Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings: Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites

Juan Carlos Bazo-Alvarez, Renato Quispe, Frank Peralta, Julio A. Poterico, Giancarlo A. Valle, Melissa Burroughs, Timesh Pillay, Robert H Gilman, William Checkley, Germán Malaga, Liam Smeeth, Antonio Bernabé-Ortiz, J. Jaime Miranda

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

It is unclear how well currently available risk scores predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in low-income and middle-income countries. We aim to compare the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort risk equations (ACC/AHA model) with 6 other CVD risk tools to assess the concordance of predicted CVD risk in a random sample from 5 geographically diverse Peruvian populations. We used data from 2 Peruvian, age and sex-matched, population-based studies across 5 geographical sites. The ACC/AHA model were compared with 6 other CVD risk prediction tools: laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, non-laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, Reynolds risk score, systematic coronary risk evaluation, World Health Organization risk charts, and the Lancet chronic diseases risk charts. Main outcome was in agreement with predicted CVD risk using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient. Two thousand one hundred and eighty-three subjects, mean age 54.3 (SD ± 5.6) years, were included in the analysis. Overall, we found poor agreement between different scores when compared with ACC/AHA model. When each of the risk scores was used with cut-offs specified in guidelines, ACC/AHA model depicted the highest proportion of people at high CVD risk predicted at 10 years, with a prevalence of 29.0% (95% confidence interval, 26.9-31.0%), whereas prevalence with World Health Organization risk charts was 0.6% (95% confidence interval, 0.2-8.6%). In conclusion, poor concordance between current CVD risk scores demonstrates the uncertainty of choosing any of them for public health and clinical interventions in Latin American populations. There is a need to improve the evidence base of risk scores for CVD in low-income and middle-income countries.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)74-80
Number of pages7
JournalCritical Pathways in Cardiology
Volume14
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2015

Fingerprint

Cardiovascular Diseases
American Heart Association
Cardiology
Confidence Intervals
Population
Uncertainty
Chronic Disease
Public Health

Keywords

  • cardiovascular diseases
  • Peru
  • vulnerable populations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Bazo-Alvarez, J. C., Quispe, R., Peralta, F., Poterico, J. A., Valle, G. A., Burroughs, M., ... Miranda, J. J. (2015). Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings: Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites. Critical Pathways in Cardiology, 14(2), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1097/HPC.0000000000000045

Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings : Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites. / Bazo-Alvarez, Juan Carlos; Quispe, Renato; Peralta, Frank; Poterico, Julio A.; Valle, Giancarlo A.; Burroughs, Melissa; Pillay, Timesh; Gilman, Robert H; Checkley, William; Malaga, Germán; Smeeth, Liam; Bernabé-Ortiz, Antonio; Miranda, J. Jaime.

In: Critical Pathways in Cardiology, Vol. 14, No. 2, 01.06.2015, p. 74-80.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bazo-Alvarez, JC, Quispe, R, Peralta, F, Poterico, JA, Valle, GA, Burroughs, M, Pillay, T, Gilman, RH, Checkley, W, Malaga, G, Smeeth, L, Bernabé-Ortiz, A & Miranda, JJ 2015, 'Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings: Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites', Critical Pathways in Cardiology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1097/HPC.0000000000000045
Bazo-Alvarez, Juan Carlos ; Quispe, Renato ; Peralta, Frank ; Poterico, Julio A. ; Valle, Giancarlo A. ; Burroughs, Melissa ; Pillay, Timesh ; Gilman, Robert H ; Checkley, William ; Malaga, Germán ; Smeeth, Liam ; Bernabé-Ortiz, Antonio ; Miranda, J. Jaime. / Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings : Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites. In: Critical Pathways in Cardiology. 2015 ; Vol. 14, No. 2. pp. 74-80.
@article{33da86dd986749f3a57f532ff9260ae1,
title = "Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings: Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites",
abstract = "It is unclear how well currently available risk scores predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in low-income and middle-income countries. We aim to compare the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort risk equations (ACC/AHA model) with 6 other CVD risk tools to assess the concordance of predicted CVD risk in a random sample from 5 geographically diverse Peruvian populations. We used data from 2 Peruvian, age and sex-matched, population-based studies across 5 geographical sites. The ACC/AHA model were compared with 6 other CVD risk prediction tools: laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, non-laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, Reynolds risk score, systematic coronary risk evaluation, World Health Organization risk charts, and the Lancet chronic diseases risk charts. Main outcome was in agreement with predicted CVD risk using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient. Two thousand one hundred and eighty-three subjects, mean age 54.3 (SD ± 5.6) years, were included in the analysis. Overall, we found poor agreement between different scores when compared with ACC/AHA model. When each of the risk scores was used with cut-offs specified in guidelines, ACC/AHA model depicted the highest proportion of people at high CVD risk predicted at 10 years, with a prevalence of 29.0{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval, 26.9-31.0{\%}), whereas prevalence with World Health Organization risk charts was 0.6{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval, 0.2-8.6{\%}). In conclusion, poor concordance between current CVD risk scores demonstrates the uncertainty of choosing any of them for public health and clinical interventions in Latin American populations. There is a need to improve the evidence base of risk scores for CVD in low-income and middle-income countries.",
keywords = "cardiovascular diseases, Peru, vulnerable populations",
author = "Bazo-Alvarez, {Juan Carlos} and Renato Quispe and Frank Peralta and Poterico, {Julio A.} and Valle, {Giancarlo A.} and Melissa Burroughs and Timesh Pillay and Gilman, {Robert H} and William Checkley and Germ{\'a}n Malaga and Liam Smeeth and Antonio Bernab{\'e}-Ortiz and Miranda, {J. Jaime}",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/HPC.0000000000000045",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "74--80",
journal = "Critical Pathways in Cardiology",
issn = "1535-282X",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Agreement between cardiovascular disease risk scores in resource-limited settings

