Key result
Life's Essential 8 matches SCORE2 for predicting incident MACE.
Why the study?
Better control of modifiable risk factors can prevent CVD, motivating a comparison of the prognostic value of Life's Essential 8 and its components against the established SCORE2 risk prediction tool.
Does Life's Essential 8 provide comparable prognostic value to SCORE2 for predicting incident major adverse cardiovascular events in a middle-aged general population without established cardiovascular disease?
Cohort (n=2,938)
Does Life's Essential 8 provide comparable prognostic value to SCORE2 for predicting incident major adverse cardiovascular events in a middle-aged general population without established cardiovascular disease?
Life's Essential 8 demonstrates comparable prognostic performance to SCORE2 for predicting incident MACE in middle-aged adults without prior CVD, supporting its utility in lifestyle counseling and cardiovascular health promotion.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
LE8 and SCORE2 show similar MACE association; leaves open whether either refines risk stratification beyond current tools.
Background Better control of modifiable risk factors offers substantial potential to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD). Risk scores can be used to identify and quantify risk and to guide health promotion, based on prediction of CVD. Purpose To evaluate and compare the prognostic value of Life’s Essential 8 (LE8) and its components, and to compare LE8 with the established risk prediction tool SCORE2. Methods The Akershus Cardiac Examination 1950 (ACE1950) Study is an ongoing prospective birth cohort study including all men and women born in 1950 and residing in Akershus County, Norway. Cardiovascular risk assessment, including calculation of LE8 and SCORE2, was performed at the baseline visit (2012–2015). Data collection comprised self-reported information (comorbidities, medication use and lifestyle), fasting blood samples and clinical examination. LE8 comprises two major domains with 4 corresponding components: LE8 Health Behaviors (diet, smoking, sleep and physical activity and LE8 Health Factors (blood pressure, blood glucose, cholesterol and body mass index (BMI)). Participants were followed through 2022 for incident major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Results Among 5,827 individuals invited to the ACE 1950 Study, 3,706 (64%) participated, and 2,938 without established CVD and with complete LE8 data were analysed. Mean age was 63.9 years, 53% were women, with a mean SCORE2 of 6.1 and LE8 score of 63.9. Only 9.8% had “optimal” cardiovascular health (CVH), while 78.0% were categorized as “intermediate” and 12.2% as “poor.” Physical activity (59.7%) and blood pressure (52.5%) most frequently fell in the “poor” category. During a median follow-up of 8.3 years, 197 (6.7%) experienced incident MACE. Both LE8 (total score, domains, and number of optimal components) and SCORE2 were significantly associated with MACE, with similar prognostic performance (LE 8 HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.35-1.73; SCORE 2 HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.57-2.10, p for comparison = 0.30). The highest risk was observed in participants with “poor” CVH. See graphical abstract. Conclusions LE8 can be used in health promotion based on prognostic performance comparable to SCORE2, for counselling to a healthier lifestyle to optimize cardiovascular health in middle-aged populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ihle‐Hansen et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Cardiovascular disease risk prediction in middle-aged general population (n=2,938). Life's Essential 8 (LE8) vs. SCORE2 was evaluated on Incident major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.35-1.73, p=0.30 for comparison). Life's Essential 8 had similar prognostic performance to SCORE2 for predicting incident MACE (LE8 HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.35-1.73 vs SCORE2 HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.57-2.10; p=0.30).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: