USPSTF: Continue Using Traditional CV Risk Models

Traditional risk assessment models such as the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and the Pooled Cohort Equations are commonly used to assess cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic individuals.

However, in a new draft statement, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) reports that there is insufficient evidence to weigh the benefits and harms of adding certain nontraditional risk factors to these existing risk assessment models.

CVD Risk Linked to Timing of Reproductive Factors
AHA Statement Details Link Between Childhood Adversity and CVD Risk

In the report, the researchers noted that there is adequate evidence indicating that using the ankle-brachial index (ABI), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and the coronary artery calcification (CAC) scores could improve calibration, discrimination, and reclassification.

However, there is currently not enough evidence to assess whether treatment decisions guided these scores, along with existing CVD risk assessment models, helped lower the incidence of CVD events or mortality.

“The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of using the ABI, hsCRP, or CAC score in risk assessment for CVD in asymptomatic adults to prevent CVD events,” the authors wrote.

—Christina Vogt


Draft recommendation statement: cardiovascular disease: risk assessment with nontraditional risk factors. US Preventive Services Task Force. Accessed on January 17, 2018.