Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Access

Associations of coronary artery calcified plaque density with mortality in type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes Heart Study

  • Laura M. Raffield1, 2, 3Email author,
  • Amanda J. Cox2, 3, 4,
  • Michael H. Criqui5,
  • Fang-Chi Hsu2, 6,
  • James G. Terry7,
  • Jianzhao Xu2, 3,
  • Barry I. Freedman8,
  • J. Jeffrey Carr7 and
  • Donald W. Bowden2, 3, 9
Cardiovascular Diabetology201817:67

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12933-018-0714-z

Received: 24 February 2018

Accepted: 8 May 2018

Published: 11 May 2018

Abstract

Background

Coronary artery calcified plaque (CAC) is strongly predictive of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and mortality, both in general populations and individuals with type 2 diabetes at high risk for CVD. CAC is typically reported as an Agatston score, which is weighted for increased plaque density. However, the role of CAC density in CVD risk prediction, independently and with CAC volume, remains unclear.

Methods

We examined the role of CAC density in individuals with type 2 diabetes from the family-based Diabetes Heart Study and the African American-Diabetes Heart Study. CAC density was calculated as mass divided by volume, and associations with incident all-cause and CVD mortality [median follow-up 10.2 years European Americans (n = 902, n = 286 deceased), 5.2 years African Americans (n = 552, n = 93 deceased)] were examined using Cox proportional hazards models, independently and in models adjusted for CAC volume.

Results

In European Americans, CAC density, like Agatston score and volume, was consistently associated with increased risk of all-cause and CVD mortality (p ≤ 0.002) in models adjusted for age, sex, statin use, total cholesterol, HDL, systolic blood pressure, high blood pressure medication use, and current smoking. However, these associations were no longer significant when models were additionally adjusted for CAC volume. CAC density was not significantly associated with mortality, either alone or adjusted for CAC volume, in African Americans.

Conclusions

CAC density is not associated with mortality independent from CAC volume in European Americans and African Americans with type 2 diabetes.

Keywords

Coronary artery calcificationPlaque densityType 2 diabetesMortality

Background

Many studies have found computed tomography (CT)-based measures of calcified plaque in the coronary arteries (CAC) to be predictive of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and mortality, independent from traditional CVD risk factors [15]. CAC is also a powerful independent risk factor for CVD and mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) [69], with elevated CAC burden in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetic individuals [10]. This is of particular interest due to the elevated CVD risk in individuals with T2D, with mortality risk from CVD increased two- to fourfold and approximately 68% of T2D-affected individuals age 65 or older succumbing to CVD [11].

Recent work from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) found that increased CAC density, in models adjusted for plaque volume, was associated with a decreased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events (HR of 0.73, 95% CI 0.58–0.91 per standard deviation increase) and all CVD events, with improved risk prediction for CHD and CVD events with the inclusion of density [12]. These results were contrary to the assumptions of using Agatston scores to assess CAC, as those scores are weighted for increased density [13, 14], and the results have been confirmed in re-analysis of the MESA dataset with additional events from 11 years median follow-up [15]. Further study of the role of calcified plaque density in CVD risk appears to be warranted. We evaluated the associations of CAC density measures with incident mortality in a high risk population with T2D, including participants of both European American (EA) and African American (AA) descent from the Diabetes Heart Study (DHS) and African American-Diabetes Heart Study (AA-DHS).

Methods

Study design and sample

The DHS recruited T2D-affected siblings without advanced renal insufficiency, as well as their unaffected siblings when possible, from outpatient internal medicine and endocrinology clinics at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center and from the community from 1998 through 2005; this initial DHS cohort included 1221 self-reported EA individuals and 222 self-reported AA participants. Differences in the distribution of vascular calcification between EA and AA participants, with AA participants generally having lower vascular calcification burden despite higher levels of traditional CVD risk factors [16], an observation supported by many additional studies [1719], prompted the development of the independent AA-DHS Study. AA-DHS recruited additional unrelated African American participants with T2D from 2007 to 2010. Recruitment criteria and objectives of the DHS family of studies have been reported [20]. T2D was defined in DHS studies as diabetes developing after the age of 35 years (or after the age of 30 in AA participants) initially treated with changes in diet and exercise and/or oral agents, in the absence of historical evidence of ketoacidosis or initial treatment with insulin. Individuals with prior evidence of CVD were included. Fasting glucose and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) concentrations were assessed at the exam visit.

