Why the study?
Existing 10-year image-based cardiovascular risk calculators combined conventional risk factors with carotid ultrasound phenotypes but lacked chronic kidney disease biomarkers such as estimated glomerular filtration rate.
Does the AECRS2.0 risk score improve 10-year CVD/stroke risk prediction compared to QRISK3 in a South Asian-Indian diabetes cohort with moderate CKD?
Does the AECRS2.0 risk score improve 10-year CVD/stroke risk prediction compared to QRISK3 in a South Asian-Indian diabetes cohort with moderate CKD?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The AECRS2.0 integrated calculator, which includes eGFR and carotid ultrasound phenotypes, demonstrated superior predictive performance for 10-year CVD/stroke risk compared to QRISK3 in patients with diabetes and moderate CKD.
BACKGROUND: Recently, a 10-year image-based integrated calculator (called AtheroEdge Composite Risk Score-AECRS1.0) was developed which combines conventional cardiovascular risk factors (CCVRF) with image phenotypes derived from carotid ultrasound (CUS). Such calculators did not include chronic kidney disease (CKD)-based biomarker called estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The novelty of this study is to design and develop an advanced integrated version called-AECRS2.0 that combines eGFR with image phenotypes to compute the composite risk score. Furthermore, AECRS2.0 was benchmarked against QRISK3 which considers eGFR for risk assessment. METHODS: The method consists of three major steps: 1) five, current CUS image phenotypes (CUSIP) measurements using AtheroEdge system (AtheroPoint, CA, USA) consisting of: average carotid intima-media thickness (cIMTave), maximum cIMT (cIMTmax), minimum cIMT (cIMTmin), variability in cIMT (cIMTV), and total plaque area (TPA); 2) five, 10-year CUSIP measurements by combining these current five CUSIP with 11 CCVRF (age, ethnicity, gender, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, smoking, carotid artery type, hemoglobin, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and eGFR); 3) AECRS2.0 risk score computation and its comparison to QRISK3 using area-under-the-curve (AUC). The proposed AECRS2.0 reported higher AUC (AUC=0.89, P<0.001) compared to QRISK3 (AUC=0.51, P<0.001) by ~74% in CKD patients. CONCLUSIONS: An integrated calculator AECRS2.0 can be used to assess the 10-year CVD/stroke risk in patients suffering from CKD. AECRS2.0 was much superior to QRISK3.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Viswanathan et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: