Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33276814›Full record

ArticleArthritis research & therapy2020

Derivation and internal validation of a multi-biomarker-based cardiovascular disease risk prediction score for rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Jeffrey R Curtis, Fenglong Xie, Cynthia S Crowson, Eric H Sasso, Elena Hitraya, Cheryl L Chin, Richard D Bamford, Rotem Ben-Shachar, Alexander Gutin, Darl D Flake and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jeffrey R CurtisUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. jrcurtis@uabmc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8907-8976
Fenglong XieUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Cynthia S CrowsonMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Eric H SassoCrescendo Bioscience, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Elena HitrayaCrescendo Bioscience, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Cheryl L ChinCrescendo Bioscience, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Richard D BamfordCrescendo Bioscience, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Rotem Ben-ShacharMyriad Genetics Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Alexander GutinMyriad Genetics Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Darl D FlakeMyriad Genetics Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Brent MabeyMyriad Genetics Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Jerry S LanchburyMyriad Genetics Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Accurate CVD risk prediction could improve care for RA patients. Our goal is to develop and validate a biomarker-based model for predicting CVD risk in RA patients.

methodsMedicare claims data were linked to multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) test results to create an RA patient cohort with age ≥ 40 years that was split 2:1 for training and internal validation. Clinical and RA-related variables, MBDA score, and its 12 biomarkers were evaluated as predictors of a composite CVD outcome: myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or fatal CVD within 3 years. Model building used Cox proportional hazard regression with backward elimination. The final MBDA-based CVD risk score was internally validated and compared to four clinical CVD risk prediction models.

results30,751 RA patients (904 CVD events) were analyzed. Covariates in the final MBDA-based CVD risk score were age, diabetes, hypertension, tobacco use, history of CVD (excluding MI/stroke), MBDA score, leptin, MMP-3 and TNF-R1. In internal validation, the MBDA-based CVD risk score was a strong predictor of 3-year risk for a CVD event, with hazard ratio (95% CI) of 2.89 (2.46-3.41). The predicted 3-year CVD risk was low for 9.4% of patients, borderline for 10.2%, intermediate for 52.2%, and high for 28.2%. Model fit was good, with mean predicted versus observed 3-year CVD risks of 4.5% versus 4.4%. The MBDA-based CVD risk score significantly improved risk discrimination by the likelihood ratio test, compared to four clinical models. The risk score also improved prediction, reclassifying 42% of patients versus the simplest clinical model (age + sex), with a net reclassification index (NRI) (95% CI) of 0.19 (0.10-0.27); and 28% of patients versus the most comprehensive clinical model (age + sex + diabetes + hypertension + tobacco use + history of CVD + CRP), with an NRI of 0.07 (0.001-0.13). C-index was 0.715 versus 0.661 to 0.696 for the four clinical models.

conclusionA prognostic score has been developed to predict 3-year CVD risk for RA patients by using clinical data, three serum biomarkers and the MBDA score. In internal validation, it had good accuracy and outperformed clinical models with and without CRP. The MBDA-based CVD risk prediction score may improve RA patient care by offering a risk stratification tool that incorporates the effect of RA inflammation.

Indexed as

Arthritis, RheumatoidCardiovascular DiseasesAdultAgedBiomarkersDisease ProgressionHumansMedicareSeverity of Illness IndexUnited StatesBiomarkersBiomarkerCardiovascular riskMBDA scoreMulti-biomarkerMyocardial infarctionRheumatoid arthritisStroke

Identifiers

PMID33276814
PMCPMC7718706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.