=0·169. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were registered in 606 (10·2%) versus 2,682 (10·6%) (HR=0·96 [95% CI 0·88;1.04]; p=0·319). Severe bleedings were significantly more common in the invited-to-screening group (6·0% versus 5·1%; HR=1·18 [95% CI 1·05;1·32]; p=0·007). This included intracranial (HR=1·23 (95% CI 0·96;1·58); p=0·097) and gastrointestinal bleedings (HR=1·18; (95% CI 1·03;1·34) p=0·014), respectively. Conclusions Invitation to a comprehensive CT-based screening for subclinical CVD did not decrease death over 7 years among men aged 60–64 years but did increase severe bleeding. Because the trial was powered for events over 10 years, further follow-up is needed. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT03946410
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lindholt et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in Subclinical cardiovascular disease (n=31,268). Invitation to screening for subclinical CVD vs. No invitation was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.03, p=0.169). Invitation to comprehensive CT-based screening for subclinical CVD did not significantly decrease all-cause mortality compared to no invitation (9.3% vs 9.9%; HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.86-1.03; P=0.169).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: