Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Based on US Cohort Studies: Findings From a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop

This report was derived from a workshop on cardiovascular risk assessment sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, which addressed whether risk equations developed in the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) for predicting new-onset coronary heart disease (CHD) apply to diverse population groups. Preparation for the workshop included a reanalysis and comparison of prospective studies in several different populations in which risk factors were related to cardiovascular outcomes. Some studies included fatal and nonfatal CHD end points, whereas others contained only CHD mortality. Extensive collaboration provided as much uniformity as possible with respect to both risk factors and CHD end points. The FHS has led in defining the quantitative impact of risk factors.1 Many potential risk factors were measured and related to cardiovascular outcomes. Several risk factors proved to be strong, largely independent predictors of cardiovascular disease (CVD). These factors—advancing age, cigarette smoking, blood pressure (particularly systolic), cholesterol in total serum and HDL, and diabetes—served as the basis for the development of risk prediction equations.1 If FHS risk estimates are to be widely used, they must apply widely in the US population. To document their transportability, they must be compared with prospective studies in other populations. Although the FHS is the longest running prospective study, there are other major studies. The cardiovascular end points of these other studies have varied. Some include cardiovascular morbidity and mortality; others have only cardiovascular mortality. Among the end points, CHD is the most extensively reported; for this reason, CHD was the primary focus of the workshop. ### Multivariate Relative Risk Comparisons In preparation for the workshop, multivariate regression coefficients for each risk factor were compared in different populations with those of the FHS. Adjusted relative risk estimates make it possible to determine whether each independent risk factor confers a similar or different relative risk among different …

[1]  Eary,et al.  CAROTID-ARTERY INTIMA AND MEDIA THICKNESS AS A RISK FACTOR FOR MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION AND STROKE IN OLDER ADULTS , 2000 .

[2]  Barry Lewis,et al.  Coronary heart disease: reducing the risk: the scientific background to primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. A worldwide view. International Task force for the Prevention of Coronary Heart disease. , 1999, Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology.

[3]  R. Cooper,et al.  Prediction of coronary heart disease mortality in blacks and whites: pooled data from two national cohorts. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[4]  R. Kronmal,et al.  Carotid-artery intima and media thickness as a risk factor for myocardial infarction and stroke in older adults. Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  S M Grundy,et al.  Primary prevention of coronary heart disease: guidance from Framingham: a statement for healthcare professionals from the AHA Task Force on Risk Reduction. American Heart Association. , 1998, Circulation.

[6]  D. Levy,et al.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. , 1998, Circulation.

[7]  W. Browner,et al.  Improving the prediction of coronary heart disease to aid in the management of high cholesterol levels: what a difference a decade makes. , 1998, JAMA.

[8]  A. Folsom,et al.  Association of coronary heart disease incidence with carotid arterial wall thickness and major risk factors: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, 1987-1993. , 1997, American journal of epidemiology.

[9]  F. Mayet,et al.  Risk factors leading to coronary heart disease among the black, Indian and white peoples of Durban. , 1996, Journal of human hypertension.

[10]  B Foxman,et al.  How Well Do Prediction Equations Predict? Using Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves and Accuracy Curves to Compare Validity and Generalizability , 1993, Epidemiology.

[11]  R. Kronmal,et al.  The Cardiovascular Health Study: design and rationale. , 1991, Annals of epidemiology.

[12]  P. Savage,et al.  The Strong Heart Study. A study of cardiovascular disease in American Indians: design and methods. , 1990, American journal of epidemiology.

[13]  Aric Invest The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study: design and objectives. The ARIC investigators , 1989 .

[14]  A. Folsom,et al.  The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study: design and objectives. The ARIC investigators. , 1989, American journal of epidemiology.

[15]  W. Willett,et al.  The 2 × 2 factorial design: Its application to a randomized trial of aspirin and U.S. physicians , 1985 .

[16]  Stern Mp Honolulu Heart Study: review of epidemiologic data and design. , 1984 .

[17]  M. Stern Honolulu Heart Study: review of epidemiologic data and design. , 1984, Progress in clinical and biological research.

[18]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[19]  J. Swets ROC analysis applied to the evaluation of medical imaging techniques. , 1979, Investigative radiology.

[20]  C. Metz Basic principles of ROC analysis. , 1978, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[21]  P. Sorlie,et al.  Urban-rural differences in coronary heart disease in a low incidence area. The Puerto Rico heart study. , 1978, American journal of epidemiology.