Key result
Each point increase in ideal CV health metrics is linked to ~15% lower incident HF risk.
Why the study?
Both genetic and cardiovascular factors contribute to heart failure risk, but whether ideal cardiovascular health metrics offset genetic risk remains unclear.
Do favorable ideal cardiovascular health metrics reduce the risk of incident heart failure in populations with varying genetic risk?
Cohort (n=431,796)
Yes
Do favorable ideal cardiovascular health metrics reduce the risk of incident heart failure in populations with varying genetic risk?
Adherence to favorable cardiovascular health metrics is associated with a lower risk of incident heart failure regardless of underlying genetic risk.
May support CVH promotion across genetic strata; extends observational data but leaves causal effects open.
BACKGROUND: Both genetic and cardiovascular factors contribute to the risk of developing heart failure (HF), but whether idea cardiovascular health metrics (ICVHMs) offset the genetic association with incident HF remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the genetic association with incident HF as well as the modification effect of ICVHMs on such genetic association in Chinese and British populations. METHODS: An ICVHMs based on smoking, drinking, physical activity, diets, body mass index, waist circumference, blood pressure, blood glucose, and blood lipids, and a polygenic risk score (PRS) for HF were constructed in the China Kadoorie Biobank (CKB) of 96,014 participants and UK Biobank (UKB) of 335,782 participants which were free from HF and severe chronic diseases at baseline. RESULTS: During the median follow-up of 11.38 and 8.73 years, 1451 and 3169 incident HF events were documented in CKB and UKB, respectively. HF risk increased monotonically with the increase of PRS per standard deviation (CKB: hazard ratio [HR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07, 1.32; UKB: 1.07; 1.03, 1.11; P for trend < 0.001). Each point increase in ICVHMs was associated with 15% and 20% lower risk of incident HF in CKB (0.85; 0.81, 0.90) and UKB (0.80; 0.77, 0.82), respectively. Compared with unfavorable ICVHMs, favorable ICVHMs was associated with a lower HF risk, with 0.71 (0.44, 1.15), 0.41 (0.22, 0.77), and 0.48 (0.30, 0.77) in the low, intermediate, and high genetic risk in CKB and 0.34 (0.26, 0.44), 0.32 (0.25, 0.41), and 0.37 (0.28, 0.47) in UKB (P for multiplicative interaction > 0.05). Participants with low genetic risk and favorable ICVHMs, as compared with high genetic risk and unfavorable ICVHMs, had 56~72% lower risk of HF (CKB 0.44; 0.28, 0.70; UKB 0.28; 0.22, 0.37). No additive interaction between PRS and ICVHMs was observed (relative excess risk due to interaction was 0.05 [-0.22, 0.33] in CKB and 0.04 [-0.14, 0.22] in UKB). CONCLUSIONS: In CKB and UKB, genetic risk and ICVHMs were independently associated with the risk of incident HF, which suggested that adherence to favorable cardiovascular health status was associated with a lower HF risk among participants with all gradients of genetic risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Incident heart failure (n=431,796). Ideal cardiovascular health metrics (ICVHMs) vs. Unfavorable ICVHMs was evaluated on Incident heart failure (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.90, p=<0.001). Each point increase in ideal cardiovascular health metrics was associated with a 15% and 20% lower risk of incident heart failure in the China Kadoorie Biobank and UK Biobank, respectively, regardless of genetic risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: