Estimated Life Expectancy Without Recurrent Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Vascular Disease: The SMART-REACH Model

Cardiovascular risk assessment in daily clinical practice: when and how to use a risk score

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The European Society of Cardiology Guidelines encourage the use of risk prediction models to enhance an adequate management of cardiovascular risk factors and the implementation of healthy behaviours. In primary prevention, estimating CVD risk is used to identify patients at high risk in order to enhance preventive strategies and decrease the incidence of unfavourable events and pre-mature cardiovascular deaths. Risk models integrate information on several conventional risk factors and estimate individual risk over a 10-year period. In addition to conventional risk factors, emerging non-traditional markers should be considered and mentioned in risk stratification. In secondary prevention, optimal management of patients include evaluation of residual CVD risk. The 10-year risk of recurrent events is not the same for all patients. The identification of high-risk patients is mandatory to prevent recurrent events and to allow to engage intensive treatments and follow-up strategies, representing an opportunity for major public health gain. This review provides a guide to evaluate which CVD risk score is appropriate for use in different settings in clinical practice.

Prediction of Severe Baseline Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis and Subsequent Risk of Stroke and Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

Risk models to identify patients at high risk of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS) can help in selecting patients for screening, but long-term outcomes in these patients are unknown. We assessed the diagnostic and prognostic value of the previously published Prevalence of ACAS (PACAS) risk model to detect ACAS at baseline and to predict subsequent risk of stroke and cardiovascular disease (CVD) during follow-up.

METHODS

We validated the discrimination and calibration of the PACAS risk model to detect severe (≥70% narrowing) ACAS with patients from the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health registry. We subsequently calculated the incidence rates of stroke and CVD (fatal and nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction or vascular death) during follow-up in 4 risk groups (low, medium, high, and very high, corresponding to sum scores of ≤9, 10-13, 14-17, and ≥18, respectively).

RESULTS

Among 26 384 patients, aged between 45 and 80 years, without prior carotid procedures, 1662 (6.3%) had severe baseline ACAS. During ≈70 000 patient-years of follow-up, 1124 strokes and 2484 CVD events occurred. Discrimination of the PACAS model was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.68), and calibration showed adequate concordance between predicted and observed risks of severe baseline ACAS after recalibration. Significantly higher incidence rates of stroke (Ptrend<0.011) and CVD (Ptrend<0.0001) during follow-up were found with increasing PACAS risk groups. Among patients with high PACAS sum score of ≥14 (corresponding to 27.7% of all patients), severe baseline ACAS prevalence was 11.4%. In addition, 56.6% of incident strokes and 64.9% of incident CVD events occurred in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

The PACAS risk model can reliably identify patients at high risk of severe baseline ACAS. Incidence rates of stroke and CVD during follow-up were significantly higher in patients with high PACAS sum scores. Selective screening of patients with high PACAS sum scores may help to prevent future stroke or CVD.

Effects of icosapent ethyl according to baseline residual risk in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: results from REDUCE-IT

AIMS

Icosapent ethyl lowers triglycerides and significantly reduces major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), though treatment effects may vary between individuals. This study aimed to determine the relative and absolute effects of icosapent ethyl on MACE according to baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Participants from the Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) with ASCVD were included (n = 5785). The primary outcome was 3-point MACE, i.e. non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. Baseline 5-year risk of MACE was estimated using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline-recommended SMART2 risk score. Modification of the relative treatment effects of icosapent ethyl by baseline risk was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models, including a treatment-by-risk interaction. Next, treatment effects were assessed stratified by quartiles of baseline risk. During a median follow-up of 4.8 years (interquartile range 3.2-5.3), MACE occurred in 361 vs. 489 patients in the icosapent ethyl vs. placebo group [95% confidence interval (CI)]; hazard ratio (HR) 0.72 (0.63-0.82), absolute risk reduction (ARR) 4.4% (2.6-6.2%), number needed to treat (NNT) 23 (16-38), and 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence reduction (CIR) 5.7% (3.5-7.9%). Icosapent ethyl significantly reduced MACE in all risk quartiles, with an HR (95% CI) of 0.62 (0.43-0.88), 0.66 (0.48-0.92), 0.69 (0.53-0.90), and 0.78 (0.63-0.96), respectively (P for treatment-by-risk interaction = 0.106). The ARR (95% CI) increased across risk quartiles, i.e. was 3.9% (1.0-6.8%), 4.3% (1.2-7.3%), 5.1% (1.4-8.7%), and 5.6% (1.3-10.0%), respectively. This translates to NNTs (95% CI) of 26 (15-98), 24 (14-84), 20 (11-70), and 18 (10-77). The 5-year CIR (95% CI) was 4.8% (1.3-8.2%), 5.0% (1.3-8.7%), 6.1% (1.7-10.5%), and 7.7% (2.3-13.2%), respectively. Consistent results were obtained for 5-point MACE, additionally including coronary revascularization and unstable angina.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with ASCVD and elevated triglyceride levels, icosapent ethyl significantly reduces the risk of MACE irrespective of baseline CVD risk, though absolute benefits are largest for patients at the highest risk.

Cost-effectiveness of Mediterranean diet and physical activity in secondary cardiovascular disease prevention: results from the UCC-SMART cohort study

AIMS

The efficacy of a healthy lifestyle in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is well established and a first-line recommendation in CVD prevention guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess whether Mediterranean diet and physical activity are also cost-effective in patients with established CVD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed comparing a combined Mediterranean diet and physical activity intervention to usual care in patients with CVD. The CUA had a healthcare perspective and lifetime horizon. Costs and utilities were estimated using a microsimulation on a cohort of 100 000 patients with CVD sampled from the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease study (n = 8947, mean age 62 ± 8.7 years, and 74% male). Cost-effectiveness was expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefit (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB). Mediterranean diet and physical activity yielded 2.0 incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost reductions of €1236 per person compared with usual care, resulting in an ICER of €-626/QALY [95% confidence interval (CI) -1929 to 2673]. At a willingness-to-pay of €20 000/QALY, INHB was 2.04 (95% CI 0.99-3.58) QALYs and INMB was €40 757 (95% CI 19 819-71 605). The interventions remained cost-effective in a wide range of sensitivity analyses, including worst-case scenarios and scenarios with reimbursement for food and physical activity costs.

CONCLUSION

In patients with established CVD, a combined Mediterranean diet and physical activity intervention was cost-saving and highly cost-effective compared with usual care. These findings strongly advocate for the incorporation of lifestyle interventions as integral components of care for all patients with CVD.

Course of the effects of LDL-cholesterol reduction on cardiovascular risk over time: A meta-analysis of 60 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Individuals with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) often receive long-term treatment with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapies, but whether the effects of LDL-C reduction remain stable over time is uncertain. This study aimed to establish the course of the effects of LDL-C reduction on cardiovascular risk over time.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of LDL-C lowering therapies were identified through a search in MEDLINE and EMBASE (1966-January 2023). The primary analyses were restricted to statins, ezetimibe, and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, with other therapies included in sensitivity analyses. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to establish the hazard ratio (HR) for major vascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, coronary revascularization, or stroke) per 1 mmol/L LDL-C reduction. Course of the effects over time was assessed using random-effects meta-regression analyses for the association between follow-up duration, age, and the HR for major vascular events per 1 mmol/L LDL-C reduction. Additionally, treatment-by-time interactions were evaluated in an individual participant data meta-analysis of six atorvastatin trials.

RESULTS

A total of 60 RCTs were identified (408,959 participants, 51,425 major vascular events). The HR for major vascular events per 1 mmol/L LDL-C reduction was 0.78 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.75-0.81). Follow-up duration was not associated with a change in the HR for major vascular events (HR for change per year 0.994; 95 % CI 0.970-1.020; p = 0.66). The HR attenuated with increasing age in primary prevention (HR for change per 5 years 1.097; 95 % CI 1.031-1.168; p = 0.003), but not secondary prevention (HR for change per 5 years 0.987; 95 % CI 0.936-1.040; p = 0.63). Consistent results were found for statin trials only, and all trials combined. In the individual participant data meta-analysis (31,310 participants, 6734 major vascular events), the HR for major vascular events did not significantly change over follow-up time (HR for change per year 0.983; 95 % CI 0.943-1.025; p = 0.42), or age (HR for change per 5 years 1.022; 95 % CI 0.990-1.055; p = 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on available RCT data with limited follow-up duration, the relative treatment effects of LDL-C reduction are stable over time in secondary prevention, but may attenuate with higher age in primary prevention.

Risk estimation for recurrent cardiovascular events using the SMART-REACH model and direct inpatient cost profiling in Indonesian ASCVD patients: a large-scale multicenter study

Introduction

With atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) cases increasing in Indonesia, there is a growing need to identify high-risk patients for recurrent cardiovascular events. Risk stratification could guide optimal secondary preventive therapy. Understanding the ASCVD direct inpatient costs could further provide insight in reducing the economic burden that comes with Indonesia's high number ASCVD cases. However, there is a significant gap in Indonesian large-scale research on both of these valuable data. Employing the SMART-REACH model, we can profile the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in Indonesian ASCVD patients.

Objectives

Utilize the SMART-REACH model to estimate 10-year and lifetime risk of cardiovascular events in Indonesian ASCVD patients and describe the direct inpatient cost of ASCVD.

Methods

This descriptive cross-sectional study gathered data from 3,209 ASCVD patients aged 45-80 from two major cardiovascular centers using purposive sampling. Participants were patients admitted between January 2020 and March 2023 with ST-elevated myocardial infarct (STEMI), non-ST-elevated myocardial infarct (NSTEMI), and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) requiring elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The SMART-REACH risk estimation model required clinical data upon admission, laboratory results within the first 24 h of admission, and cardiovascular medication prescribed upon discharge. The SMART-REACH model is a Fine and Gray competing risk model incorporating cardiovascular risk factors that estimates individual 10-year and lifetime risk for recurrent cardiovascular events which includes myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular death. Direct inpatient cost profiling totaled all medical expenses incurred from ASCVD diagnosis admission to discharge. Results were reported descriptively with subgroup analyses.

Results

The cohorts (mean age 60.15 ± 8.6 years) were predominantly male [n = 2,537 (79.1%)], hypertensive [n = 2,267 (70.6%)], and diagnosed with STEMI [n = 1,732 (54%)]. The SMART-REACH model calculated a mean 10-year risk of 30.2% (95% CI 29.7-30.6) and a lifetime risk of 62.5% (95% CI 62.1-62.9). The direct inpatient cost of ASCVD patients includes a median 3,033 USD, with highest median costs in the STEMI subgroup (3,270 USD).

Conclusions

A significant number of Indonesian ASCVD patients exhibited notably high 10-year and lifetime risks of experiencing a major cardiovascular event. Combined with the direct inpatient cost, therapy optimization is crucially needed to mitigate these risks and further cost burden.

From Atherosclerotic Plaque to Myocardial Infarction-The Leading Cause of Coronary Artery Occlusion

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) constitutes the most common cause of death worldwide. In Europe alone, approximately 4 million people die annually due to CVD. The leading component of CVD leading to mortality is myocardial infarction (MI). MI is classified into several types. Type 1 is associated with atherosclerosis, type 2 results from inadequate oxygen supply to cardiomyocytes, type 3 is defined as sudden cardiac death, while types 4 and 5 are associated with procedures such as percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. Of particular note is type 1, which is also the most frequently occurring form of MI. Factors predisposing to its occurrence include, among others, high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in the blood, cigarette smoking, chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, and familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH). The primary objective of this review is to elucidate the issues with regard to type 1 MI. Our paper delves into, amidst other aspects, its pathogenesis, risk assessment, diagnosis, pharmacotherapy, and interventional treatment options in both acute and long-term conditions.

Risk-stratified analysis of long-term clinical outcomes and cumulative costs in Finnish patients with recent acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularization: a 5-year real-world study using electronic health records

Aims

Risk assessment is essential in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. In patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or coronary revascularization, risk prediction tools, like the European Society of Cardiology guideline recommended SMART-REACH risk score, are increasingly used to predict the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events enabling risk-based personalized prevention. However, little is known about the association between risk stratification and the social and healthcare costs at a population level. This study evaluated the associations between baseline SMART-REACH risk scores, long-term recurrent clinical events, cumulative costs, and post-index event LDL-C goal attainment in patients with recent ACS and/or revascularization.

Methods and results

This retrospective study used electronic health records and was conducted in the North Karelia region of Finland. The study cohort included all patients aged 45-85 admitted to a hospital for ACS or who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021. Patients were divided into quintiles based on their baseline SMART-REACH risk scores to examine the associations between predicted 5-year scores and selected clinical and economic outcomes. In addition, simple age-based stratification was conducted as a sensitivity analysis. The observed 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrent events ranged from 20% in the lowest to 41% in the highest risk quintile, whereas the corresponding predicted risks ranged from 13% to 51%, and cumulative 5-year mean total costs per patient ranged from 15 827 to 46 182€, respectively. Both monitoring and attainment of low LDL-C values were suboptimal.

Conclusion

The use of the SMART-REACH quintiles as a population-level risk stratification tool successfully stratified patients into subgroups with different cumulative numbers of recurrent events and cumulative total costs. However, more research is needed to define clinically and economically optimal threshold values for a population-level stratification.

Development and validation of cardiovascular risk prediction equations in 76 000 people with known cardiovascular disease

AIMS

Multiple health administrative databases can be individually linked in Aotearoa New Zealand, using encrypted identifiers. These databases were used to develop cardiovascular risk prediction equations for patients with known cardiovascular disease (CVD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Administrative health databases were linked to identify all people aged 18-84 years with known CVD, living in Auckland and Northland, Aotearoa New Zealand, on 1 January 2014. The cohort was followed until study outcome, death, or 5 years. The study outcome was death or hospitalization due to ischaemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, or peripheral vascular disease. Sex-specific 5-year CVD risk prediction equations were developed using multivariable Fine and Gray models. A total of 43 862 men {median age: 67 years [interquartile range (IQR): 59-75]} and 32 724 women [median age: 70 years (IQR: 60-77)] had 14 252 and 9551 cardiovascular events, respectively. Equations were well calibrated with good discrimination. Increasing age and deprivation, recent cardiovascular hospitalization, Mori ethnicity, smoking history, heart failure, diabetes, chronic renal disease, atrial fibrillation, use of blood pressure lowering and anti-thrombotic drugs, haemoglobin A1c, total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol, and creatinine were statistically significant independent predictors of the study outcome. Fourteen per cent of men and 23% of women had predicted 5-year cardiovascular risk <15%, while 28 and 24% had ≥40% risk.

CONCLUSION

Robust cardiovascular risk prediction equations were developed from linked routine health databases, a currently underutilized resource worldwide. The marked heterogeneity demonstrated in predicted risk suggests that preventive therapy in people with known CVD would be better informed by risk stratification beyond a one-size-fits-all high-risk categorization.

Individual lifetime benefit from low-dose colchicine in patients with chronic coronary artery disease

AIMS

Low-dose colchicine reduces cardiovascular risk in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), but absolute benefits may vary between individuals. This study aimed to assess the range of individual absolute benefits from low-dose colchicine according to patient risk profile.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline-recommended SMART-REACH model was combined with the relative treatment effect of low-dose colchicine and applied to patients with CAD from the Low-Dose Colchicine 2 (LoDoCo2) trial and the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART) study (n = 10 830). Individual treatment benefits were expressed as 10-year absolute risk reductions (ARRs) for myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death (MACE), and MACE-free life-years gained. Predictions were also performed for MACE plus coronary revascularization (MACE+), using a new lifetime model derived in the REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry. Colchicine was compared with other ESC guideline-recommended intensified (Step 2) prevention strategies, i.e. LDL cholesterol (LDL-c) reduction to 1.4 mmol/L and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction to 130 mmHg. The generalizability to other populations was assessed in patients with CAD from REACH North America and Western Europe (n = 25 812). The median 10-year ARR from low-dose colchicine was 4.6% [interquartile range (IQR) 3.6-6.0%] for MACE and 8.6% (IQR 7.6-9.8%) for MACE+. Lifetime benefit was 2.0 (IQR 1.6-2.5) MACE-free years, and 3.4 (IQR 2.6-4.2) MACE+-free life-years gained. For LDL-c and SBP reduction, respectively, the median 10-year ARR for MACE was 3.0% (IQR 1.5-5.1%) and 1.7% (IQR 0.0-5.7%), and the lifetime benefit was 1.2 (IQR 0.6-2.1) and 0.7 (IQR 0.0-2.3) MACE-free life-years gained. Similar results were obtained for MACE+ and in American and European patients from REACH.

CONCLUSION

The absolute benefits of low-dose colchicine vary between individual patients with chronic CAD. They may be expected to be of at least similar magnitude to those of intensified LDL-c and SBP reduction in a majority of patients already on conventional lipid-lowering and blood pressure-lowering therapy.

Personalized lifetime prediction of survival and treatment benefit in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: The LIFE-HF model

AIMS

Although trials have proven the group-level effectiveness of various therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), important differences in absolute effectiveness exist between individuals. We developed and validated the LIFEtime-perspective for Heart Failure (LIFE-HF) model for the prediction of individual (lifetime) risk and treatment benefit in patients with HFrEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cox proportional hazards functions with age as the time scale were developed in the PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE trials (n = 15 415). Outcomes were cardiovascular death, heart failure (HF) hospitalization or cardiovascular death, and non-cardiovascular mortality. Predictors were age, sex, New York Heart Association class, prior HF hospitalization, diabetes mellitus, extracardiac vascular disease, systolic blood pressure, left ventricular ejection fraction, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and glomerular filtration rate. The functions were combined in life-tables to predict individual overall and HF hospitalization-free survival. External validation was performed in the SwedeHF registry, ASIAN-HF registry, and DAPA-HF trial (n = 51 286). Calibration of 2- to 10-year risk was adequate, and c-statistics were 0.65-0.74. An interactive tool was developed combining the model with hazard ratios from trials to allow estimation of an individual's (lifetime) risk and treatment benefit in clinical practice. Applying the tool to the development cohort, combined treatment with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor was estimated to afford a median of 2.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.7-3.7) and 3.7 (IQR 2.4-5.5) additional years of overall and HF hospitalization-free survival, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The LIFE-HF model enables estimation of lifelong overall and HF hospitalization-free survival, and (lifetime) treatment benefit for individual patients with HFrEF. It could serve as a tool to improve the management of HFrEF by facilitating personalized medicine and shared decision-making.

Residual cardiovascular risk, use of standard care treatments, and achievement of treatment goals in patients with cardiovascular disease

Background

Residual risk management in patients with previous cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a relevant issue. Objectives: 1) to assess the residual risk of patients with CVD using the new scores developed to predict recurrent CVD events (SMART score/SMART-REACH model); 2) to determine the use of therapies with cardiovascular benefit and the achievement of therapeutic goals in patients with very high residual risk.

Methods

A multicenter, descriptive, cross-sectional study was performed. Individuals over 18 years of age with CVD were included consecutively. The 10-year risk of recurrent events was estimated using the SMART score and the SMART-REACH model. A value ≥ 30% was considered "very high risk".

Results

In total, 296 patients (mean age 68.2 ± 9.4 years, 75.7% men) were included. Globally, 32.43% and 64.53% of the population was classified as very high risk by the SMART score and the SMART-REACH model, respectively. Among patients classified as very high risk by the SMART score, 45.7% and 33.3% were treated with high-intensity statins and reached the goal of LDL-C <55 mg/dL, respectively. The results were similar when evaluating very high patients according to the SMART-REACH model (high-intensity statins: 59.7%; LDL-C <55 mg/dL: 43.9%). Few very high-risk patients with diabetes were receiving glucose-lowering drugs with demonstrated cardiovascular benefit.

Conclusion

In this secondary prevention population, the residual risk was considerable. Underutilization of standard care treatments and failure to achieve therapeutic goals were evident even in subjects with very high residual risk.

A Web-Based Application for Risk Stratification and Optimization in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

In addition to aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, statins, and lifestyle modification interventions, novel pharmacological agents have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease patients, including new antithrombotics, antihyperglycemics, and lipid-modulating therapies. Despite their benefits, the uptake of these guideline-directed therapies remains a challenge. There is a need to develop strategies to support knowledge translation for the uptake of secondary prevention therapies.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to test the feasibility and usability of Stratification and Optimization in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease (STOP-CVD), a point-of-care application that was designed to facilitate knowledge translation by providing individualized risk stratification and optimization guidance.

METHODS

Using the REACH (Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) Registry trial and predictive modeling (which included 67,888 patients), we designed a free web-based secondary risk calculator. Based on demographic and comorbidity profiles, the application was used to predict an individual's 20-month risk of cardiovascular events and cardiovascular mortality and provides a comparison to an age-matched control with an optimized cardiovascular risk profile to illustrate the modifiable residual risk. Additionally, the application used the patient's risk profile to provide specific guidance for possible therapeutic interventions based on a novel algorithm. During an initial 3-month adoption phase, 1-time invitations were sent through email and telephone to 240 physicians that refer to a regional cardiovascular clinic. After 3 months, a survey of user experience was sent to all users. Following this, no further marketing of the application was performed. Google Analytics was collected postimplementation from January 2021 to December 2021. These were used to tabulate the total number of distinct users and the total number of monthly uses of the application.

RESULTS

During the 1-year pilot, 47 of the 240 invited clinicians used the application 1573 times, an average of 131 times per month, with sustained usage over time. All 24 postimplementation survey respondents confirmed that the application was functional, easy to use, and useful.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot suggests that the STOP-CVD application is feasible and usable, with high clinician satisfaction. This tool can be easily scaled to support the uptake of guideline-directed medical therapy, which could improve clinical outcomes. Future research will be focused on evaluating the impact of this tool on clinician management and patient outcomes.

Unsupervised learning to characterize patients with known coronary artery disease undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging

PURPOSE

Patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD) comprise a heterogenous population with varied clinical and imaging characteristics. Unsupervised machine learning can identify new risk phenotypes in an unbiased fashion. We use cluster analysis to risk-stratify patients with known CAD undergoing single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI).