Participant examinations for the DHS and AA-DHS included interviews for medical history and health behaviors, anthropometric measures, resting blood pressure, electrocardiography, fasting blood sampling for laboratory analyses, and spot urine collection. As described, CAC was assessed using CT, summing the left main, left anterior descending, circumflex, posterior descending, and right coronary arteries [2123]. CT scans were performed on multi-detector CT scanners with cardiac gating in chest scans, with a CT slice thickness of 2.5 mm for AA-DHS and 2.5 or 3 mm, depending on the scanner used, for DHS. The protocol for CAC imaging was the same as in two large population-based studies of subclinical cardiovascular disease, MESA and the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study [2426]; however, the DHS used the FDA approved and validated GE Healthcare Smartscore software program, improving assessment of mass scores.

Mortality was assessed using the National Social Security Death Index. When possible, copies of death certificates were obtained from county or state Vital Records Offices to determine cause of death. Cause of death was categorized based on death certificates as CVD mortality [myocardial infarction (MI), congestive heart failure, cardiac arrhythmia, sudden cardiac death, peripheral vascular disease, and stroke] or as mortality from other causes. However, for 15 EA participants and 8 AA participants, information on cause of death could not be obtained; these 23 participants were excluded from analyses of CVD mortality. For deceased participants, length of follow-up was determined from the date of initial study visit to date of death. For all other participants the length of follow-up was determined from the date of the initial study visit to December 31, 2013.

For our main analysis, we included only individuals affected by T2D with non-missing covariate data and non-zero values for the relevant CAC values at the 90 Hounsfield unit (HU) threshold, which is more sensitive but less specific than the frequently used 130 HU threshold. This included a total of 902 EA participants from 448 families from the DHS and 552 AA participants from 483 families from the DHS and AA-DHS, including 139 individuals from 70 families from the DHS and 413 unrelated individuals from the AA-DHS. A supplemental analysis of 816 EA participants and 446 AA participants with non-zero Agatston scores at the 130 HU threshold was also performed.

Statistical analysis

Associations were examined for five measures of calcified plaque burden, including volume, Agatston score at the 90 HU and 130 HU thresholds, and two density measures. The density measure used in all main analyses was calculated by dividing mass over volume. As a supplemental analysis, an alternate density measure calculated as Agatston score over plaque area (calculated as volume divided by CT slice thickness, which was either 2.5 or 3 mm depending on the scanner used) was analyzed. This alternate density measure is similar to the measure analyzed in MESA, which did not have access to reliable mass scores [12]. Some plaque measures were transformed prior to analysis. In EA and AA participants, volume and Agatston scores were ln transformed and the alternate density measure calculated as Agatston divided by area was squared to better approximate a normal distribution (Additional file 1: Figure S1). Untransformed summary statistics are presented in Table 1. Non-parametric Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to determine relationships between these calcified plaque measures.
Table 1

Demographic characteristics of European American and African American participants with type 2 diabetes from the Diabetes Heart Study and African American Diabetes-Heart Study cohorts with non-zero coronary artery calcification burden and complete covariate data for analysis models

Trait

European Americans (n = 902)

African Americans (n = 552)

Mean (SD) or %

Median (range)

n

Mean (SD) or %

Median (range)

N

Age (years)

62.8 (9)

63.3 (34.2, 86)

902

57.4 (9.3)

57.5 (35, 86)

552

Female sex (%)

50.4

 

902

59.8

 

552

Current smoking (%)

16.5

 

902

23.9

 

552

Past smoking (%)

43.6

 

902

36.8

 

552

History of myocardial infarction (%)

22.4

 

894

11.9

 

547

History of cardiovascular disease (%)

44.7

 

894

35.7

 

526

Incident all-cause mortality (%)

31.7

 

902

16.9

 

552

Incident cardiovascular disease mortality (%)

14.9

 

887

7.7

 

544

Follow-up time (years)

9.5 (3.1)

10.2 (0.3, 15.6)

902

6 (3)

5.2 (0.3, 16)

552

Body mass index (kg/m2)

32.3 (6.5)

31.3 (17.1, 58)

902

35.3 (8.2)

34 (17.1, 77.5)

552

Glucose (mg/dL)

148.2 (56.2)

135.5 (16, 463)

900

149.6 (65.3)

134 (32, 524)

552

Glycated hemoglobin (%)

7.5 (1.6)

7.2 (4.6, 16.6)

896

8.2 (2.1)

7.7 (4.4, 21.8)

543

Glycated hemoglobin (mmol/mol)

59 (17.7)

55.2 (26.8, 157.9)

896

66.2 (23.2)

60.7 (24.6, 214.8)

543

Diabetes duration (years)

