Comparison of Framingham, PROCAM, SCORE, and Diamond Forrester to predict coronary atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events

Mathijs O. Versteylen*, Ivo A. Joosen, Leslee J. Shaw, Jagat Narula, Leonard Hofstra

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

63 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

Background. Cardiologists are often confronted with patients presenting with chest pain, in whom clinical risk profiling is required. We studied four frequently used risk scores in their ability to predict for coronary artery disease (CAD) and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients presenting with stable chest pain at the cardiology outpatient clinic. Methods and Results. We enrolled 1,296 stable chest pain patients, who underwent cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) to assess CAD (any, significant: stenosis >= 50%). Framingham (FRS), PROCAM, SCORE risk score, and Diamond Forrester pre-test probability were calculated. All patients were followed up for a mean 19 +/- 9 months for all cardiovascular events (mortality, acute coronary syndrome, revascularization >90 days after CCTA). In ROC-analysis for prediction of significant CAD, the areas under the curve for FRS; 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.64-0.72) and for SCORE; 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.72) were significantly higher than for PROCAM; 0.64 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.68; P
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)904-911
JournalJournal of Nuclear Cardiology
Volume18
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2011

Keywords

  • Framingham risk score
  • PROCAM
  • SCORE
  • Diamond Forrester
  • cardiac CT-angiography
  • CAD
  • ACS

Cite this