Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Original article
The validation of cardiovascular risk scores for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
  1. J van der Leeuw1,
  2. S van Dieren2,3,
  3. J W J Beulens2,
  4. H Boeing4,
  5. A M W Spijkerman5,
  6. Y van der Graaf2,
  7. D L van der A5,
  8. U Nöthlings6,
  9. F L J Visseren1,
  10. G E H M Rutten2,
  11. K G M Moons2,
  12. Y T van der Schouw2,
  13. L M Peelen2
  1. 1Department of Vascular Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  2. 2Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  3. 3Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  4. 4Department of Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbrücke, Nuthetal, Germany
  5. 5Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
  6. 6Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Nutritional Epidemiology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr Joep van der Leeuw, Department of Vascular Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, P.O. Box 85500, Utrecht 3508 GA, The Netherlands; j.vanderleeuw-4{at}umcutrecht.nl

Abstract

Objective Various cardiovascular prediction models have been developed for patients with type 2 diabetes. Their predictive performance in new patients is mostly not investigated. This study aims to quantify the predictive performance of all cardiovascular prediction models developed specifically for diabetes patients.

Design and methods Follow-up data of 453, 1174 and 584 type 2 diabetes patients without pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the EPIC-NL, EPIC-Potsdam and Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease cohorts, respectively, were used to validate 10 prediction models to estimate risk of CVD or coronary heart disease (CHD). Discrimination was assessed by the c-statistic for time-to-event data. Calibration was assessed by calibration plots, the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistic and expected to observed ratios.

Results There was a large variation in performance of CVD and CHD scores between different cohorts. Discrimination was moderate for all 10 prediction models, with c-statistics ranging from 0.54 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.63) to 0.76 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.84). Calibration of the original models was poor. After simple recalibration to the disease incidence of the target populations, predicted and observed risks were close. Expected to observed ratios of the recalibrated models ranged from 1.06 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.40) to 1.55 (95% CI 0.95 to 2.54), mainly driven by an overestimation of risk in high-risk patients.

Conclusions All 10 evaluated models had a comparable and moderate discriminative ability. The recalibrated, but not the original, prediction models provided accurate risk estimates. These models can assist clinicians in identifying type 2 diabetes patients who are at low or high risk of developing CVD.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.