Background: Current recommendations include using the non-Hispanic White (NHW) pooled cohort equation (PCE) for 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk estimation among Hispanic individuals and the non-Hispanic Black (NHB) PCE when African ancestry is present. We studied PCE performance at thresholds of African and European ancestry among US Hispanics. Methods: Hispanic participants from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA), ages 44-75 years without diabetes mellitus or prior cardiovascular disease were included. ADMIXTURE software was used to estimate quantile thresholds of continental genetic ancestry (African and European). We compared 10-year survival Kaplan-Meier estimates among Mexican Hispanics, Caribbean Hispanics and Other Hispanics using a log-rank analysis. We calculated the predicted-to-observed (P/O) ASCVD event ratios using the NHW and NHB PCE across quantile threshold of African and European ancestry. Results: 966 MESA Hispanics were stratified into: Mexican (n=504), Caribbean (n=284) or Other Hispanic (n=178). At 10-years, there were 179 ASCVD events [Mexicans (n=107), Caribbean (n=49), Other Hispanic (n=23)]. We observed overestimation using the NHW and NHB PCE as evidenced by P/O ratios >1. Both PCEs performed better (P/O ratios converge toward 1) with increasing quantiles of European Ancestry and performed worse (P/O ratios diverge from 1) with increasing quantiles of African Ancestry. At a greater than 0.7 quantile of African ancestry, a sharp increase in overestimation was recorded for both PCEs. (Fig1A). Though Mexican Hispanics had the lowest ASCVD-free survival probability at 10 years’ time mark, results were not statistically significant. (Fig 1B) Conclusion: We observed overestimation in the 10-year ASCVD risk estimation using the NHW and NHB PCE among Hispanics as evidenced by P/O ratios >1. Both PCEs performed better with increasing quantiles of European ancestry and performed poorly with increasing quantiles of African ancestry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nriagu et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: