Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring in Current Clinical Practice: How to Define Its Value?

Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine

Volumn 19, Issue 11, 2017, Pages

  Kianoush, Sina ^a   Mirbolouk, Mohammadhassan ^a   Makam, Raghavendra Charan ^a   Nasir, Khurram ^a,b   Blaha, Michael J ^a,c  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b MIAMI CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical decision making; Coronary artery calcium; Cost effectiveness; Risk prediction

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; ANTILIPEMIC AGENT;

ALGORITHM; ATHEROSCLEROSIS; BLOOD PRESSURE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CORONARY ARTERY CALCIUM SCORE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION TREE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HUMAN; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SHARED DECISION MAKING;

EID: 85029865056     PISSN: 10928464     EISSN: 15343189     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11936-017-0582-y     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Cainzos-Achirica M, Desai CS, Wang L, Blaha MJ, Lopez-Jimenez F, Kopecky SL, et al. Pathways forward in cardiovascular disease prevention one and a half years after publication of the 2013 ACC/AHA cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90(9):1262–71.
2. DeFilippis AP, Young R, Carrubba CJ, McEvoy JW, Budoff MJ, Blumenthal RS, et al. An analysis of calibration and discrimination among multiple cardiovascular risk scores in a modern multiethnic cohort. Ann Intern Med [Internet]. 2015;162:266–75. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25686167
3. DeFilippis AP, Young R, McEvoy JW, Michos ED, Sandfort V, Kronmal RA, et al. Risk score overestimation: the impact of individual cardiovascular risk factors and preventive therapies on the performance of the American Heart Association-American College of Cardiology-Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease risk score in a modern mult. Eur Heart J [Internet]. 2017;38:598–608. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27436865
4. Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, Benjamin EJ, Budoff MJ, Fayad ZA, et al. ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: executive summary. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;2010:2182–99.
5. Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, Goff DC, Lloyd-Jones DM, Smith SC, et al. Treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults: synopsis of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guideline. Ann Intern Med [Internet]. 2014;160:339–43. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24474185
6. Goff DC, Lloyd-Jones DM, Bennett G, Coady S, D’Agostino RB, Gibbons R, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2014;63:2935–59. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24239921
7. Blaha MJ, Dardari ZA, Blumenthal RS, Martin SS, Nasir K, Al-Mallah MH. The new “intermediate risk” group: a comparative analysis of the new 2013 ACC/AHA risk assessment guidelines versus prior guidelines in men. Atherosclerosis [Internet]. 2014;237:1–4. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25173946
8. • Yeboah J, Young R, McClelland RL, Delaney JC, Polonsky TS, Dawood FZ, et al. Utility of nontraditional risk markers in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:139–47. This MESA study showed that non-traditional markers, such as CAC, ankle-brachial index, and family history, can predict ASCVD risk. However, CAC was the best marker, as it better-improved discrimination ability of PCE.
9. •• Blaha MJ, Yeboah J, Al Rifai M, Liu K, Kronmal R, Greenland P. Providing evidence for subclinical CVD in risk assessment. Glob Heart. 2016;11(3):275–85. This review article describes CAC as the single best marker for cardiovascular disease risk prediction based on a series of landmark publications from MESA. MESA CHD Risk Estimator is now available based on these findings.
10. Möhlenkamp S, Lehmann N, Moebus S, Schmermund A, Dragano N, Stang A, et al. Quantification of coronary atherosclerosis and inflammation to predict coronary events and all-cause mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2011;57:1455–64. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21435514
11. Mody P, Joshi PH, Khera A, Ayers CR, Rohatgi A. Beyond coronary calcification, family history, and C-reactive protein: cholesterol efflux capacity and cardiovascular risk prediction. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2016;67:2480–7. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27230043
12. •• McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, Budoff M, Blaha MJ, Post WS, Kronmal RA, et al. 10-Year coronary heart disease risk prediction using coronary artery calcium and traditional risk factors: derivation in the MESA (multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis) with validation in the HNR (Heinz Nixdorf Recall) study and the DHS (Dallas Heart Stu). J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2015;66:1643–53. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26449133. This landmark study resulted in the inclusion of CAC along with other nontraditional risk factors to predict 10-year CHD risk in MESA population. This MESA CHD Risk Calculator (validated in two external cohorts) is valuable for guiding risk-based treatment strategies.
13. Lloyd-Jones DM. Coronary artery calcium scoring: are we there yet? J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2015;66:1654–6. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26449134
14. Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, Bairey Merz CN, Blum CB, Eckel RH, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2014;63:2889–934. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24239923
15. •• Gupta A, Lau E, Varshney R, Hulten EA, Cheezum M, Bittencourt MS, et al. The identification of calcified coronary plaque is associated with initiation and continuation of pharmacological and lifestyle preventive therapies. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2017;10:833–42. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1936878X17305193 This study provides evidence that knowledge of CAC might improve dietary and exercise habits and help the patient to initiate and adhere to drug therapy.
16. Martin SS, Sperling LS, Blaha MJ, Wilson PWF, Gluckman TJ, Blumenthal RS, et al. Clinician-patient risk discussion for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention: importance to implementation of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2015;65:1361–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25835448. This paper reviews guideline recommendations for clinician-patient risk discussion and general concepts of shared decision-making and decision aids.
17. •• Hecht H, Blaha MJ, Berman DS, Nasir K, Budoff M, Leipsic J, et al. Clinical indications for coronary artery calcium scoring in asymptomatic patients: expert consensus statement from the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr [Internet] Elsevier Ltd. 2017;11:157–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2017.02.010. An important paper on shared decision-making. This statement from Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT) discusses harms and benefits of statin treatment or CAC scoring versus no treatment or no testing.
18. Nasir K, Bittencourt MS, Blaha MJ, Blankstein R, Agatson AS, Rivera JJ, et al. Implications of coronary artery calcium testing among statin candidates according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol management guidelines: MESA (multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis). J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2015;66:1657–68. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26449135
19. • Mortensen MB, Fuster V, Muntendam P, Mehran R, Baber U, Sartori S, et al. A simple disease-guided approach to personalize ACC/AHA-recommended statin allocation in elderly people: the BioImage study. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2016;68:881–91. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27561760. Showed that most old individuals were eligible for statin treatment according to the recent guidelines only because of their age. The absence of CAC could spare a considerable portion of elderly individuals from statin treatment.
20. Pursnani A, Massaro JM, D’Agostino RB, O’Donnell CJ, Hoffmann U. Guideline-based statin eligibility, coronary artery calcification, and cardiovascular events. Jama [Internet]. 2015;314:134. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26172893
21. •• Blaha MJ, Cainzos-Achirica M, Greenland P, McEvoy JW, Blankstein R, Budoff MJ, et al. Role of coronary artery calcium score of zero and other negative risk markers for cardiovascular disease: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulation. 2016;133:849–58. This MESA study assessed the role of 13 negative risk markers for predicting the absence of events among asymptomatic individuals to see how they can add to previous risk models for a more accurate risk prediction. The absence of CAC resulted in the greatest downward shift in estimated CVD risk compared with negative results related to other tested risk markers.
22. •• Blaha MJ. Personalizing treatment: between primary and secondary prevention. Am J Cardiol [Internet] Elsevier Inc. 2016;118:4A–12A. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002914916308803. This article explains that a subgroup of patients with advanced atherosclerosis can be considered between primary and secondary prevention and may benefit from a more intensive preventive treatment strategy.
23. • Miedema MD, Duprez DA, Misialek JR, Blaha MJ, Nasir K, Silverman MG, et al. Use of coronary artery calcium testing to guide aspirin utilization for primary prevention: estimates from the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes [Internet]. 2014;7:453–60. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24803472. A MESA study that showed subgroup of patients with CA≥100 had a net benefit from aspirin treatment with regard to CHD prevention. On the contrary, those with CAC=0 received net harm from aspirin.
24. • McEvoy JW, Martin SS, Dardari ZA, Miedema MD, Sandfort V, Yeboah J, et al. Coronary artery calcium to guide a personalized risk-based approach to initiation and intensification of antihypertensive therapy. Circulation. 2017;135:153–65. This MESA study showed that CAC could provide flexible treatment goals regarding treatment of hypertension for those with intermediate ASCVD risk and pre-hypertension or mild hypertension.
25. •• Hong JC, Blankstein R, Shaw LJ, Padula WV, Arrieta A, Fialkow JA, et al. Implications of coronary artery calcium testing for treatment decisions among statin candidates according to the ACC/AHA cholesterol management guidelines. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2017;10:938–52. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1936878X17305089. This paper showed that CAC scoring is recommended in the setting of clinician-patient risk discussion.
26. van Kempen BJH, Ferket BS, Steyerberg EW, Max W, Myriam Hunink MG, Fleischmann KE. Comparing the cost-effectiveness of four novel risk markers for screening asymptomatic individuals to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the US population. Int J Cardiol [Internet]. 2016;203:422–31. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26547049
27. •• Pletcher MJ, Pignone M, Earnshaw S, McDade C, Phillips KA, Auer R, et al. Using the coronary artery calcium score to guide statin therapy: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes [Internet]. 2014;7:276–84. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4156513&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract. Demonstrated that among patients who are at intermediate FRS risk, CAC testing is cost-effective if statins are expensive or markedly affect the quality of life. A “treat-all” strategy was not found to be cost-effective.
28. •• Roberts ET, Horne A, Martin SS, Blaha MJ, Blankstein R, Budoff MJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery calcium testing for coronary heart and cardiovascular disease risk prediction to guide statin allocation: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA). PLoS One. 2015;10:e0116377. Demonstrated that among individuals who are at intermediate ASCVD risk, testing for CAC and treating patients with CAC≥1 is cost-effective compared with treatment based on risk assessment guidelines. Particularly, treating those who had CAC≥100 was cost-effective when accounting for statin side effects and disutility (when the patient would be willing to trade two weeks of perfect health to avoid ten years of treatment).
29. Stone NJ. Cholesterol guidelines do not endorse “one size fits all”: the strategy begins with a discussion. J Am Coll Cardiol [Internet]. 2015;65:1640–3. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25908068
30. Mamudu HM, Paul TK, Veeranki SP, Budoff M. The effects of coronary artery calcium screening on behavioral modification, risk perception, and medication adherence among asymptomatic adults: a systematic review. Atherosclerosis. 2014;236(2):338–50.
31. • Hecht HS. Coronary artery calcium scanning: past, present, and future. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8:579–96. This paper describes CAC as a test that can improve adherence to medication and lifestyle modification and is cost-effective for some specific populations.
32. Silverman MG, Blaha MJ, Krumholz HM, Budoff MJ, Blankstein R, Sibley CT, et al. Impact of coronary artery calcium on coronary heart disease events in individuals at the extremes of traditional risk factor burden: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2232–41.
33. Navar AM, Stone NJ, Martin SS. What to say and how to say it: effective communication for cardiovascular disease prevention. Curr Opin Cardiol [Internet]. 2016;31:537–44. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27428113
34. Carr JJ, Jacobs DR, Terry JG, Shay CM, Sidney S, Liu K, et al. Association of Coronary Artery Calcium in adults aged 32 to 46 years with incident coronary heart disease and death. JAMA Cardiol [Internet]. 2017;2:391. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2016.5493.
