Development and Validation of Novel Residual Risk Scores for Patients With ASCVD.

Olga Mineeva, Chunying Li, Franco Giulianini, Simeon Häfliger, Vadim Bubes, Gunnar Raetsch, Samia Mora, Olga V Demler
{"title":"Development and Validation of Novel Residual Risk Scores for Patients With ASCVD.","authors":"Olga Mineeva, Chunying Li, Franco Giulianini, Simeon Häfliger, Vadim Bubes, Gunnar Raetsch, Samia Mora, Olga V Demler","doi":"10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite clinical need, personalized risk scores for established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) are scarce.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of the study was to develop and validate 10-year residual risk scores for cardiovascular death in patients with established ASCVD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective observational cohort study. Models developed and validated in U.K. Biobank (UKB) (baseline 2006-2010; follow-up through 2021) and externally validated in Mass General Brigham cohort (MGB) (baseline 2007; follow-up through 2018). Analyzed on October 2022-February 2024. Eligible participants had established ASCVD. Guideline-based clinical factors plus additional biomarkers and self-reported health ratings.</p><p><strong>Primary outcome: </strong>10-year cardiovascular death. Elastic-net Cox and gradient-boosted tree models. C statistics and goodness-of-fit assessed in holdout set.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>UKB: 32,994 participants (mean age 61; 11,727 [35.5%] women; 2,660 [8.0%] cardiovascular deaths), with 9,899 (30%) randomly selected as a holdout validation set. MGB: 54,969 patients (mean age 71; 22,738 [41.4%] women; 6,927 [12.6%] cardiovascular deaths). Median follow-up: 10 years (IQR 10-10) in UKB; 9.4 years (5-10) in MGB. We developed 2 residual risk scores, RRS16 and RRS24, incorporating 16 and 24 algorithmically selected factors. RRS16 used routinely available factors; RRS24 also included self-reported health and additional biomarkers. RRS16 achieved C statistics of 0.752 (95% CI: 0.736-0.768) in UKB and 0.750 (0.744-0.756) in MGB, outperforming the 2018 the American Heart Association (AHA) guideline model (0.658 [0.642-0.674] in UKB, 0.580 [0.574-0.586] in MGB). RRS24 achieved 0.784 (0.768-0.800) in UKB. Both models well calibrated (P > 0.1). RRS16 calculator: https://mora.bwh.harvard.edu/rrs16/.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RRS16 and RRS24 outperformed AHA guideline model in estimating the residual risk in patients with established ASCVD. Both are clinically applicable but require further validation in diverse populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":73527,"journal":{"name":"JACC advances","volume":"4 11 Pt 1","pages":"102162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JACC advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102162","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite clinical need, personalized risk scores for established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) are scarce.

Objectives: The objective of the study was to develop and validate 10-year residual risk scores for cardiovascular death in patients with established ASCVD.

Methods: Prospective observational cohort study. Models developed and validated in U.K. Biobank (UKB) (baseline 2006-2010; follow-up through 2021) and externally validated in Mass General Brigham cohort (MGB) (baseline 2007; follow-up through 2018). Analyzed on October 2022-February 2024. Eligible participants had established ASCVD. Guideline-based clinical factors plus additional biomarkers and self-reported health ratings.

Primary outcome: 10-year cardiovascular death. Elastic-net Cox and gradient-boosted tree models. C statistics and goodness-of-fit assessed in holdout set.

Results: UKB: 32,994 participants (mean age 61; 11,727 [35.5%] women; 2,660 [8.0%] cardiovascular deaths), with 9,899 (30%) randomly selected as a holdout validation set. MGB: 54,969 patients (mean age 71; 22,738 [41.4%] women; 6,927 [12.6%] cardiovascular deaths). Median follow-up: 10 years (IQR 10-10) in UKB; 9.4 years (5-10) in MGB. We developed 2 residual risk scores, RRS16 and RRS24, incorporating 16 and 24 algorithmically selected factors. RRS16 used routinely available factors; RRS24 also included self-reported health and additional biomarkers. RRS16 achieved C statistics of 0.752 (95% CI: 0.736-0.768) in UKB and 0.750 (0.744-0.756) in MGB, outperforming the 2018 the American Heart Association (AHA) guideline model (0.658 [0.642-0.674] in UKB, 0.580 [0.574-0.586] in MGB). RRS24 achieved 0.784 (0.768-0.800) in UKB. Both models well calibrated (P > 0.1). RRS16 calculator: https://mora.bwh.harvard.edu/rrs16/.

Conclusions: RRS16 and RRS24 outperformed AHA guideline model in estimating the residual risk in patients with established ASCVD. Both are clinically applicable but require further validation in diverse populations.

ASCVD患者新型剩余风险评分的开发和验证。
背景:尽管有临床需要,但针对已确诊的动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(ASCVD)的个性化风险评分仍然很少。目的:本研究的目的是建立并验证ASCVD患者心血管死亡的10年剩余风险评分。方法:前瞻性观察队列研究。模型在英国生物银行(UKB)开发和验证(基线2006-2010年,随访至2021年),并在麻省总医院布里格姆队列(MGB)中进行外部验证(基线2007年,随访至2018年)。分析时间为2022年10月至2024年2月。符合条件的参与者建立了ASCVD。基于指南的临床因素加上额外的生物标志物和自我报告的健康评级。主要结局:10年心血管死亡。弹性网Cox和梯度增强树模型。C组统计量和拟合优度评估。结果:UKB: 32,994名参与者(平均年龄61岁;11,727名(35.5%)女性;2,660名(8.0%)心血管死亡),随机选择9,899名(30%)作为保留验证集。MGB: 54,969例患者(平均年龄71岁;22,738例(41.4%)女性;6,927例(12.6%)心血管死亡。中位随访:10年(IQR 10-10);9.4年(5-10年)。我们制定了2个剩余风险评分,RRS16和RRS24,其中包括16和24个算法选择的因素。RRS16使用常规可用因子;RRS24还包括自我报告的健康状况和其他生物标志物。RRS16在UKB和MGB的C统计值分别为0.752 (95% CI: 0.736-0.768)和0.750(0.744-0.756),优于2018年美国心脏协会(AHA)指南模型(UKB为0.658 [0.642-0.674],MGB为0.580[0.574-0.586])。RRS24在英国市场达到0.784(0.768-0.800)。两个模型都经过了很好的校准(P < 0.1)。RRS16计算器:https://mora.bwh.harvard.edu/rrs16/.Conclusions: RRS16和RRS24在估计ASCVD患者的剩余风险方面优于AHA指南模型。两者均具有临床适用性,但需要在不同人群中进一步验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JACC advances
JACC advances Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信