scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary Artery Calcium Testing for Coronary Heart and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction to Guide Statin Allocation: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e0116377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric T. Roberts ◽  
Aaron Horne ◽  
Seth S. Martin ◽  
Michael J. Blaha ◽  
Ron Blankstein ◽  
...  
Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 137 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel S Tajeu ◽  
Ciaran Kohli-Lynch ◽  
Yiyi Zhang ◽  
Paul Muntner ◽  
Steven Shea ◽  
...  

Introduction: Uncertainty remains regarding the most efficient and cost-effective 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk prediction tool for identifying moderate to high-risk patients for primary prevention statin treatment. Methods: We utilized the CVD Policy Model, a computer microsimulation model of ASCVD incidence, prevalence, mortality, and costs, to compare cost-effectiveness of statin treatment at varying 10-year predicted ASCVD risk thresholds for Framingham CVD (FRS-CVD), Reynolds Risk Score (RRS), and Pooled Cohorts Risk Equations over a 10-year time horizon in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) cohort. Cost effectiveness was assessed at predicted 10-year risk ≥ 20.0%, 15.0%, 10.0%, 7.5%, 5.0%, and 2.5%. We restricted the simulation cohort to participants aged 50 to 74 years who were not taking statins at baseline (n = 2,871). Moderate intensity statin treatment effectiveness was parameterized in the model as a 29% low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction. Total cost comprised statins ($100/year), side effect costs, and ASCVD event costs. Disability from treatment side effects and ASCVD events were included. Results: Average FRS-CVD, RRS, and Pooled Cohorts 10-year predicted ASCVD risks were 18.8%, 11.3%, 12.2%, for men and 8.9%, 4.3%, 6.6%, for women, respectively. At the same predicted risk, FRS-CVD consistently selected the most patients for treatment, and RRS the fewest ( Figure ). Compared with no treatment, treating patients with RRS ≥ 20% was cost saving in men. Subsequent risk threshold strategies with incremental cost effectiveness <$75,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for men were: FRS-CVD ≥ 20% ($13,046), RRS ≥ 7.5% ($17,774), and RRS ≥ 5.0% ($19,891). For women, the non-dominated thresholds were: Pooled Cohorts ≥ 15% ($27,908) and Pooled Cohorts ≥ 7.5% ($72,377). Conclusions: At cost-effectiveness thresholds less than $75,000/QALY, RRS was the highest value tool for men while the Pooled Cohorts Risk Equations performed best for women.


Heart ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isac C Thomas ◽  
Brandon Shiau ◽  
Julie O Denenberg ◽  
Robyn L McClelland ◽  
Philip Greenland ◽  
...  

ObjectivesRecently, the density score of coronary artery calcium (CAC) has been shown to be associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events at any level of CAC volume. Whether risk factors for CAC volume and CAC density are similar or distinct is unknown. We sought to evaluate the associations of CVD risk factors with CAC volume and CAC density scores.MethodsBaseline measurements from 6814 participants free of clinical CVD were collected for the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Participants with detectable CAC (n=3398) were evaluated for this study. Multivariable linear regression models were used to evaluate independent associations of CVD risk factors with CAC volume and CAC density scores.ResultsWhereas most CVD risk factors were associated with higher CAC volume scores, many risk factors were associated with lower CAC density scores. For example, diabetes was associated with a higher natural logarithm (ln) transformed CAC volume score (standardised β=0.44 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.58) ln-units) but a lower CAC density score (β=−0.07 (−0.12 to −0.02) density units). Chinese, African-American and Hispanic race/ethnicity were each associated with lower ln CAC volume scores (β=−0.62 (−0.83to −0.41), −0.52 (−0.64 to −0.39) and −0.40 (−0.55 to −0.26) ln-units, respectively) and higher CAC density scores (β= 0.41 (0.34 to 0.47), 0.18 (0.12 to 0.23) and 0.21 (0.15 to 0.26) density units, respectively) relative to non-Hispanic White.ConclusionsIn a cohort free of clinical CVD, CVD risk factors are differentially associated with CAC volume and density scores, with many CVD risk factors inversely associated with the CAC density score after controlling for the CAC volume score. These findings suggest complex associations between CVD risk factors and these components of CAC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document