Novel cardiovascular risk prediction models in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

Women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) which is underestimated by the Framingham risk score (FRS). We hypothesized that new risk scores that include inflammation or vascular age in the risk calculation would better identify women with SLE a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Lupus 2011-12, Vol.20 (14), p.1526-1534
Main Authors: Kawai, VK, Solus, JF, Oeser, A, Rho, YH, Raggi, P, Bian, A, Gebretsadik, T, Shintani, A, Stein, CM
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Age
Age Factors
Atherosclerosis
Cardiovascular disease
Case-Control Studies
Coronary Disease - etiology
Coronary vessels
Female
Humans
Lupus
Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic - complications
Medicine
Middle Aged
Models, Cardiovascular
Risk Assessment
Veins & arteries
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) which is underestimated by the Framingham risk score (FRS). We hypothesized that new risk scores that include inflammation or vascular age in the risk calculation would better identify women with SLE at risk for CHD, particularly in those with subclinical coronary atherosclerosis. We calculated the FRS and Reynolds risk score (RRS) in 121 women with SLE and 65 age-matched female controls; coronary age-modified risk scores (camFRS, camRRS) were calculated using coronary age derived from the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score. Risk scores were compared in SLE and controls, and in SLE patients with and without CAC. Although CAC was present in 21 SLE patients (17%) and four controls (6%) (p = 0.033); the FRS, camFRS, RRS, and camRRS, did not differ significantly among SLE and controls (p > 0.05), but were all significantly higher in SLE patients with CAC compared with those without (p 
ISSN:0961-2033
1477-0962
DOI:10.1177/0961203311420317