METHODS

From 37,298 patients in the REFINE SPECT registry, we identified 9221 patients with known coronary artery disease. Unsupervised machine learning was performed using clinical (23), acquisition (17), and image analysis (24) parameters from 4774 patients (internal cohort) and validated with 4447 patients (external cohort). Risk stratification for all-cause mortality was compared to stress total perfusion deficit (< 5%, 5-10%, ≥10%).

RESULTS

Three clusters were identified, with patients in Cluster 3 having a higher body mass index, more diabetes mellitus and hypertension, and less likely to be male, have dyslipidemia, or undergo exercise stress imaging (p < 0.001 for all). In the external cohort, during median follow-up of 2.6 [0.14, 3.3] years, all-cause mortality occurred in 312 patients (7%). Cluster analysis provided better risk stratification for all-cause mortality (Cluster 3: hazard ratio (HR) 5.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0, 8.6, p < 0.001; Cluster 2: HR 3.3, 95% CI 2.5, 4.5, p < 0.001; Cluster 1, reference) compared to stress total perfusion deficit (≥10%: HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.5, 2.5 p < 0.001; < 5%: reference).

CONCLUSIONS

Our unsupervised cluster analysis in patients with known CAD undergoing SPECT MPI identified three distinct phenotypic clusters and predicted all-cause mortality better than ischemia alone.

External validation of bleeding risk models for the prediction of long-term bleeding risk in patients with established cardiovascular disease

OBJECTIVE

The long-term predictive performance of existing bleeding risk models in patients with various manifestations of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is not well known. This study aims to assess and compare the performance of relevant existing bleeding risk models in estimating the long-term risk of major bleeding in a cohort of patients with established CVD.

METHODS

Seven existing bleeding risk models (PRECISE-DAPT, DAPT, Ducrocq et al, de Vries et al, S₂TOP-BLEED, Intracranial B₂LEED₃S and HAS-BLED) were identified and externally validated in 7,249 patients with established CVD included in the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-second manifestations of arterial disease study. Predictive performance was assessed in terms of discrimination and calibration, both at 10 years and the original prediction horizon of the models. Major bleeding was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 8.4 years (interquartile range 4.5-12.5), a total of 233 (3.2%) major bleeding events occurred. C-statistics for discrimination at 10 years ranged from 0.53 (95%CI 0.49-0.57) to 0.64 (95%CI 0.60-0.68). Calibration plots after recalibration to 10 years showed best agreement between predicted and observed bleeding risk for De Vries et al, S₂TOP-BLEED, DAPT and PRECISE-DAPT.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of existing bleeding risk models to predict long-term bleeding in patients with CVD varied. Discrimination and calibration were best for the models of de Vries et al, S₂TOP-BLEED, DAPT and PRECISE-DAPT. Of these, recalibrated models requiring the least predictors may be preferred for use to personalize prevention with antithrombotic therapy.

Monitoring antiplatelet therapy: where are we now?

Single antiplatelet therapy represents the cornerstone of thrombosis prevention in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor, is the standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndrome or undergoing both coronary and peripheral percutaneous interventions. Recent data suggest the efficacy of DAPT also after minor stroke. In this setting, a large body of evidence has documented that genetic and acquired patients' characteristics may affect the magnitude of platelet inhibition induced by antiplatelet agents. The implementation of tools allowing the identification and prediction of platelet inhibition has recently been shown to improve outcomes, leading to an optimal balance between antithrombotic efficacy and bleeding risk. We are therefore clearly moving towards tailored antiplatelet therapy. The aim of this paper is to summarize the available evidence on the evaluation of platelet inhibition in patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular atherosclerosis. We will here focus on antiplatelet therapy based on both aspirin and P2Y 12 inhibitors. In addition, we provide practical insights into the clinical settings in which it appears reasonable to implement antiplatelet therapy monitoring.

Cohort profile: the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of Arterial Disease (UCC-SMART) Study-an ongoing prospective cohort study of patients at high cardiovascular risk in the Netherlands

PURPOSE

The Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of Arterial Disease (UCC-SMART) Study is an ongoing prospective single-centre cohort study with the aim to assess important determinants and the prognosis of cardiovascular disease progression. This article provides an update of the rationale, design, included patients, measurements and findings from the start in 1996 to date.

PARTICIPANTS

The UCC-SMART Study includes patients aged 18-90 years referred to the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, for management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) or severe cardiovascular risk factors. Since September 1996, a total of 14 830 patients have been included. Upon inclusion, patients undergo a standardised screening programme, including questionnaires, vital signs, laboratory measurements, an ECG, vascular ultrasound of carotid arteries and aorta, ankle-brachial index and ultrasound measurements of adipose tissue, kidney size and intima-media thickness. Outcomes of interest are collected through annual questionnaires and adjudicated by an endpoint committee.

FINDINGS TO DATE

By May 2022, the included patients contributed to a total follow-up time of over 134 000 person-years. During follow-up, 2259 patients suffered a vascular endpoint (including non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and vascular death) and 2794 all-cause deaths, 943 incident cases of diabetes and 2139 incident cases of cancer were observed up until January 2020. The UCC-SMART cohort contributed to over 350 articles published in peer-reviewed journals, including prediction models recommended by the 2021 European Society of Cardiology CVD prevention guidelines.

FUTURE PLANS

The UCC-SMART Study guarantees an infrastructure for research in patients at high cardiovascular risk. The cohort will continue to include about 600 patients yearly and follow-up will be ongoing to ensure an up-to-date cohort in accordance with current healthcare and scientific knowledge. In the near future, UCC-SMART will be enriched by echocardiography, and a food frequency questionnaire at baseline enabling the assessment of associations between nutrition and CVD and diabetes.

Cardiovascular risk and lifetime benefit from preventive treatment in type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the CAPTURE study

AIM

To assess the potential gain in the number of life-years free of a (recurrent) cardiovascular disease (CVD) event with optimal cardiovascular risk management (CVRM) and initiation of glucose-lowering agents with proven cardiovascular benefit in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

9,416 individuals with T2D from the CAPTURE study, a non-interventional, cross-sectional, multinational study, were included. The diabetes lifetime-perspective prediction model was used for calculating individual 10-year and lifetime CVD risk. The distribution of preventive medication use was assessed according to predicted CVD risk and stratified for history of CVD. For the estimation of absolute individual benefit from lifelong preventive treatment, including optimal CVRM and the addition of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is), the model was combined with treatment effects from current evidence.

RESULTS

GLP-1 RA or SGLT-2i use did not greatly differ between patients with and without CVD history, while use of blood pressure-lowering medication, statins and aspirin was more frequent in patients with CVD. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) lifetime benefit from optimal CVRM was 3.9 (3.0) and 1.3 (1.9) years in patients with and without established CVD, respectively. Further addition of a GLP-1 RA and an SGLT-2i in patients with CVD gave an added mean (SD) lifetime benefit of 1.2 (0.6) years.

CONCLUSIONS

Life-years gained free of (recurrent) CVD by optimal CVRM and the addition of a GLP-1 RA or aSGLT-2i is dependent on baseline CVD status. These results aid individualizing prevention and promote shared decision-making in patients with T2D.

Estimating individual lifetime risk of incident cardiovascular events in adults with Type 2 diabetes: an update and geographical calibration of the DIAbetes Lifetime perspective model (DIAL2)

AIMS

The 2021 European Society of Cardiology cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines recommend the use of (lifetime) risk prediction models to aid decisions regarding intensified preventive treatment options in adults with Type 2 diabetes, e.g. the DIAbetes Lifetime perspective model (DIAL model). The aim of this study was to update the DIAL model using contemporary and representative registry data (DIAL2) and to systematically calibrate the model for use in other European countries.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The DIAL2 model was derived in 467 856 people with Type 2 diabetes without a history of CVD from the Swedish National Diabetes Register, with a median follow-up of 7.3 years (interquartile range: 4.0-10.6 years) and comprising 63 824 CVD (including fatal CVD, non-fatal stroke and non-fatal myocardial infarction) events and 66 048 non-CVD mortality events. The model was systematically recalibrated to Europe's low- and moderate-risk regions using contemporary incidence data and mean risk factor distributions. The recalibrated DIAL2 model was externally validated in 218 267 individuals with Type 2 diabetes from the Scottish Care Information-Diabetes (SCID) and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). In these individuals, 43 074 CVD events and 27 115 non-CVD fatal events were observed. The DIAL2 model discriminated well, with C-indices of 0.732 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.726-0.739] in CPRD and 0.700 (95% CI 0.691-0.709) in SCID.

CONCLUSION

The recalibrated DIAL2 model provides a useful tool for the prediction of CVD-free life expectancy and lifetime CVD risk for people with Type 2 diabetes without previous CVD in the European low- and moderate-risk regions. These long-term individualized measures of CVD risk are well suited for shared decision-making in clinical practice as recommended by the 2021 CVD ESC prevention guidelines.

Estimation of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular event risk in patients with established cardiovascular disease: the updated SMART2 algorithm

AIMS

The 10-year risk of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events in patients with established ASCVD can be estimated with the Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease (SMART) risk score, and may help refine clinical management. To broaden generalizability across regions, we updated the existing tool (SMART2 risk score) and recalibrated it with regional incidence rates and assessed its performance in external populations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Individuals with coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral artery disease, or abdominal aortic aneurysms were included from the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-SMART cohort [n = 8355; 1706 ASCVD events during a median follow-up of 8.2 years (interquartile range 4.2-12.5)] to derive a 10-year risk prediction model for recurrent ASCVD events (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular mortality) using a Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted model. The model was recalibrated to four regions across Europe, and to Asia (excluding Japan), Japan, Australia, North America, and Latin America using contemporary cohort data from each target region. External validation used data from seven cohorts [Clinical Practice Research Datalink, SWEDEHEART, the international REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry, Estonian Biobank, Spanish Biomarkers in Acute Coronary Syndrome and Biomarkers in Acute Myocardial Infarction (BACS/BAMI), the Norwegian COgnitive Impairment After STroke, and Bialystok PLUS/Polaspire] and included 369 044 individuals with established ASCVD of whom 62 807 experienced an ASCVD event. C-statistics ranged from 0.605 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.547-0.664] in BACS/BAMI to 0.772 (95% CI 0.659-0.886) in REACH Europe high-risk region. The clinical utility of the model was demonstrated across a range of clinically relevant treatment thresholds for intensified treatment options.

CONCLUSION

The SMART2 risk score provides an updated, validated tool for the prediction of recurrent ASCVD events in patients with established ASCVD across European and non-European populations. The use of this tool could allow for a more personalized approach to secondary prevention based upon quantitative rather than qualitative estimates of residual risk.

Use of lipid-lowering therapy after ischaemic stroke and expected benefit from intensification of treatment

Objectives

Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) increases the risk of recurrent cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. We examined use of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) following ischaemic stroke, and estimated benefits from guideline-based up-titration of LLT.

Methods

The Norwegian COgnitive Impairment After STroke (Nor-COAST) study, a multicentre prospective cohort study, collected data on LLT use, dose intensity and LDL-C levels for 462 home-dwelling patients with ischaemic stroke. We used the Secondary Manifestations of Arterial Disease-Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (SMART-REACH) model to estimate the expected benefit of up-titrating LLT.

Results

At discharge, 92% received LLT (97% statin monotherapy). Patients with prestroke dementia and cardioembolic stroke aetiology were less likely to receive LLT. Older patients (coefficient −3 mg atorvastatin per 10 years, 95% CI −6 to −0.5) and women (coefficient −5.1 mg atorvastatin, 95% CI −9.2 to −0.9) received lower doses, while individuals with higher baseline LDL-C, ischaemic heart disease and large artery stroke aetiology received higher dose intensity. At 3 months, 45% reached LDL-C ≤1.8 mmol/L, and we estimated that 81% could potentially reach the target with statin and ezetimibe, resulting in median 5 (IQR 0–12) months of CVD-free life gain and median 2% 10-year absolute risk reduction (IQR 0–4) with large interindividual variation.

Conclusion

Potential for optimisation of conventional LLT use exists in patients with ischaemic stroke. Awareness of groups at risk of undertreatment and objective estimates of the individual patient’s benefit of intensification can help personalise treatment decisions and reduce residual cholesterol risk.

Trial registration number

NCT02650531.

Prediction of Cardiovascular and All-Cause Mortality After Myocardial Infarction in US Veterans

Risk prediction models for cardiovascular disease (CVD) death developed from patients without vascular disease may not be suitable for myocardial infarction (MI) survivors. Prediction of mortality risk after MI may help to guide secondary prevention. Using national electronic record data from the Veterans Health Administration 2002 to 2012, we developed risk prediction models for CVD death and all-cause death based on 5-year follow-up data of 100,601 survivors of MI using Cox proportional hazards models. Model performance was evaluated using a cross-validation approach. During follow-up, there were 31,622 deaths and 12,901 CVD deaths. In men, older age, current smoking, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, peripheral artery disease, and lower body mass index were associated with greater risk of death from CVD or all-causes, and statin treatment, hypertension medication, estimated glomerular filtration rate level, and high body mass index were significantly associated with reduced risk of fatal outcomes. Similar associations and slightly different predictors were observed in women. The estimated Harrell's C-statistics of the final model versus the cross-validation estimates were 0.77 versus 0.77 in men and 0.81 versus 0.77 in women for CVD death. Similarly, the C-statistics were 0.75 versus 0.75 in men, 0.78 versus 0.75 in women for all-cause mortality. The predicted risk of death was well calibrated compared with the observed risk. In conclusion, we developed and internally validated risk prediction models of 5-year risk for CVD and all-cause death for outpatient survivors of MI. Traditional risk factors, co-morbidities, and lack of blood pressure or lipid treatment were all associated with greater risk of CVD and all-cause mortality.

Impact of a Patient's Baseline Risk on the Relative Benefit and Harm of a Preventive Treatment Strategy: Applying Trial Results in Clinical Decision Making

Background For translating an overall trial result into an individual patient's expected absolute treatment effect, differences in relative treatment effect between patients need to be taken into account. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether relative treatment effects of medication in 2 large contemporary trials are influenced by multivariable baseline risk of an individual patient. Methods and Results In 9361 patients from SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was assessed using a newly derived risk model. In 18 133 patients from the RE-LY (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulant Therapy) trial, risk of stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding was assessed using the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation risk model. Heterogeneity of trial treatment effect was assessed using Cox models of trial allocation, model linear predictor, and their interaction. There was no significant interaction between baseline risk and relative treatment effect from intensive blood pressure lowering in SPRINT (P=0.92) or from dabigatran compared with warfarin for stroke or systemic embolism in the RE-LY trial (P=0.71). There was significant interaction between baseline risk and treatment effect from dabigatran versus warfarin in the RE-LY trial (P<0.001) for major bleeding. Quartile-specific hazard ratios for bleeding ranged from 0.40 (95% CI, 0.26-0.61) to 1.04 (95% CI, 0.83-1.03) for dabigatran, 110 mg, and from 0.61 (95% CI, 0.42-0.88) to 1.20 (95% CI, 0.97-1.50) for dabigatran, 150 mg, compared with warfarin. Conclusions Effect modification of relative treatment effect by individual baseline event risk should be assessed systematically in randomized clinical trials using multivariate risk prediction, not only in terms of treatment efficacy but also for important treatment harms, as a prespecified analysis. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

