Key result
Adjusting SCORE2 for lipid-lowering therapy modestly shifts risk calculation with ~76% agreement in risk thresholds.
Why the study?
Current guidelines advise against using SCORE2 algorithms in individuals on lipid-lowering therapy, but the effect of treatment on risk calculation and detection of high-risk individuals remained unclear.
Does adjusting for lipid-lowering therapy significantly alter the risk classification of SCORE2 algorithms in middle-aged individuals treated for dyslipidemia?
Cross-Sectional (n=417)
Does adjusting for lipid-lowering therapy significantly alter the risk classification of SCORE2 algorithms in middle-aged individuals treated for dyslipidemia?
Absolute Event Rate: 5.4% vs 6.6%
p-value: p=<0.05
Adjusting lipid levels for lipid-lowering therapy has only a modest effect on SCORE2 risk classification, suggesting the algorithm may still provide useful risk estimation in treated individuals despite current guideline restrictions.
Agreement between SCORE2 variants suggests modest reclassification from lipid adjustment; leaves open guideline applicability in treated dyslipidemia.
Background and aim Current guidelines state that Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) risk algorithms should not be used among persons under lipid-lowering therapy. This study investigated in dyslipidemia-treated individuals the effect of lipid-lowering treatment on SCORE2 calculation and on its performance to detect high risk individuals. Methods and results Analysis included middle-aged individuals (n=417), treated for dyslipidemia, without established cardiovascular disease, diabetes and/or chronic kidney disease, recruited from screening programs in the community [mean age 59.5±6.9 (SD) years, men 48.9%, statin monotherapy 67%, statin/ezetimibe combination 26%]. SCORE2 algorithms were calculated using measured and adjusted (for the lipid-lowering therapy characteristics) lipid levels. SCORE2 and adjusted-SCORE2 were 5.4±2.7% and 6.6±3.3% respectively (P<0.05). Participants classified as low-moderate/high/very-high risk (age-dependent risk thresholds) were 42.2%/51.1%/6.7% with SCORE2, and 28.8%/54.4%/16.8% with adjusted-SCORE2 (agreement 76.5%, weighted kappa 0.73, P<0.05). Using single risk thresholds (<10%, 10% to <20%, and ≥20%), the respective percentages were 93.8%/6.2%/0% and 83.9%/16.1%/0% (agreement 90.2%, kappa 0.52, P<0.05). The agreement between carotid plaque score and SCORE2/adjusted-SCORE2 was 54% (weighted kappa 0.29, P<0.05)/50.1% (weighted kappa 0.25, P<0.05). Conclusions Lipid-lowering treatment appears to have a modest effect on SCORE2 calculation and mainly on its stability to detect high risk individuals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Κόλλιας et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Dyslipidemia (n=417). Lipid-lowering treatment vs. Adjusted lipid levels (simulating untreated state) was evaluated on SCORE2 risk score (p=<0.05). Lipid-lowering treatment modestly affected SCORE2 calculation (5.4% vs adjusted 6.6%, P<0.05) and its ability to detect high-risk individuals, with 76.5% agreement in age-dependent risk thresholds.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: