Why the study?
The optimal method for communicating coronary heart disease risk to individual patients is not yet clear.
Does a coronary age calculator incorporating traditional risk factors and CAC improve risk discrimination for CHD events compared to chronological age or CAC alone in MESA participants?
Population
Participants in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis
Comparison
Coronary age vs chronological age, MESA CHD Risk Score, and CAC alone
Key result
A newly derived coronary age calculator incorporating coronary artery calcium had identical predictive ability to the MESA CHD Risk Score and outperformed chronological age and CAC alone.
Authors
Loading...
May aid CAC result communication in similar cohorts; leaves open validation and outcome impact versus MESA score.
Cohort
Yes
Does a coronary age calculator incorporating traditional risk factors and CAC improve risk discrimination for CHD events compared to chronological age or CAC alone in MESA participants?
Blaha et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Coronary heart disease risk. Coronary age calculator (with and without CAC) vs. Chronological age, MESA CHD Risk Score, and CAC alone was evaluated on Risk discrimination for CHD events. A newly derived coronary age calculator incorporating coronary artery calcium had identical predictive ability to the MESA CHD Risk Score and outperformed chronological age and CAC alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: