Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, University of California, San Francisco, 513 Parnassus Avenue, Medical Sciences Room S847, Box 0500, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, University of Pennsylvania, White Building, Room 5024, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Clin Rheumatol. 2018 Feb;37(2):467-474. doi: 10.1007/s10067-017-3860-x. Epub 2017 Oct 9.
Despite the increasing use of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cardiovascular (CV) risk score in clinical practice, few studies have compared this score to the Framingham risk score among rheumatologic patients. We calculated Framingham and 2013 ACC/AHA risk scores in subjects with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and assessed demographic, CV, and rheumatologic characteristics associated with discordant scores (high-risk ACC/AHA scores but low-risk Framingham scores). SLE and RA subjects drawn from two population-based cohort studies were assessed during in-person study visits. We used chi-squared tests and t tests to examine the association of discordant CV risk scores with baseline characteristics. Eleven (7.0%) of 157 SLE subjects and 11 (11.5%) of 96 RA subjects had discordant CV risk scores with high ACC/AHA scores and low Framingham scores. These findings did not significantly change when a 1.5 multiplier was applied to the Framingham score. Rheumatologic disease duration, high-sensitivity CRP levels, African-American race, diabetes, current use of anti-hypertensive medication, higher age, and higher systolic blood pressure were each significantly associated with discordant risk scores. Approximately 10% of SLE and RA subjects had discordant 10-year CV risk scores. Our findings suggest that the use of the 2013 ACC/AHA risk score could result in changes to lipid-lowering therapy recommendations in a significant number of rheumatologic patients. Prospective studies are needed to compare which score better predicts CV events in rheumatologic patients, especially those with risk factors associated with discordant risk scores.
尽管在临床实践中越来越多地使用 2013 年美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会(ACC/AHA)心血管(CV)风险评分,但很少有研究将该评分与风湿病患者的弗雷明汉风险评分进行比较。我们计算了系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)和类风湿关节炎(RA)患者的弗雷明汉和 2013 年 ACC/AHA 风险评分,并评估了与评分不一致(高风险 ACC/AHA 评分但低风险弗雷明汉评分)相关的人口统计学、CV 和风湿病特征。从两项基于人群的队列研究中抽取 SLE 和 RA 患者,在面对面研究访问期间进行评估。我们使用卡方检验和 t 检验来检查不相符的 CV 风险评分与基线特征之间的关联。在 157 例 SLE 患者中,有 11 例(7.0%)和在 96 例 RA 患者中,有 11 例(11.5%)的 CV 风险评分不一致,即高 ACC/AHA 评分和低弗雷明汉评分。当对弗雷明汉评分应用 1.5 倍乘数时,这些发现没有显著变化。风湿病疾病持续时间、高敏 C 反应蛋白水平、非裔美国人种族、糖尿病、当前使用抗高血压药物、年龄较大和收缩压较高与不相符的风险评分显著相关。大约 10%的 SLE 和 RA 患者的 10 年 CV 风险评分不一致。我们的研究结果表明,2013 年 ACC/AHA 风险评分的使用可能会导致相当数量的风湿病患者改变降脂治疗建议。需要前瞻性研究来比较哪种评分能更好地预测风湿病患者的 CV 事件,特别是那些与不相符风险评分相关的危险因素的患者。