Key result
Ten-variable clinical risk model predicts 5-year CV death in stable CAD with ~0.80 validation accuracy.
Why the study?
Risk estimation is important to motivate treatment adherence and identify patients with stable CAD who may warrant additional or expensive treatments, prompting the development of a simple risk model based on readily available risk factors.
Can a simple risk model based on 10 readily available clinical variables accurately predict 5-year cardiovascular death in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Cohort (n=32,361)
Yes
Can a simple risk model based on 10 readily available clinical variables accurately predict 5-year cardiovascular death in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Provides a well-calibrated, externally validated 10-variable clinical risk score for predicting 5-year cardiovascular mortality in patients with stable CAD without requiring laboratory or LVEF measurements.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May aid risk stratification in stable CAD; leaves open whether implementation improves outcomes or requires prospective trials.
AIMS: Risk estimation is important to motivate patients to adhere to treatment and to identify those in whom additional treatments may be warranted and expensive treatments might be most cost effective. Our aim was to develop a simple risk model based on readily available risk factors for patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Models were developed in the CLARIFY registry of patients with stable CAD, first incorporating only simple clinical variables and then with the inclusion of assessments of left ventricular function, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and haemoglobin levels. The outcome of cardiovascular death over ∼5 years was analysed using a Cox proportional hazards model. Calibration of the models was assessed in an external study, the CORONOR registry of patients with stable coronary disease. We provide formulae for calculation of the risk score and simple integer points-based versions of the scores with associated look-up risk tables. Only the models based on simple clinical variables provided both good c-statistics (0.74 in CLARIFY and 0.80 or over in CORONOR), with no lack of calibration in the external dataset. CONCLUSION: Our preferred model based on 10 readily available variables [age, diabetes, smoking, heart failure (HF) symptom status and histories of atrial fibrillation or flutter, myocardial infarction, peripheral arterial disease, stroke, percutaneous coronary intervention, and hospitalization for HF] had good discriminatory power and fitted well in an external dataset. STUDY REGISTRATION: The CLARIFY registry is registered in the ISRCTN registry of clinical trials (ISRCTN43070564).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ford et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Stable coronary artery disease (n=32,361). CLARIFY 10-variable clinical risk prediction model (age, diabetes, smoking, heart failure symptom status, and histories of atrial fibrillation/flutter, MI, PAD, stroke, PCI, and hospitalization for HF) was evaluated on Cardiovascular death over median 5 years follow-up (c-statistic 0.74 (derivation) and 0.80 (validation), 95% CI 0.72-0.75). A 10-variable clinical risk model predicted 5-year cardiovascular death in stable CAD with c-statistics of 0.74 in CLARIFY and 0.80 in CORONOR external validation.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: