ArticleLupus science & medicine2017
Cardiovascular risk profiles in a lupus cohort: what do different calculators tell us?
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term association of the triglyceride-glucose index with cardiovascular involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus: a retrospective cohort study.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Increased cardiovascular risk in Korean patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a population-based cohort study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cardiac Magnetic Resonance in Rheumatology to Detect Cardiac Involvement Since Early and Pre-clinical Stages of the Autoimmune Diseases: A Narrative Review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Cardiovascular risk management in antiphospholipid syndrome: trends over time and comparison with rheumatoid arthritis and diabetes mellitus.Lupus science & medicine · 2021Article
- Understanding Accelerated Atherosclerosis in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Toward Better Treatment and Prevention.Inflammation · 2021Review
- Interaction between theAnnals of the rheumatic diseases · 2021Article
- Assessment of cardiovascular risk tools as predictors of cardiovascular disease events in systemic lupus erythematosus.Lupus science & medicine · 2021Article
- Long-term outcomes in systemic lupus erythematosus: trends over time and major contributors.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2020Review
- Associations of metabolic syndrome in SLE.Lupus science & medicine · 2020Article
- Psoriasis and Cardiovascular Risk: A Comprehensive Review.Advances in therapy · 2020Review
- Increased Incidence of Resistant Hypertension in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Arthritis care & research · 2020Article
- Article
- Recognition and control of hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.Clinical rheumatology · 2018Observational
- QRISK3 improves detection of cardiovascular disease risk in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.Lupus science & medicine · 2018Article
- Should all patients with psoriasis receive statins? Analysis according to different strategies.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
- Cardiometabolic Risk, Evaluation, and Control in Lupus Nephritis.Glomerular diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death worldwide and this risk is increased in patients with SLE who may not conform to traditional cardiovascular risk profiles.
aimsTo determine the prevalence of high CVD risk among patients with SLE calculated using different risk calculators, and to characterise those identified as high risk.
methodsA cross-sectional analysis to estimate CVD risk using the Framingham Risk Equation (Framingham score) and an SLE-specific CVD risk equation (SLE score) was undertaken using data from a single centre cohort. The characteristics of patients identified as 'high risk' by the SLE score only (the 'missed group') were compared with those identified by the Framingham score (the 'conventional group').
results146 patients were included; 22 (15%) and 44 (30%) were determined to be at 'high risk' based on the Framingham and SLE scores, respectively. Patients in the 'missed group' were less likely to have traditional risk factors and were more likely to be female (81% vs 50%; p=0.03), younger (mean age 54 vs 69 years p<0.01) and have lower systolic blood pressure (132 vs 143 mm Hg; p=0.05). Of those deemed high risk, only a minority were treated to target blood pressure and lipid levels.
conclusionsA large proportion of patients with SLE could be re-classified as high risk using a formula that incorporates SLE disease-related parameters. These patients have different profiles to those identified using a conventional risk model. Optimal CVD risk assessment and management warrants further attention in SLE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.