Biomarkers versus traditional risk factors to predict cardiovascular events in very old adults: cross-validated prospective cohort study. Issue 6 (28th June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Vaes, Bert; Indestege, Paulien; Serneels, Tinne; Hegendörfer, Eralda; van Peet, Petra G; Poortvliet, Rosalinde K E; Wallemacq, Pierre; Gussekloo, Jacobijn; Degryse, Jan
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 10:Issue 6(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-06-28
• Subjects: cardiac epidemiology -- epidemiology -- geriatric medicine; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035809
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: To test new cardiovascular (CV) risk models in very old adults with and without a history of CV disease (CVD), based on traditional risk factors and biomarkers. Design: Cross-validated prospective cohort study. The models were tested in the BELFRAIL Study and externally validated in the Leiden 85-plus Study. Setting: General practice, Belgium and The Netherlands. Participants: The BELFRAIL cohort consisted of 266 patients aged 80 years or older without a history of CVD and 260 with a history of CVD. The Leiden 85-plus Study consisted of 264 patients aged 85 years without a history of CVD and 282 with a history of CVD. Outcome measures: The model with traditional risk factors and biomarkers, as well as the model using only biomarkers, was compared with the model with only traditional risk factors to predict 3-year CV morbidity and mortality. A competing-risk analysis was performed, and the continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) and net benefit were used to compare the predictive value of the different models. Results: Traditional risk factors poorly predicted CV mortality and morbidity. In participants without a history of CVD, adding N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) improved the prediction (NRI 0.56 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.99) and relative IDI 4.01 (95% CI 2.19 to 6.28)). In participants with a history of CVD, the NRI with the addition of NT-pro-BNP and high-sensitivity C reactive protein was 0.38 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.70), and the relative IDI was 0.53 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.90). Moreover, in participants without a history of CVD, NT-pro-BNP performed well as a stand-alone predictor (NRI 0.32 (95% CI −0.12 to 0.74) and relative IDI 3.44 (95% CI 1.56 to 6.09)). Conclusions: This study tested new risk models to predict CV morbidity and mortality in very old adults. Especially, NT-pro-BNP showed a strong added predictive value. This opens perspectives for clinicians who are in need of an easily applicable strategy for CV risk prediction in very old adults.