ArticleAmerican journal of preventive cardiology2025
Utility of coronary artery calcium scoring in low-risk patients: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).
Article in American journal of preventive cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- LDL-cholesterol distance to target: A practical tool for guiding lipid-lowering treatment decisions.Atherosclerosis plus · 2026Review
- Exploring the prevalence and clinical impact of carotid plaque burden by Doppler ultrasound in lung cancer screening participants with limited coronary artery calcification.European radiology · 2026Article
- AJPC 2025 in review: A year of growth & clearer mandate for actionable prevention.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Guidelines recommend consideration of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring in intermediate atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk patients, but its utility in lower-risk individuals is less clear. Methods: Data from 6712 participants from MESA was used with 10-year ASCVD risk defined by the pooled cohort equations (PCE) and AHA PREVENT equations. The association between CAC, CHD and ASCVD risk was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models. Risk prediction improvement was evaluated using Harrell's C-index and net reclassification improvement (NRI). Results: Amongst all participants (mean age 62.2 ± 10.2 years, 52.8 % women), the ASCVD event rate per 1000 person years was 14.3 vs. 4.1 with and without CAC over a median of 16.7 years. CAC score was most strongly associated with increased ASCVD risk in low and borderline-risk individuals (HR 1.35, 95 % CI 1.22-1.50 and 1.30, 1.16-1.46). Among these individuals, addition of the Agatston score to the PCE improved the C-index (SE) for ASCVD from 0.593(0.029) to 0.640(0.031) and 0.558(0.037) to 0.663(0.036), respectively. Category-free NRI was also significant in low (0.3268, 95 % CI 0.0960-0.5408) and borderline (0.4283, 0.2319-0.7332) risk individuals with similar results using the AHA PREVENT equations. Using a statin eligibility threshold of 7.5 %, the addition of CAC correctly reclassified a net of 10.1 % of low/borderline risk individuals vs the PCE and 16.7 % vs. PREVENT. Conclusions: CAC is associated with increased ASCVD risk in lower-risk individuals. The addition of CAC scoring to the PCE and AHA PREVENT equations improved risk prediction, suggesting potential utility in this population.
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.