35. Paixao ARM, Ayers CR, Rohatgi A, Das SR, de Lemos JA, Khera A, et al. Cardiovascular lifetime risk predicts incidence of coronary calcification in individuals with low short-term risk: the Dallas heart study. J Am Heart Assoc [Internet]. 2014;3:e001280. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25424574
36. Kavousi M, Desai CS, Ayers C, Blumenthal RS, Budoff MJ, Mahabadi A-A, et al. Prevalence and prognostic implications of coronary artery calcification in low-risk women: a meta-analysis. JAMA [Internet]. 2016;316:2126–34. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27846641
37. Stone NJ, Robinson JG. Potential for net benefit should guide preventive therapy. Circulation [Internet]. 2017;135:630–2. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28193796
38. Blaha MJ, Silverman MG, Budoff MJ. Is there a role for coronary artery calcium scoring for management of asymptomatic patients at risk for coronary artery disease?: clinical risk scores are not sufficient to define primary prevention treatment strategies among asymptomatic patients. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2014;7:398–408. discussion 408. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24642922
39. McEvoy JW, Diamond GA, Detrano RC, Kaul S, Blaha MJ, Blumenthal RS, et al. Risk and the physics of clinical prediction. Am J Cardiol [Internet]. 2014;113:1429–35. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24581923
40. Goldman RE, Parker DR, Eaton CB, Borkan JM, Gramling R, Cover RT, et al. Patients’ perceptions of cholesterol, cardiovascular disease risk, and risk communication strategies. Ann Fam Med [Internet]. 2006;4:205–12. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16735521
41. •• Nasir K. Overhauling cardiovascular risk prediction in primary prevention: difficult journey worth the destination. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes [Internet]. 2015;8:466–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26349838. This Editorial placed emphasis on more flexible treatment goal based on CAC score. Most importantly, it underscores the role of the patient in making informed decisions about treatment. In this context, the absence of CAC can help patients avoid statin treatment.
42. Pencina MJ, D’Agostino RB, D’Agostino RB, Vasan RS. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 2008;27:157–72.
43. Blaha MJ, Budoff MJ, Defilippis AP, Blankstein R, Rivera JJ, Agatston A, et al. Associations between C-reactive protein, coronary artery calcium, and cardiovascular events: implications for the JUPITER population from MESA, a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2011;378:684–92.
44. Martin SS, Blaha MJ, Blankstein R, Agatston A, Rivera JJ, Virani SS, et al. Dyslipidemia, coronary artery calcium, and incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: implications for statin therapy from the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2014;129:77–86.
45. •• Hecht HS, Shaw LJ, Chandrashekhar Y, Narula J. Coronary artery calcium and shared decision making. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2016;9:637–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27151526. This paper discusses the role of CAC as an important topic in shared decision-making. The patient should know that they are unlikely to benefit from statins while they have no CAC. On the contrary, the presence of CAC advocates for initiation of preventive medications.
46. • Valenti V, Ó Hartaigh B, Heo R, Cho I, Schulman-Marcus J, Gransar H, et al. A 15-year warranty period for asymptomatic individuals without coronary artery calcium: a prospective follow-up of 9,715 individuals. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8:900–9. Studied the role of CAC=0 for identifying individuals that have a very low risk (less than 1%) for CHD.
47. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, Davidson KW, Epling JWJ, Garcia FAR, et al. Statin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;316:1997–2007.
48. Desai CS, Martin SS, Blumenthal RS. Non-cardiovascular effects associated with statins. BMJ [Internet]. 2014;349:g3743. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25035309%5Cn, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=PMC4707717
49. Swiger KJ, Manalac RJ, Blumenthal RS, Blaha MJ, Martin SS. Statins and cognition: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short- and long-term cognitive effects. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013;88:1213–21.
50. McEvoy JW, Martin SS, Blaha MJ, Polonsky TS, Nasir K, Kaul S, et al. The case for and against a coronary artery calcium trial: means, motive, and opportunity. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2016;9:994–1002. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27491486
51. Mahabadi AA, Möhlenkamp S, Lehmann N, Kälsch H, Dykun I, Pundt N, et al. CAC score improves coronary and CV risk assessment above statin indication by ESC and AHA/ACC primary prevention guidelines. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2017;10:143–53. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27665163
52. Blaha MJ, Matsushita K. Coronary artery calcium: need for more clarity in guidelines. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging [Internet]. 2017;10:154–6. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27665157
53. Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP, McCagg A, White JA, Theroux P, et al. Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2015;372:2387–97. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1410489.
54. Jarcho JA, Keaney JF. Proof that lower is better—LDL cholesterol and IMPROVE-IT. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2015;372:2448–50. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe1507041.
55. Sabatine MS. Evolocumab and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2017;376(18):1713–22. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1615664.
56. Kankeu HT, Saksena P, Xu K, Evans DB. The financial burden from non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a literature review. Heal Res Policy Syst [Internet]. 2013;11:31. Available from: http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/11/1/31/abstract%0A%0A, http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/pdf/1478-4505-11-31.pdf