Developing Non-Laboratory Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Charts and Validating Laboratory and Non-Laboratory-Based Models Publisher Pubmed



Hassannejad R¹ ; Mansourian M^{2, 3} ; Marateb H⁴ ; Mohebian MR⁵ ; Gaziano TA⁶ ; Jackson RT⁷ ; Di Angelantonio E⁸ ; Sarrafzadegan N^{1, 9} Show Affiliations
Source: Global Heart Published:2021

Abstract

Background: Developing simplified risk assessment model based on non-laboratory risk factors that could determine cardiovascular risk as accurately as laboratory-based one can be valuable, particularly in developing countries where there are limited resources. Objective: To develop a simplified non-laboratory cardiovascular disease risk assessment chart based on previously reported laboratory-based chart and evaluate internal and external validation, and recalibration of both risk models to assess the performance of risk scoring tools in other population. Methods: A 10-year non-laboratory-based risk prediction chart was developed for fatal and non-fatal CVD using Cox Proportional Hazard regression. Data from the Isfahan Cohort Study (ICS), a population-based study among 6504 adults aged ≥ 35 years, followed-up for at least ten years was used for the non-laboratory-based model derivation. Participants were followed up until the occurrence of CVD events. Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study (TLGS) data was used to evaluate the external validity of both non-laboratory and laboratory risk assessment models in other populations rather than one used in the model derivation. Results: The discrimination and calibration analysis of the non-laboratory model showed the following values of Harrell's C: 0.73 (95% CI 0.71-0.74), and Nam-D'Agostino X2:11.01 (p = 0.27), respectively. The non-laboratory model was in agreement and classified high risk and low risk patients as accurately as the laboratory one. Both non-laboratory and laboratory risk prediction models showed good discrimination in the external validation, with Harrell's C of 0.77 (95% CI 0.75-0.78) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.76-0.79), respectively. Conclusions: Our simplified risk assessment model based on non-laboratory risk factors could determine cardiovascular risk as accurately as laboratory-based one. This approach can provide simple risk assessment tool where laboratory testing is unavailable, inconvenient, and costly. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.. All rights reserved.