Search

Aims The aim of this study was to develop, validate, and illustrate an updated prediction model (SCORE2) to estimate 10-year fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in individuals without previous CVD or diabetes aged 40-69 years in Europe.Methods and results We derived risk prediction models using individual-participant data from 45 cohorts in 13 countries (677 684 individuals, 30 121 CVD events). We used sex-specific and competing risk-adjusted models, including age, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, and total- and HDL-cholesterol. We defined four risk regions in Europe according to country-specific CVD mortality, recalibrating models to each region using expected incidences and risk factor distributions. Region-specific incidence was estimated using CVD mortality and incidence data on 10 776 466 individuals. For external validation, we analysed data from 25 additional cohorts in 15 European countries (1 133 181 individuals, 43 492 CVD events). After applying the derived risk prediction models to external validation cohorts, C-indices ranged from 0.67 (0.65-0.68) to 0.81 (0.76-0.86). Predicted CVD risk varied several-fold across European regions. For example, the estimated 10-year CVD risk for a 50-year-old smoker, with a systolic blood pressure of 140 mmHg, total cholesterol of 5.5 mmol/L, and HDL-cholesterol of 1.3 mmol/L, ranged from 5.9% for men in low- risk countries to 14.0% for men in very high-risk countries, and from 4.2% for women in low-risk countries to 13.7% for women in very high-risk countries.Conclusion SCORE2-a new algorithm derived, calibrated, and validated to predict 10-year risk of first-onset CVD in European populations-enhances the identification of individuals at higher risk of developing CVD across Europe. Acknowledgements We thank investigators and participants of the several studies that contributed data to the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration (ERFC). This research has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource under Application Number 26865. Data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) were obtained under licence from the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (protocol 162RMn2). CPRD uses data provided by patients and collected by the NHS as part of their care and support. We thank all EPIC participants and staff for their contribution to the study, the laboratory teams at the Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit for sample management and Cambridge Genomic Services for genotyping, Sarah Spackman for data management and the team at the EPIC-CVD Coordinating Centre for study co-ordination and administration. Funding The ERFC co-ordinating centre was underpinned by programme grants from the British Heart Foundation (SP/09/002; RG/13/13/30194; RG/18/13/33946), BHF Centre of Research Excellence (RE/18/1/34212), the UK Medical Research Council (MR/L003120/1), and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC1215-20014), with project-specific support received from the UK NIHR [*], British United Provident Association UK Foundation and an unrestricted educational grant from GlaxoSmithKline. A variety of funding sources have supported recruitment, follow-up, and laboratory measurements in the studies contributing data to the ERFC, which are listed on the ERFC website (www.phpc.cam.ac.uk/ceu/erfc/list-of-studies). *The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. This work was supported by Health Data Research UK, which is funded by the UK Medical Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care (England), Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), British Heart Foundation, and Wellcome. The MORGAM Project has received funding from EU projects MORGAM (Biomed BMH4-CT98-3183), GenomEUtwin (FP5, QLG2-CT-2002-01254), ENGAGE (FP7, HEALTH-F4-2007-201413),CHANCES (FP7, HEALTH-F3-2010-242244), BiomarCaRE (FP7,HEALTH-F2-2011-278913), euCanSHare (Horizon 2020, No. 825903) and AFFECT-EU (Horizon 2020, No. 847770); and Medical Research Council, London (G0601463, No. 80983: Biomarkers in the MORGAM Populations). This has supported central coordination, workshops and part of the activities of the MORGAM Data Centre, the MORGAM Laboratories and the MORGAM Participating Centres EPIC-CVD was funded by the European Research Council (268834), and the European Commission Framework Programme 7 (HEALTH-F2-2012-279233). This work was supported by the Estonian Research Council grant PUTs (PRG687, PUT1660, PUT1665, PRG184), by European Union through the European Regional Development Fund project no. MOBERA5 (Norface Network project no 462.16.107), by the Green ICT programme under Norway Grants 2014 – 2021 (grant number EU53928), by the European Union through Horizon 2020 grant no. 810645 and through the European Regional Development Fund (Project No. 2014-2020.4.01.16-0125) and by the PRECISE4Q consortium. PRECISE4Q project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant agreement 777107. This work was partly funded through the CoMorMent project. CoMorMent has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant agreement 847776. The KORA study was initiated and financed by the Helmholtz Zentrum Mu¨nchen—German Research Center for Environmental Health, which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and by the State of Bavaria. The KORA study was supported by a research grant from the Virtual Institute of Diabetes Research (Helmholtz Zentrum Mu¨nchen), the Clinical Cooperation Group Diabetes between Ludwig-Maximilians-Universita¨t Mu¨nchen and Helmholtz Zentrum Mu¨nchen, and by the German Diabetes Center (DDZ). The HAPIEE project, Institute, was supported by grants from the Wellcome Trust (064947/Z/01/Z; WT081081) and US National Institute on Aging (1R01 and AG23522). The co-ordination of EPIC is financially supported by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and also by the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, which has additional infrastructure support provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The national cohorts are supported by: Danish Cancer Society (Denmark); Ligue Contre le Cancer, Institut Gustave Roussy, Mutuelle Ge´ne´rale de l’Education Nationale, Institut National de la Sante´ et de la Recherche Me´dicale (INSERM) (France); German Cancer Aid, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam Rehbruecke (DIfE), Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (Germany); Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro-AIRC-Italy, Compagnia di SanPaolo and National Research Council (Italy); Dutch 2448 SCORE2 working group and ESC Cardiovascular Risk Collaboration Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS), Netherlands Cancer Registry (NKR), LK Research Funds, Dutch Prevention Funds, Dutch ZON (Zorg Onderzoek Nederland), World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), Statistics Netherlands (The Netherlands); Health Research Fund (FIS)—Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Regional Governments of Andalucı´a, Asturias, Basque Country, Murcia and Navarra, and the Catalan Institute of Oncology—ICO (Spain); Swedish Cancer Society, Swedish Research Council and County Councils of Ska˚ne and Va¨sterbotten (Sweden); Cancer Research UK (14136 to EPIC-Norfolk; C8221/A29017 to EPIC-Oxford), Medical Research Council (1000143 to EPIC-Norfolk; MR/M012190/1 to EPIC-Oxford) (United Kingdom)

