@article {1382, title = {Carotid intima-media thickness progression to predict cardiovascular events in the general population (the PROG-IMT collaborative project): a meta-analysis of individual participant data.}, journal = {Lancet}, volume = {379}, year = {2012}, month = {2012 Jun 02}, pages = {2053-62}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) is related to the risk of cardiovascular events in the general population. An association between changes in cIMT and cardiovascular risk is frequently assumed but has rarely been reported. Our aim was to test this association.

METHODS: We identified general population studies that assessed cIMT at least twice and followed up participants for myocardial infarction, stroke, or death. The study teams collaborated in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Excluding individuals with previous myocardial infarction or stroke, we assessed the association between cIMT progression and the risk of cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular death, or a combination of these) for each study with Cox regression. The log hazard ratios (HRs) per SD difference were pooled by random effects meta-analysis.

FINDINGS: Of 21 eligible studies, 16 with 36,984 participants were included. During a mean follow-up of 7{\textperiodcentered}0 years, 1519 myocardial infarctions, 1339 strokes, and 2028 combined endpoints (myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular death) occurred. Yearly cIMT progression was derived from two ultrasound visits 2-7 years (median 4 years) apart. For mean common carotid artery intima-media thickness progression, the overall HR of the combined endpoint was 0{\textperiodcentered}97 (95\% CI 0{\textperiodcentered}94-1{\textperiodcentered}00) when adjusted for age, sex, and mean common carotid artery intima-media thickness, and 0{\textperiodcentered}98 (0{\textperiodcentered}95-1{\textperiodcentered}01) when also adjusted for vascular risk factors. Although we detected no associations with cIMT progression in sensitivity analyses, the mean cIMT of the two ultrasound scans was positively and robustly associated with cardiovascular risk (HR for the combined endpoint 1{\textperiodcentered}16, 95\% CI 1{\textperiodcentered}10-1{\textperiodcentered}22, adjusted for age, sex, mean common carotid artery intima-media thickness progression, and vascular risk factors). In three studies including 3439 participants who had four ultrasound scans, cIMT progression did not correlate between occassions (reproducibility correlations between r=-0{\textperiodcentered}06 and r=-0{\textperiodcentered}02).

INTERPRETATION: The association between cIMT progression assessed from two ultrasound scans and cardiovascular risk in the general population remains unproven. No conclusion can be derived for the use of cIMT progression as a surrogate in clinical trials.

FUNDING: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

}, keywords = {Cardiovascular Diseases, Carotid Intima-Media Thickness, Disease Progression, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Myocardial Infarction, Prognosis, Risk Assessment, Stroke}, issn = {1474-547X}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60441-3}, author = {Lorenz, Matthias W and Polak, Joseph F and Kavousi, Maryam and Mathiesen, Ellisiv B and V{\"o}lzke, Henry and Tuomainen, Tomi-Pekka and Sander, Dirk and Plichart, Matthieu and Catapano, Alberico L and Robertson, Christine M and Kiechl, Stefan and Rundek, Tatjana and Desvarieux, Mo{\"\i}se and Lind, Lars and Schmid, Caroline and DasMahapatra, Pronabesh and Gao, Lu and Ziegelbauer, Kathrin and Bots, Michiel L and Thompson, Simon G} } @article {6876, title = {Race/Ethnic Differences in the Associations of the Framingham Risk Factors with Carotid IMT and Cardiovascular Events.}, journal = {PLoS One}, volume = {10}, year = {2015}, month = {2015}, pages = {e0132321}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Clinical manifestations and outcomes of atherosclerotic disease differ between ethnic groups. In addition, the prevalence of risk factors is substantially different. Primary prevention programs are based on data derived from almost exclusively White people. We investigated how race/ethnic differences modify the associations of established risk factors with atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events.

METHODS: We used data from an ongoing individual participant meta-analysis involving 17 population-based cohorts worldwide. We selected 60,211 participants without cardiovascular disease at baseline with available data on ethnicity (White, Black, Asian or Hispanic). We generated a multivariable linear regression model containing risk factors and ethnicity predicting mean common carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and a multivariable Cox regression model predicting myocardial infarction or stroke. For each risk factor we assessed how the association with the preclinical and clinical measures of cardiovascular atherosclerotic disease was affected by ethnicity.

RESULTS: Ethnicity appeared to significantly modify the associations between risk factors and CIMT and cardiovascular events. The association between age and CIMT was weaker in Blacks and Hispanics. Systolic blood pressure associated more strongly with CIMT in Asians. HDL cholesterol and smoking associated less with CIMT in Blacks. Furthermore, the association of age and total cholesterol levels with the occurrence of cardiovascular events differed between Blacks and Whites.

CONCLUSION: The magnitude of associations between risk factors and the presence of atherosclerotic disease differs between race/ethnic groups. These subtle, yet significant differences provide insight in the etiology of cardiovascular disease among race/ethnic groups. These insights aid the race/ethnic-specific implementation of primary prevention.

}, keywords = {Adult, Age Distribution, Aged, Carotid Artery Diseases, Carotid Intima-Media Thickness, Cholesterol, HDL, Cholesterol, LDL, Comorbidity, Continental Population Groups, Diabetes Mellitus, Dyslipidemias, Ethnic Groups, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Global Health, Humans, Hypertension, Incidence, Linear Models, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Prevalence, Proportional Hazards Models, Risk Factors, Smoking, Stroke}, issn = {1932-6203}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0132321}, author = {Gijsberts, Crystel M and Groenewegen, Karlijn A and Hoefer, Imo E and Eijkemans, Marinus J C and Asselbergs, Folkert W and Anderson, Todd J and Britton, Annie R and Dekker, Jacqueline M and Engstr{\"o}m, Gunnar and Evans, Greg W and de Graaf, Jacqueline and Grobbee, Diederick E and Hedblad, Bo and Holewijn, Suzanne and Ikeda, Ai and Kitagawa, Kazuo and Kitamura, Akihiko and de Kleijn, Dominique P V and Lonn, Eva M and Lorenz, Matthias W and Mathiesen, Ellisiv B and Nijpels, Giel and Okazaki, Shuhei and O{\textquoteright}Leary, Daniel H and Pasterkamp, Gerard and Peters, Sanne A E and Polak, Joseph F and Price, Jacqueline F and Robertson, Christine and Rembold, Christopher M and Rosvall, Maria and Rundek, Tatjana and Salonen, Jukka T and Sitzer, Matthias and Stehouwer, Coen D A and Bots, Michiel L and den Ruijter, Hester M} }