Risk Stratification in Patients with Ischemic Stroke and Residual Cardiovascular Risk with Current Secondary Prevention

PURPOSE

Suboptimal secondary prevention in patients with stroke causes a remaining cardiovascular risk desirable to reduce. We have validated a prognostic model for secondary preventive settings and estimated future cardiovascular risk and theoretical benefit of reaching guideline recommended risk factor targets.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The SMART-REACH (Secondary Manifestations of Arterial Disease-Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) model for 10-year and lifetime risk of cardiovascular events was applied to 465 patients in the Norwegian Cognitive Impairment After Stroke (Nor-COAST) study, a multicenter observational study with two-year follow-up by linkage to national registries for cardiovascular disease and mortality. The residual risk when reaching recommended targets for blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, smoking cessation and antithrombotics was estimated.

RESULTS

In total, 11.2% had a new event. Calibration plots showed adequate agreement between estimated and observed 2-year prognosis (C-statistics 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.71). Median estimated 10-year risk of recurrent cardiovascular events was 42% (Interquartile range (IQR) 32-54%) and could be reduced to 32% by optimal guideline-based therapy. The corresponding numbers for lifetime risk were 70% (IQR 63-76%) and 61%. We estimated an overall median gain of 1.4 (IQR 0.2-3.4) event-free life years if guideline targets were met.

CONCLUSION

Secondary prevention was suboptimal and residual risk remains elevated even after optimization according to current guidelines. Considerable interindividual variation in risk exists, with a corresponding variation in benefit from intensification of treatment. The SMART-REACH model can be used to identify patients with the largest benefit from more intensive treatment and follow-up.

Communicating personalised statin therapy-effects as 10-year CVD-risk or CVD-free life-expectancy: does it improve decisional conflict? Three-armed, blinded, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether communicating personalised statin therapy-effects obtained by prognostic algorithm leads to lower decisional conflict associated with statin use in patients with stable cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with standard (non-personalised) therapy-effects.

DESIGN

Hypothesis-blinded, three-armed randomised controlled trial SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 303 statin users with stable CVD enrolled in a cohort INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard practice (control-group) or one of two intervention arms. Intervention arms received standard practice plus (1) a personalised health profile, (2) educational videos and (3) a structured telephone consultation. Intervention arms received personalised estimates of prognostic changes associated with both discontinuation of current statin and intensification to the most potent statin type and dose (ie, atorvastatin 80 mg). Intervention arms differed in how these changes were expressed: either change in individual 10-year absolute CVD risk (iAR-group) or CVD-free life-expectancy (iLE-group) calculated with the SMART-REACH model (http://U-Prevent.com).

OUTCOME

Primary outcome was patient decisional conflict score (DCS) after 1 month. The score varies from 0 (no conflict) to 100 (high conflict). Secondary outcomes were collected at 1 or 6 months: DCS, quality of life, illness perception, patient activation, patient perception of statin efficacy and shared decision-making, self-reported statin adherence, understanding of statin-therapy, post-randomisation low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level and physician opinion of the intervention. Outcomes are reported as median (25th- 75th percentile).

RESULTS

Decisional conflict differed between the intervention arms: median control 27 (20-43), iAR-group 22 (11-30; p-value vs control 0.001) and iLE-group 25 (10-31; p-value vs control 0.021). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed.

CONCLUSION

In patients with clinically manifest CVD, providing personalised estimations of treatment-effects resulted in a small but significant decrease in decisional conflict after 1 month. The results support the use of personalised predictions for supporting decision-making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NTR6227/NL6080.

SCORE2-OP risk prediction algorithms: estimating incident cardiovascular event risk in older persons in four geographical risk regions

AIMS

The aim of this study was to derive and validate the SCORE2-Older Persons (SCORE2-OP) risk model to estimate 5- and 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in individuals aged over 70 years in four geographical risk regions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Sex-specific competing risk-adjusted models for estimating CVD risk (CVD mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke) were derived in individuals aged over 65 without pre-existing atherosclerotic CVD from the Cohort of Norway (28 503 individuals, 10 089 CVD events). Models included age, smoking status, diabetes, systolic blood pressure, and total- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Four geographical risk regions were defined based on country-specific CVD mortality rates. Models were recalibrated to each region using region-specific estimated CVD incidence rates and risk factor distributions. For external validation, we analysed data from 6 additional study populations {338 615 individuals, 33 219 CVD validation cohorts, C-indices ranged between 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.65] and 0.67 (0.64-0.69)}. Regional calibration of expected-vs.-observed risks was satisfactory. For given risk factor profiles, there was substantial variation across the four risk regions in the estimated 10-year CVD event risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The competing risk-adjusted SCORE2-OP model was derived, recalibrated, and externally validated to estimate 5- and 10-year CVD risk in older adults (aged 70 years or older) in four geographical risk regions. These models can be used for communicating the risk of CVD and potential benefit from risk factor treatment and may facilitate shared decision-making between clinicians and patients in CVD risk management in older persons.

Peripheral Artery Disease and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: The Forgotten Diseases in COVID-19 Pandemic. Results from an Observational Study on Real-World Management

Background and Objectives: It is well established that patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) as well abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) have an increased cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Despite this higher risk, PAD and AAA patients are often suboptimality treated. This study assessed the CV profile of PAD and AAA patients, quantifying the survival benefits of target-based risk-factors modification even in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: PAD and AAA patients admitted for any reason to the Vascular Unit from January 2019 to February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Biochemical and CV profiles as well as ongoing medical therapies were recorded. Benefits of CV risk-factors control were estimated using the SMART-REACH model. A follow-up visit during the year 2020 was scheduled. Results: A total of 669 patients were included. Of these, 190 showed AAA and 479 PAD at any stage. Only 54% of PAD and 41% of AAA patients were on lipid-lowering drugs with non-optimal low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels for most of them. A better control of all modifiable CV risk-factors based on the current guidelines would offer an absolute risk reduction of the mean 10-year CV risk by 9% in PAD and 14% in AAA. Unfortunately, the follow-up visit was lost because of COVID-19 limitations. Conclusions: Lipid profiles of PAD and AAA patients were far from guideline-based targets, and medical management was suboptimal. In our center, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted on the strict surveillance required in these very high-risk patients. The achievement of guideline-based therapeutic targets would definitively confer additional significant benefits in reducing the CV risk in these patients.

Is the SMART risk prediction model ready for real-world implementation? A validation study in a routine care setting of approximately 380 000 individuals

AIMS

Reliably quantifying event rates in secondary prevention could aid clinical decision-making, including quantifying potential risk reductions of novel, and sometimes expensive, add-on therapies. We aimed to assess whether the SMART risk prediction model performs well in a real-world setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a historical open cohort study using UK primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2000-2017) diagnosed with coronary, cerebrovascular, peripheral, and/or aortic atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Analyses were undertaken separately for cohorts with established (≥6 months) vs. newly diagnosed ASCVD. The outcome was first post-cohort entry occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. Among the cohort with established ASCVD [n = 244 578, 62.1% male, median age 67.3 years, interquartile range (IQR) 59.2-74.0], the calibration and discrimination achieved by the SMART model was not dissimilar to performance at internal validation [Harrell's c-statistic = 0.639, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.636-0.642, compared with 0.675, 0.642-0.708]. Decision curve analysis indicated that the model outperformed treat all and treat none strategies in the clinically relevant 20-60% predicted risk range. Consistent findings were observed in sensitivity analyses, including complete case analysis (n = 182 482; c = 0.624, 95% CI 0.620-0.627). Among the cohort with newly diagnosed ASCVD (n = 136 445; 61.0% male; median age 66.0 years, IQR 57.7-73.2), model performance was weaker with more exaggerated risk under-prediction and a c-statistic of 0.559, 95% CI 0.556-0.562.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of the SMART model in this validation cohort demonstrates its potential utility in routine healthcare settings in guiding both population and individual-level decision-making for secondary prevention patients.

Residual cardiovascular risk reduction guided by lifetime benefit estimation in patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic disease: effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

AIMS

To determine the (cost)-effectiveness of blood pressure lowering, lipid-lowering, and antithrombotic therapy guided by predicted lifetime benefit compared to risk factor levels in patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS 

For all patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic disease in the UCC-SMART cohort (1996-2018; n = 7697) two treatment strategies were compared. The lifetime benefit-guided strategy was based on individual estimation of gain in cardiovascular disease (CVD)-free life with the SMART-REACH model. In the risk factor-based strategy, all patients were treated the following: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) < 1.8 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure <140 mmHg, and antithrombotic medication. Outcomes were evaluated for the total cohort using a microsimulation model. Effectiveness was evaluated as total gain in CVD-free life and events avoided, cost-effectiveness as incremental cost-effectivity ratio (ICER). In comparison to baseline treatment, treatment according to lifetime benefit would lead to an increase of 24 243 CVD-free life years [95% confidence interval (CI) 19 980-29 909] and would avoid 940 (95% CI 742-1140) events in the next 10 years. For risk-factor based treatment, this would be an increase of 18 564 CVD-free life years (95% CI 14 225-20 456) and decrease of 857 (95% CI 661-1057) events. The ICER of lifetime benefit-based treatment with a treatment threshold of ≥1 year additional CVD-free life per therapy was €15 092/QALY gained and of risk factor-based treatment €9933/QALY gained. In a direct comparison, lifetime benefit-based treatment compared to risk factor-based treatment results in 1871 additional QALYs for the price of €36 538/QALY gained.

CONCLUSION 

Residual risk reduction guided by lifetime benefit estimation results in more CVD-free life years and more CVD events avoided compared to the conventional risk factor-based strategy. Lifetime benefit-based treatment is an effective and potentially cost-effective strategy for reducing residual CVD risk in patients with clinical manifest vascular disease.

Added value of cardiovascular calcifications for prediction of recurrent cardiovascular events and cardiovascular interventions in patients with established cardiovascular disease

The purpose is to investigate the added prognostic value of coronary artery calcium (CAC), thoracic aortic calcium (TAC), and heart valve calcium scores for prediction of a combined endpoint of recurrent major cardiovascular events and cardiovascular interventions (MACE +) in patients with established cardiovascular disease (CVD). In total, 567 patients with established CVD enrolled in a substudy of the UCC-SMART cohort, entailing cardiovascular CT imaging and calcium scoring, were studied. Five Cox proportional hazards models for prediction of 4-year risk of MACE + were developed; traditional CVD risk predictors only (model I), with addition of CAC (model II), TAC (model III), heart valve calcium (model IV), and all calcium scores (model V). Bootstrapping was performed to account for optimism. During a median follow-up of 3.43 years (IQR 2.28–4.74) 77 events occurred (MACE+). Calibration of predicted versus observed 4-year risk for model I without calcium scores was good, and the c-statistic was 0.65 (95%CI 0.59–0.72). Calibration for models II–V was similar to model I, and c-statistics were 0.67, 0.65, 0.65, and 0.68 for model II, III, IV, and V, respectively. NRIs showed improvement in risk classification by model II (NRI 15.24% (95%CI 0.59–29.39)) and model V (NRI 20.00% (95%CI 5.59–34.92)), but no improvement for models III and IV. In patients with established CVD, addition of the CAC score improved performance of a risk prediction model with classical risk factors for the prediction of the combined endpoint MACE+ . Addition of the TAC or heart valve score did not improve risk predictions.

The incremental value of angiographic features for predicting recurrent cardiovascular events: Insights from the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Identifying patient subgroups with cardiovascular disease (CVD) at highest risk for recurrent events remains challenging. Angiographic features may provide incremental value in risk prediction beyond clinical characteristics.

METHODS

We included all cardiac catheterization patients from the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease with significant coronary artery disease (CAD; 07/01/2007-12/31/2012) and an outpatient follow-up visit with a primary care physician or cardiologist in the same health system within 3 months post-catheterization. Follow-up occurred for 3 years for the primary major adverse cardiovascular event endpoint (time to all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI], or stroke). A multivariable model to predict recurrent events was developed based on clinical variables only, then adding angiographic variables from the catheterization. Next, we compared discrimination of clinical vs. clinical plus angiographic risk prediction models.

RESULTS

Among 3366 patients with angiographically-defined CAD, 633 (19.2%) experienced cardiovascular events (death, MI, or stroke) within 3 years. A multivariable model including 18 baseline clinical factors and initial revascularization had modest ability to predict future atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events (c-statistic = 0.716). Among angiographic predictors, number of diseased vessels, left main stenosis, left anterior descending stenosis, and the Duke CAD Index had the highest value for secondary risk prediction; however, the clinical plus angiographic model only slightly improved discrimination (c-statistic = 0.724; delta 0.008). The net benefit for angiographic features was also small, with a relative integrated discrimination improvement of 0.05 (95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of coronary angiographic features added little incremental value in secondary risk prediction beyond clinical characteristics.

A narrative review of low-dose rivaroxaban in patients with atherothrombotic cardiovascular disease: vascular protection beyond anticoagulation

Major cardiovascular (CV) events often complicate the natural history of apparently stable atherothrombotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) despite appropriate guideline-based preventive treatment. This finding has been termed residual risk and it has been the focus of recent investigation. New and revisited targets to tackle this so-called residual risk have been proposed, including antithrombotic treatment intensification, further lowering targets of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, novel oral antidiabetic agents with a CV benefit, and drugs to reduce systemic inflammation. In this narrative review, we discuss the evidence, mechanisms and gaps in knowledge concerning the vascular protection derived from low-dose (2.5 mg twice daily) rivaroxaban. On this topic, the main trials (ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51, COMPASS and VOYAGER PAD), will be summarized in a comprehensive manner. Indeed, these have shown that a drug developed to prevent thrombus formation (selective Factor Xa inhibition) reduced events that were traditionally platelet-related in concept. Moreover, we propose a simple evidence-based clinically oriented algorithm to thoroughly identify patients at increased risk and who may benefit from this strategy in different clinical scenarios. Low-dose rivaroxaban portrays a novel promising era in atherothrombotic CVD prevention, providing a mechanistic protection beyond traditional strategies in patients overwhelmed by recurrent dismal events.

Coronary 18F-Sodium Fluoride Uptake Predicts Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Reliable methods for predicting myocardial infarction in patients with established coronary artery disease are lacking. Coronary ¹⁸F-sodium fluoride (¹⁸F-NaF) positron emission tomography (PET) provides an assessment of atherosclerosis activity.

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed whether ¹⁸F-NaF PET predicts myocardial infarction and provides additional prognostic information to current methods of risk stratification.

