Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Minneapolis Heart Institute, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Feb 1;2(2):e188023. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.8023.
The interplay of self-rated health (SRH), coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores, and cardiovascular risk is poorly described.
To assess the degree of correlation between SRH and CAC, to determine whether these measures are complementary for risk prediction, and to assess the incremental value of the addition of SRH to established risk tools.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) is a large population-based prospective cohort study of adults aged 45 to 84 years who were recruited from 6 US communities. A total of 6764 participants without baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) were included in the analysis. Data were collected from July 2000 through August 2002. Follow-up was completed by December 2013, and data were analyzed from October 2018 to December 2018.
The EVGGFP (excellent, very good, good, fair, and poor) self-assessment of overall health (assessed before the baseline study examination) and CAC score. The EVGGFP rating was categorized as poor/fair, good, very good, or excellent.
Hard coronary heart disease (CHD) events, hard CVD events, and all-cause mortality during a median follow-up of 13.2 years (interquartile range, 12.7-13.7 years).
Among the study population of 6764 participants, the mean (SD) age was 62.1 (10.2) years, and 52.9% were women. The EVGGFP rating was strongly associated with age, sex, race/ethnicity, educational and income levels, healthy diet and physical activity, and cardiovascular risk factors. Despite encapsulating many risk variables, no correlation (r = -0.007; P = .57) or association between EVGGFP and the presence (χ2 = 0.84; P = .84) or severity (χ2 = 4.64; P = .86) of CAC was found. During follow-up, 1161 deaths, 637 hard CVD events, and 405 hard CHD events were recorded. In models adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and CAC, participants who reported excellent health had a 45% lower risk of CVD (hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39-0.77) and a 42% lower risk of CHD (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.90) compared with those who reported poor/fair health. Participants in the excellent SRH category who had any CAC had markedly elevated risk of hard CHD (HR, 6.19; 95% CI, 2.1-18.3) and CVD (HR, 6.50; 95% CI, 2.7-15.6) events compared with those with a CAC score of 0. The addition of the EVGGFP rating to CAC improved the area under the curve (C statistic) for CHD events (0.725 vs 0.734; P = .007), CVD events (0.693 vs 0.706; P < .001), and all-cause mortality (0.685 vs 0.707; P < .001). However, the addition of the EVGGFP rating to the combination of CAC and atherosclerotic CVD risk score did not significantly improve C statistics for CHD events (0.751 vs 0.753; P = .39), CVD events (0.739 vs 0.741; P = .18), or all-cause mortality (0.779 vs 0.781; P = .13).
Although SRH and CAC integrate many risk variables, this study suggests that they are poorly correlated and have complementary predictive utility. A perception of excellent health does not obviate the need for definitive assessment of CVD risk, whereas fair/poor perceived health may serve as a risk enhancer, arguing for advanced risk assessment in selected clinical scenarios.
自我评估的健康状况(SRH)、冠状动脉钙(CAC)评分和心血管风险之间的相互作用描述得很差。
评估 SRH 和 CAC 之间的相关性程度,确定这些措施是否对风险预测具有互补性,并评估 SRH 对既定风险工具的补充是否具有增量价值。
设计、地点和参与者:多民族动脉粥样硬化研究(MESA)是一项针对年龄在 45 至 84 岁之间的成年人的大型基于人群的前瞻性队列研究,这些成年人是从美国 6 个社区招募的。共有 6764 名无基线心血管疾病(CVD)的参与者纳入分析。数据收集于 2000 年 7 月至 2002 年 8 月。随访于 2013 年 12 月完成,数据分析于 2018 年 10 月至 12 月进行。
基线研究检查前评估的整体健康状况(极好、非常好、好、一般和差)的 EVGGFP(优秀、非常好、好、一般和差)自我评估和 CAC 评分。EVGGFP 评级分为差/一般、好、非常好或优秀。
中位随访 13.2 年(四分位间距,12.7-13.7 年)期间的硬冠心病(CHD)事件、硬 CVD 事件和全因死亡率。
在 6764 名研究参与者中,平均(SD)年龄为 62.1(10.2)岁,52.9%为女性。EVGGFP 评级与年龄、性别、种族/民族、教育和收入水平、健康饮食和体育活动以及心血管危险因素密切相关。尽管包含了许多风险变量,但 EVGGFP 与 CAC 的存在(χ2=0.84;P=0.84)或严重程度(χ2=4.64;P=0.86)之间没有相关性(r=−0.007;P=0.57)或关联。在随访期间,记录了 1161 例死亡、637 例硬 CVD 事件和 405 例硬 CHD 事件。在调整年龄、性别、种族/民族和 CAC 的模型中,报告健康状况极好的参与者患 CVD 的风险降低了 45%(风险比[HR],0.55;95%CI,0.39-0.77),患 CHD 的风险降低了 42%(HR,0.58;95%CI,0.37-0.90),与报告健康状况差/一般的参与者相比。任何 CAC 评分的参与者中,自我评估为 SRH 极好的参与者发生硬 CHD(HR,6.19;95%CI,2.1-18.3)和 CVD(HR,6.50;95%CI,2.7-15.6)事件的风险显著升高,与 CAC 评分 0 的参与者相比。将 EVGGFP 评分添加到 CAC 可提高 CHD 事件(曲线下面积[C 统计量],0.725 与 0.734;P=0.007)、CVD 事件(0.693 与 0.706;P<0.001)和全因死亡率(0.685 与 0.707;P<0.001)的 C 统计量。然而,将 EVGGFP 评分添加到 CAC 和动脉粥样硬化性 CVD 风险评分的组合中并不会显著提高 CHD 事件(0.751 与 0.753;P=0.39)、CVD 事件(0.739 与 0.741;P=0.18)或全因死亡率(0.779 与 0.781;P=0.13)的 C 统计量。
尽管 SRH 和 CAC 整合了许多风险变量,但本研究表明它们相关性较差,具有互补的预测作用。对健康状况的良好感知并不能排除对 CVD 风险的明确评估的需要,而较差/差的感知健康状况可能会增强风险,这表明在某些临床情况下需要进行高级风险评估。