Hanna Jokinen tutkimusryhmän jäsenenä (VICCCS Grp) Introduction: Progress in understanding and management of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) has been hampered by lack of consensus on diagnosis, reflecting the use of multiple different assessment protocols. A large multinational group of clinicians and researchers participated in a two-phase Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study (VICCCS) to agree on principles (VICCCS-1) and protocols (VICCCS-2) for diagnosis of VCI. We present VICCCS-2. Methods: We used VICCCS-1 principles and published diagnostic guidelines as points of reference for an online Delphi survey aimed at achieving consensus on clinical diagnosis of VCI. Results: Six survey rounds comprising 65-79 participants agreed guidelines for diagnosis of VICCCS-revised mild and major forms of VCI and endorsed the National Institute of Neurological Disorders-Canadian Stroke Network neuropsychological assessment protocols and recommendations for imaging. Discussion: The VICCCS-2 suggests standardized use of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders-Canadian Stroke Network recommendations on neuropsychological and imaging assessment for diagnosis of VCI so as to promote research collaboration. (C) 2017 the Alzheimer's Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background: To help adapt cardiovascular disease risk prediction approaches to low-income and middle-income countries, WHO has convened an effort to develop, evaluate, and illustrate revised risk models. Here, we report the derivation, validation, and illustration of the revised WHO cardiovascular disease risk prediction charts that have been adapted to the circumstances of 21 global regions. Methods: In this model revision initiative, we derived 10-year risk prediction models for fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease (ie, myocardial infarction and stroke) using individual participant data from the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration. Models included information on age, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total cholesterol. For derivation, we included participants aged 40–80 years without a known baseline history of cardiovascular disease, who were followed up until the first myocardial infarction, fatal coronary heart disease, or stroke event. We recalibrated models using age-specific and sex-specific incidences and risk factor values available from 21 global regions. For external validation, we analysed individual participant data from studies distinct from those used in model derivation. We illustrated models by analysing data on a further 123 743 individuals from surveys in 79 countries collected with the WHO STEPwise Approach to Surveillance. Findings: Our risk model derivation involved 376 177 individuals from 85 cohorts, and 19 333 incident cardiovascular events recorded during 10 years of follow-up. The derived risk prediction models discriminated well in external validation cohorts (19 cohorts, 1 096 061 individuals, 25 950 cardiovascular disease events), with Harrell's C indices ranging from 0·685 (95% CI 0·629–0·741) to 0·833 (0·783–0·882). For a given risk factor profile, we found substantial variation across global regions in the estimated 10-year predicted risk. For example, estimated cardiovascular disease risk for a 60-year-old male smoker without diabetes and with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg and total cholesterol of 5 mmol/L ranged from 11% in Andean Latin America to 30% in central Asia. When applied to data from 79 countries (mostly low-income and middle-income countries), the proportion of individuals aged 40–64 years estimated to be at greater than 20% risk ranged from less than 1% in Uganda to more than 16% in Egypt. Interpretation: We have derived, calibrated, and validated new WHO risk prediction models to estimate cardiovascular disease risk in 21 Global Burden of Disease regions. The widespread use of these models could enhance the accuracy, practicability, and sustainability of efforts to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease worldwide. Funding: World Health Organization, British Heart Foundation (BHF), BHF Cambridge Centre for Research Excellence, UK Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research. The WHO CVD Risk Chart Working Group, for complete list of authors see http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30318-3

ObjectiveTo determine the long-term association of hemoglobin levels and anemia with risk of dementia, and explore underlying substrates on brain MRI in the general population.MethodsSerum hemoglobin was measured in 12,305 participants without dementia of the population-based Rotterdam Study (mean age 64.6 years, 57.7% women). We determined risk of dementia and Alzheimer disease (AD) (until 2016) in relation to hemoglobin and anemia. Among 5,267 participants without dementia with brain MRI, we assessed hemoglobin in relation to vascular brain disease, structural connectivity, and global cerebral perfusion.ResultsDuring a mean follow-up of 12.1 years, 1,520 individuals developed dementia, 1,194 of whom had AD. We observed a U-shaped association between hemoglobin levels and dementia (p = 0.005), such that both low and high hemoglobin levels were associated with increased dementia risk (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)], lowest vs middle quintile 1.29 [1.09–1.52]; highest vs middle quintile 1.20 [1.00–1.44]). Overall prevalence of anemia was 6.1%, and anemia was associated with a 34% increased risk of dementia (95% CI 11%–62%) and 41% (15%–74%) for AD. Among individuals without dementia with brain MRI, similar U-shaped associations were seen of hemoglobin with white matter hyperintensity volume (p = 0.03), and structural connectivity (for mean diffusivity, p < 0.0001), but not with presence of cortical and lacunar infarcts. Cerebral microbleeds were more common with anemia. Hemoglobin levels inversely correlated to cerebral perfusion (p < 0.0001).ConclusionLow and high levels of hemoglobin are associated with an increased risk of dementia, including AD, which may relate to differences in white matter integrity and cerebral perfusion.