Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine (H.S.B., M.H.C.), University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.
Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle (R.L.M.).
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2023 Feb;16(2):e014788. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.122.014788. Epub 2023 Feb 21.
The Agatston coronary artery calcium (CAC) score provides robust cardiovascular disease risk prediction but upweights plaque area by a density factor. Density, however, has been shown to be inversely associated with events. Using CAC volume and density separately improves risk prediction, but it is unclear how to apply this method clinically. We aimed to evaluate the association between CAC density and cardiovascular disease across the spectrum of CAC volume to better understand how to incorporate these metrics into a single score.
We performed an analysis of MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) participants with detectable CAC to evaluate the association between CAC density and events by level of CAC volume using multivariable Cox regression models.
In a cohort of 3316 participants, there was a significant interaction (<0.001) between CAC volume and density for coronary heart disease (CHD) risk (myocardial infarction, CHD death, resuscitated cardiac arrest). Models using CAC volume and density resulted in improvement in the -index (0.703, SE 0.012 versus 0.687, SE 0.013) and a significant net reclassification improvement (0.208 [95% CI, 0.102-0.306]) compared with the Agatston score for CHD risk prediction. Density was significantly associated with lower CHD risk at volumes ≤130 mm (hazard ratio, 0.57 per unit of density [95% CI, 0.43-0.75]), but the inverse association at volumes >130 mm was not significant (hazard ratio, 0.82 per unit of density [95% CI, 0.55-1.22]).
The lower risk for CHD associated with higher CAC density varied by level of volume, and volume ≤130 mm is a potentially clinically useful cut point. Further study is needed to integrate these findings into a unified CAC scoring method.
Agatston 冠状动脉钙(CAC)评分可提供强大的心血管疾病风险预测,但通过密度因素对斑块面积进行加权。然而,密度已被证明与事件呈反比相关。单独使用 CAC 体积和密度可以提高风险预测,但尚不清楚如何将这种方法应用于临床。我们旨在评估 CAC 密度与 CAC 体积谱范围内的心血管疾病之间的关联,以更好地了解如何将这些指标纳入单个评分。
我们对可检测到 CAC 的 MESA(动脉粥样硬化的多民族研究)参与者进行了分析,以使用多变量 Cox 回归模型评估 CAC 密度与 CAC 体积水平之间的关联与事件。
在 3316 名参与者的队列中,CAC 体积和密度之间存在显著的相互作用(<0.001),用于评估冠心病(心肌梗死、冠心病死亡、复苏性心脏骤停)的风险。使用 CAC 体积和密度的模型导致 -指数的改善(0.703,SE 0.012 与 0.687,SE 0.013)和显著的净重新分类改善(0.208 [95%CI,0.102-0.306])与 Agatston 评分相比,用于冠心病风险预测。在体积≤130mm 时,密度与较低的冠心病风险显著相关(密度每单位的风险比为 0.57[95%CI,0.43-0.75]),但在体积>130mm 时,反比关系不显著(密度每单位的风险比为 0.82[95%CI,0.55-1.22])。
与 CAC 密度较高相关的冠心病风险较低,其差异与体积水平有关,体积≤130mm 是一个潜在的临床有用的切点。需要进一步研究将这些发现纳入统一的 CAC 评分方法。