T2 - Evidence from 5 Peruvian sites

AU - Bazo-Alvarez, Juan Carlos

AU - Quispe, Renato

AU - Peralta, Frank

AU - Poterico, Julio A.

AU - Valle, Giancarlo A.

AU - Burroughs, Melissa

AU - Pillay, Timesh

AU - Gilman, Robert H

AU - Checkley, William

AU - Malaga, Germán

AU - Smeeth, Liam

AU - Bernabé-Ortiz, Antonio

AU - Miranda, J. Jaime

PY - 2015/6/1

Y1 - 2015/6/1

N2 - It is unclear how well currently available risk scores predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in low-income and middle-income countries. We aim to compare the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort risk equations (ACC/AHA model) with 6 other CVD risk tools to assess the concordance of predicted CVD risk in a random sample from 5 geographically diverse Peruvian populations. We used data from 2 Peruvian, age and sex-matched, population-based studies across 5 geographical sites. The ACC/AHA model were compared with 6 other CVD risk prediction tools: laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, non-laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, Reynolds risk score, systematic coronary risk evaluation, World Health Organization risk charts, and the Lancet chronic diseases risk charts. Main outcome was in agreement with predicted CVD risk using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient. Two thousand one hundred and eighty-three subjects, mean age 54.3 (SD ± 5.6) years, were included in the analysis. Overall, we found poor agreement between different scores when compared with ACC/AHA model. When each of the risk scores was used with cut-offs specified in guidelines, ACC/AHA model depicted the highest proportion of people at high CVD risk predicted at 10 years, with a prevalence of 29.0% (95% confidence interval, 26.9-31.0%), whereas prevalence with World Health Organization risk charts was 0.6% (95% confidence interval, 0.2-8.6%). In conclusion, poor concordance between current CVD risk scores demonstrates the uncertainty of choosing any of them for public health and clinical interventions in Latin American populations. There is a need to improve the evidence base of risk scores for CVD in low-income and middle-income countries.

AB - It is unclear how well currently available risk scores predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in low-income and middle-income countries. We aim to compare the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort risk equations (ACC/AHA model) with 6 other CVD risk tools to assess the concordance of predicted CVD risk in a random sample from 5 geographically diverse Peruvian populations. We used data from 2 Peruvian, age and sex-matched, population-based studies across 5 geographical sites. The ACC/AHA model were compared with 6 other CVD risk prediction tools: laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, non-laboratory Framingham risk score for CVD, Reynolds risk score, systematic coronary risk evaluation, World Health Organization risk charts, and the Lancet chronic diseases risk charts. Main outcome was in agreement with predicted CVD risk using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient. Two thousand one hundred and eighty-three subjects, mean age 54.3 (SD ± 5.6) years, were included in the analysis. Overall, we found poor agreement between different scores when compared with ACC/AHA model. When each of the risk scores was used with cut-offs specified in guidelines, ACC/AHA model depicted the highest proportion of people at high CVD risk predicted at 10 years, with a prevalence of 29.0% (95% confidence interval, 26.9-31.0%), whereas prevalence with World Health Organization risk charts was 0.6% (95% confidence interval, 0.2-8.6%). In conclusion, poor concordance between current CVD risk scores demonstrates the uncertainty of choosing any of them for public health and clinical interventions in Latin American populations. There is a need to improve the evidence base of risk scores for CVD in low-income and middle-income countries.

KW - cardiovascular diseases

KW - Peru

KW - vulnerable populations

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84966495211&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84966495211&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/HPC.0000000000000045

DO - 10.1097/HPC.0000000000000045

M3 - Article

C2 - 26102017

AN - SCOPUS:84966495211

VL - 14

SP - 74

EP - 80

JO - Critical Pathways in Cardiology

JF - Critical Pathways in Cardiology

SN - 1535-282X

IS - 2

ER -