METHODS

Patients with known coronary artery disease underwent ¹⁸F-NaF PET computed tomography and were followed up for fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction over 42 months (interquartile range: 31 to 49 months). Total coronary ¹⁸F-NaF uptake was determined by the coronary microcalcification activity (CMA).

RESULTS

In a post hoc analysis of data collected for prospective observational studies, the authors studied 293 study participants (age: 65 ± 9 years; 84% men), of whom 203 (69%) showed increased coronary ¹⁸F-NaF activity (CMA >0). Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred only in patients with increased coronary ¹⁸F-NaF activity (20 of 203 with a CMA >0 vs. 0 of 90 with a CMA of 0; p < 0.001). On receiver operator curve analysis, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction prediction was highest for ¹⁸F-NaF CMA, outperforming coronary calcium scoring, modified Duke coronary artery disease index and Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) and Secondary Manifestations of Arterial Disease (SMART) risk scores (area under the curve: 0.76 vs. 0.54, 0.62, 0.52, and 0.54, respectively; p < 0.001 for all). Patients with CMA >1.56 had a >7-fold increase in fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (hazard ratio: 7.1; 95% confidence interval: 2.2 to 25.1; p = 0.003) independent of age, sex, risk factors, segment involvement and coronary calcium scores, presence of coronary stents, coronary stenosis, REACH and SMART scores, the Duke coronary artery disease index, and recent myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with established coronary artery disease, ¹⁸F-NaF PET provides powerful independent prediction of fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction.

Predicting 10-year risk of recurrent cardiovascular events andcardiovascular interventions in patients with established cardiovascular disease: results from UCC-SMART and REACH

BACKGROUND

Existing cardiovascular risk scores for patients with established cardiovascular disease (CVD) estimate residual risk of recurrent major cardiovascular events (MACE). The aim of the current study is to develop and externally validate a prediction model to estimate the 10-year combined risk of recurrent MACE and cardiovascular interventions (MACE+) in patients with established CVD.

METHODS

Data of patients with established CVD from the UCC-SMART cohort (N = 8421) were used for model development, and patient data from REACH Western Europe (N = 14,528) and REACH North America (N = 19,495) for model validation. Predictors were selected based on the existing SMART risk score. A Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted 10-year risk model was developed for the combined outcome MACE+. The model was validated in all patients and in strata of coronary heart disease (CHD), cerebrovascular disease (CeVD), peripheral artery disease (PAD).

RESULTS

External calibration for 2-year risk in REACH Western Europe and REACH North America was good, c-statistics were moderate: 0.60 and 0.58, respectively. In strata of CVD at baseline good external calibration was observed in patients with CHD and CeVD, however, poor calibration was seen in patients with PAD. C-statistics for patients with CHD were 0.60 and 0.57, for patients with CeVD 0.62 and 0.61, and for patients with PAD 0.53 and 0.54 in REACH Western Europe and REACH North America, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The 10-year combined risk of recurrent MACE and cardiovascular interventions can be estimated in patients with established CHD or CeVD. However, cardiovascular interventions in patients with PAD could not be predicted reliably.

Risk Assessment Using Risk Scores in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Risk scores are widely used in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) prior to treatment decision-making at different points in time. At initial hospital presentation, risk scores are used to assess the risk for developing major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and can guide clinicians in either discharging the patients at low risk or swiftly admitting and treating the patients at high risk for MACE. During hospital admission, risk assessment is performed to estimate mortality, residual ischemic and bleeding risk to guide further in-hospital management (e.g., timing of coronary angiography) and post-discharge management (e.g., duration of dual antiplatelet therapy). In the months and years following ACS, long term risk can also be assessed to evaluate current treatment strategies (e.g., intensify or reduce pharmaceutical treatment options). As multiple risk scores have been developed over the last decades, this review summarizes the most relevant risk scores used in ACS patients.

The scientific basis for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease: recent contributions from the Netherlands

While the beneficial effects of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease are undisputed, implementation remains challenging. A gap between guideline-mandated risk factor targets and clinical reality was documented as early as the 1990s. To address this issue, research groups in the Netherlands have performed several major projects. These projects address innovative, multidisciplinary strategies to improve medication adherence and to stimulate healthy lifestyles, both in the setting of cardiac rehabilitation and at dedicated outpatient clinics. The findings of these projects have led to changes in prevention and rehabilitation guidelines.

Multifocal cardiovascular calcification in patients with established cardiovascular disease; prevalence, risk factors, and relation with recurrent cardiovascular disease

Aims

The aim is to investigate (multifocal) cardiovascular calcification in patients with established cardiovascular disease (CVD), regarding prevalence, risk factors, and relation with recurrent CVD or vascular interventions. Coronary artery calcification (CAC), thoracic aortic calcification (TAC) (including ascending aorta, aortic arch, descending aorta), mitral annular calcification (MAC), and aortic valve calcification (AVC) are studied.

Methods

The study concerned 568 patients with established CVD enrolled in the ORACLE cohort. All patients underwent computed tomography. Prevalence of site-specific and multifocal calcification was determined. Ordinal regression analyses were performed to quantify associations of risk factors with cardiovascular calcification, and Cox regression analyses to determine the relation between calcium scores and recurrent CVD or vascular interventions.

Results

Calcification was multifocal in 76% (N = 380) of patients with calcification. Age (per SD) was associated with calcification at all locations (lowest OR 2.17; 99%CI 1.54–3.11 for ascending aorta calcification). Diabetes mellitus and systolic blood pressure were associated with TAC, whereas male sex was a determinant of CAC. TAC and CAC were related to the combined endpoint CVD or vascular intervention (N = 68). In a model with all calcium scores combined, only CAC was related to the combined outcome (HR 1.39; 95%CI 1.15–1.68).

Conclusion

Cardiovascular calcification is generally multifocal in patients with established CVD. Differences in associations between risk factors and calcification at various anatomical locations stress the divergence in pathophysiological pathways. CAC is most strongly related to recurrent CVD or vascular interventions independent of traditional risk factors, and independent of heart valve and thoracic aorta calcification.

Would treatment decisions about secondary prevention of CVD based on estimated lifetime benefit rather than 10-year risk reduction be cost-effective?

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that treatment decisions (treatment with a PCSK9-mAb versus no treatment) are both more effective and more cost-effective when based on estimated lifetime benefit than when based on estimated risk reduction over 10 years.

METHODS

A microsimulation model was constructed for 10,000 patients with stable cardiovascular disease (CVD). Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) due to recurrent cardiovascular events and (non)vascular death were estimated for lifetime benefit-based compared to 10-year risk-based treatment, with PCSK9 inhibition as an illustration example. Lifetime benefit in months gained and 10-year absolute risk reduction were estimated using the SMART-REACH model, including an individualized treatment effect of PCSK9 inhibitors based on baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. For the different numbers of patients treated (i.e. the 5%, 10%, and 20% of patients with the highest estimated benefit of both strategies), cost-effectiveness was assessed using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), indicating additional costs per QALY gain.

RESULTS

Lifetime benefit-based treatment of 5%, 10%, and 20% of patients with the highest estimated benefit resulted in an ICER of €36,440/QALY, €39,650/QALY, or €41,426/QALY. Ten-year risk-based treatment decisions of 5%, 10%, and 20% of patients with the highest estimated risk reduction resulted in an ICER of €48,187/QALY, €53,368/QALY, or €52,390/QALY.

CONCLUSION

Treatment decisions (treatment with a PCSK9-mAb versus no treatment) are both more effective and more cost-effective when based on estimated lifetime benefit than when based on estimated risk reduction over 10 years.