ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2021
Added value of cardiovascular calcifications for prediction of recurrent cardiovascular events and cardiovascular interventions in patients with established cardiovascular disease.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of nuclear imaging in detection of coronary artery disease: a comprehensive review.American journal of translational research · 2026Review
- Review
- The Predictive Value of Aortic Calcification on Computed Tomography for Major Cardiovascular Events.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Role of Cardiovascular Imaging in Risk Assessment: Recent Advances, Gaps in Evidence, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Risk Prediction of Cardiovascular Events by Exploration of Molecular Data with Explainable Artificial Intelligence.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose is to investigate the added prognostic value of coronary artery calcium (CAC), thoracic aortic calcium (TAC), and heart valve calcium scores for prediction of a combined endpoint of recurrent major cardiovascular events and cardiovascular interventions (MACE +) in patients with established cardiovascular disease (CVD). In total, 567 patients with established CVD enrolled in a substudy of the UCC-SMART cohort, entailing cardiovascular CT imaging and calcium scoring, were studied. Five Cox proportional hazards models for prediction of 4-year risk of MACE + were developed; traditional CVD risk predictors only (model I), with addition of CAC (model II), TAC (model III), heart valve calcium (model IV), and all calcium scores (model V). Bootstrapping was performed to account for optimism. During a median follow-up of 3.43 years (IQR 2.28-4.74) 77 events occurred (MACE+). Calibration of predicted versus observed 4-year risk for model I without calcium scores was good, and the c-statistic was 0.65 (95%CI 0.59-0.72). Calibration for models II-V was similar to model I, and c-statistics were 0.67, 0.65, 0.65, and 0.68 for model II, III, IV, and V, respectively. NRIs showed improvement in risk classification by model II (NRI 15.24% (95%CI 0.59-29.39)) and model V (NRI 20.00% (95%CI 5.59-34.92)), but no improvement for models III and IV. In patients with established CVD, addition of the CAC score improved performance of a risk prediction model with classical risk factors for the prediction of the combined endpoint MACE+ . Addition of the TAC or heart valve score did not improve risk predictions.
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.