Is the Framingham Risk Function Valid for Northern European Populations? A Comparison of Methods for Estimating Absolute Coronary Risk in High Risk Men

Overview

Journal Heart

Date 1999 Apr 30

PMID 10220543

Citations 44

Authors

I U Haq

L E Ramsay

W W Yeo

P R Jackson

E J Wallis

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To examine the validity of estimates of coronary heart disease (CHD) risk by the Framingham risk function, for European populations.

Design: Comparison of CHD risk estimates for individuals derived from the Framingham, prospective cardiovascular Münster (PROCAM), Dundee, and British regional heart (BRHS) risk functions.

Setting: Sheffield Hypertension Clinic. Patients-206 consecutive hypertensive men aged 35-75 years without preexisting vascular disease.

Results: There was close agreement among the Framingham, PROCAM, and Dundee risk functions for average CHD risk. For individuals the best correlation was between Framingham and PROCAM, both of which use high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. When Framingham was used to target a CHD event rate > 3% per year, it identified men with mean CHD risk by PROCAM of 4.6% per year and all had CHD event risks > 1.5% per year. Men at lower risk by Framingham had a mean CHD risk by PROCAM of 1.5% per year, with 16% having a CHD event risk > 3.0% per year. BRHS risk function estimates of CHD risk were fourfold lower than those for the other three risk functions, but with moderate correlations, suggesting an important systematic error.

Conclusion: There is close agreement between the Framingham, PROCAM, and Dundee risk functions as regards average CHD risk, and moderate agreement for estimates within individuals. Taking PROCAM as the external standard, the Framingham function separates high and low CHD risk groups and is acceptably accurate for northern European populations, at least in men.

Citing Articles

Age and sex affect deep learning prediction of cardiometabolic risk factors from retinal images.

Gerrits N, Elen B, Van Craenendonck T, Triantafyllidou D, Petropoulos I, Malik R Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):9432.

PMID: 32523046 PMC: 7287116. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-65794-4.

Re-calibration of coronary risk prediction: an example of the Seven Countries Study.

Puddu P, Piras P, Kromhout D, Tolonen H, Kafatos A, Menotti A Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1):17552.

PMID: 29242638 PMC: 5730554. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-17784-2.

A comparison of outcomes with coronary artery calcium scanning in unselected populations: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) and Heinz Nixdorf RECALL study (HNR).

Budoff M, Mohlenkamp S, McClelland R, Delaney J, Bauer M, Jockel H J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2013; 7(3):182-91.

PMID: 23849491 PMC: 3732186. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2013.05.009.

Cardiovascular risk assessment--from individual risk prediction to estimation of global risk and change in risk in the population.

Batsis J, Lopez-Jimenez F BMC Med. 2010; 8:29.

PMID: 20500815 PMC: 2890533. DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-29.

Outcome of coronary plaque burden: a 10-year follow-up of aggressive medical management.

Goh V, Lau C, Mohlenkamp S, Rumberger J, Achenbach S, Budoff M Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2010; 8:5.

PMID: 20226020 PMC: 2850323. DOI: 10.1186/1476-7120-8-5.

References

Keys A, ARAVANIS C, Blackburn H, VAN BUCHEM F, BUZINA R, DJORDJEVIC B . Probability of middle-aged men developing coronary heart disease in five years. Circulation. 1972; 45(4):815-28. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.45.4.815. View

Ramsay L, Ul Haq I, Yeo W, Jackson P . Interpretation of prospective trials in hypertension: do treatment guidelines accurately reflect current evidence?. J Hypertens Suppl. 1996; 14(5):S187-94. View

Gordon T, Garcia-Palmieri M, Kagan A, Kannel W, Schiffman J . Differences in coronary heart disease in Framingham, Honolulu and Puerto Rico. J Chronic Dis. 1974; 27(7-8):329-44. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9681(74)90013-7. View

Brand R, Rosenman R, Sholtz R, Friedman M . Multivariate prediction of coronary heart disease in the Western Collaborative Group Study compared to the findings of the Framingham study. Circulation. 1976; 53(2):348-55. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.53.2.348. View

Jarrett R, Shipley M, Rose G . Weight and mortality in the Whitehall Study. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982; 285(6341):535-7. PMC: 1499061. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.285.6341.535. View

Rose G, Heller R . UK heart disease prevention project: incidence and mortality results. Lancet. 1983; 1(8333):1062-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(83)91907-4. View

Keys A, Menotti A, ARAVANIS C, Blackburn H, Djordevic B, BUZINA R . The seven countries study: 2,289 deaths in 15 years. Prev Med. 1984; 13(2):141-54. DOI: 10.1016/0091-7435(84)90047-1. View

Bland J, Altman D . Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1(8476):307-10. View

Shaper A, Pocock S, Phillips A, Walker M . Identifying men at high risk of heart attacks: strategy for use in general practice. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986; 293(6545):474-9. PMC: 1341109. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.293.6545.474. View

10.

Leaverton P, Sorlie P, Kleinman J, Dannenberg A, Kannel W . Representativeness of the Framingham risk model for coronary heart disease mortality: a comparison with a national cohort study. J Chronic Dis. 1987; 40(8):775-84. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90129-9. View

11.

Chambless L, Dobson A, Patterson C, Raines B . On the use of a logistic risk score in predicting risk of coronary heart disease. Stat Med. 1990; 9(4):385-96. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780090410. View

12.

Anderson K, Odell P, Wilson P, Kannel W . Cardiovascular disease risk profiles. Am Heart J. 1991; 121(1 Pt 2):293-8. DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(91)90861-b. View

13.

Jackson R, Barham P, Bills J, Birch T, McLennan L, Macmahon S . Management of raised blood pressure in New Zealand: a discussion document. BMJ. 1993; 307(6896):107-10. PMC: 1693500. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.307.6896.107. View

14.

Pyorala K, De Backer G, Graham I, Poole-Wilson P, Wood D . Prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice. Recommendations of the Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology, European Atherosclerosis Society and European Society of Hypertension. Eur Heart J. 1994; 15(10):1300-31. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a060388. View

15.

Cook R, Sackett D . The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ. 1995; 310(6977):452-4. PMC: 2548824. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.310.6977.452. View

16.

Grover S, Lowensteyn I, Esrey K, Steinert Y, Joseph L, Abrahamowicz M . Do doctors accurately assess coronary risk in their patients? Preliminary results of the coronary health assessment study. BMJ. 1995; 310(6985):975-8. PMC: 2549361. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.310.6985.975. View

17.

Laurier D, Nguyen P, Cazelles B, Segond P . Estimation of CHD risk in a French working population using a modified Framingham model. The PCV-METRA Group. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994; 47(12):1353-64. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)90079-5. View

18.

Grover S, Coupal L, Hu X . Identifying adults at increased risk of coronary disease. How well do the current cholesterol guidelines work?. JAMA. 1995; 274(10):801-6. View

19.

Shepherd J, Cobbe S, Ford I, Isles C, LORIMER A, Macfarlane P . Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1995; 333(20):1301-7. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199511163332001. View

20.

Johannesson M . The cost effectiveness of hypertension treatment in Sweden. Pharmacoeconomics. 1995; 7(3):242-50. DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199507030-00008. View