10.6 (7.2)

8 (0, 46)

888

10.7 (7.9)

8.5 (0, 52)

552

CAC mass score (mg, 90 HU)

1960 (3414)

562 (0.5, 50,415)

889

1028 (2025)

161 (1, 15,527)

552

CAC volume score (mm3, 90 HU)

899 (1328)

361 (1, 15,569)

902

432 (784)

90 (1, 6103)

552

CAC Agatston score (90 HU)

1031 (1640)

365 (0.5, 20,563)

901

497 (956)

82 (0.5, 7502)

551

CAC Agatston score (130 HU)

828 (1277)

331 (0.5, 16,287)

816

446 (772)

110 (0.5, 5693)

446

CAC density (mg/mm3, 90 HU)

1.71 (0.76)

1.74 (0.02, 4.46)

889

1.8 (0.65)

1.75 (0.9, 5.39)

552

Alternate CAC density (Agatston score/area, Hounsfield unit category units, 90 HU)

2.25 (0.83)

2.51 (0.63, 4.29)

901

2.09 (0.87)

2.35 (0.5, 3.42)

551

Total cholesterol (mg/dL)

184.5 (43.1)

180 (65, 391)

902

183.5 (45.6)

178 (81, 428)

552

HDL (mg/dL)

42.3 (12)

41 (8, 98)

902

48.3 (14)

46 (18, 115)

552

Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)

140 (19.1)

138.5 (94, 260)

902

136.7 (19.4)

134.3 (85, 211)

552

Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg)

72.3 (10.2)

71.5 (36.5, 106)

902

77.3 (11.6)

77 (48.5, 122)

552

High blood pressure medications (%)

76.4

 

902

84.1

 

552

Statin use (%)

43.8

 

902

49.5

 

552

Oral hypoglycemic medications (%)

79.5

 

902

76.3

 

552

Insulin use (%)

27.5

 

902

42.2

 

552

CAC coronary artery calcified plaque, HU Hounsfield unit

Associations with incident all-cause and CVD mortality were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models with sandwich-based variance estimation, due to the family structure of the DHS cohort. Models were adjusted for age, sex, study (DHS and AA-DHS, for AA participants only), statin use, ln transformed total cholesterol, square root transformed high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), systolic blood pressure (SBP), high blood pressure medication use, and current smoking. A minimally adjusted model (adjusted for age, sex, and, in African Americans, study only) was also assessed; results were similar and are not shown. As a supplemental analysis, self-reported prior CVD events were examined using marginal models with generalized estimating equations with a sandwich estimator of the variance under exchangeable correlation. For self-reported prior CVD, we analyzed (a) self-reported history of MI, and (b) a composite measure including MI, angina, or stroke, history of vascular procedures including coronary angioplasty, coronary artery bypass graft, or endarterectomy, or Q wave abnormalities indicative of prior MI using the Minnesota code. All analyses were performed in SAS 9.3.

Results

Demographic characteristics of AA and EA participants in the DHS and AA-DHS included in calcified plaque density analyses are summarized in Table 1. Mean diabetes duration was 10.6 ± 7.2 years [mean ± standard deviation (SD)] in EA participants and 10.7 ± 7.9 years in AA participants. 44.7% of EA participants and 35.7% of AA participants had a history of CVD, and mean BMI was > 30 kg/m2 in both groups. While burden of subclinical CVD was extensive in both groups, EA participants had higher median calcified plaque volume (361) than AA participants (90), consistent with prior reports [1618]. Using a 90 HU threshold, there were 901 EA participants with a non-zero Agatston score (median 365) and 551 AA participants with a non-zero score (median 82); as expected, fewer individuals had a non-zero Agatston score at the less sensitive but more specific 130 HU threshold, with 816 EA participants with a non-zero Agatston score (median 331) and 446 AA participants with a non-zero score (median 110). Incident all-cause mortality was greater for EA participants (31.7%) than AA participants (16.9%) as well, likely in part due to longer follow-up time in EA participants.

In both EA (Additional file 1: Table S1) and AA (Additional file 1: Table S2) participants, the CAC measures are highly correlated, with volume and Agatston score at the 90 HU and 130 HU threshold very highly correlated in both groups (r > 0.95). Volume and Agatston score measures were also significantly correlated with density in AA and in EA participants (r > 0.66).

In EA participants (Table 2), all CAC measures, including volume, Agatston scores at both the 90 HU and 130 HU thresholds, and density, were associated with increased risk of all-cause and CVD mortality (p ≤ 0.002) in models adjusted for age, sex, statin use, total cholesterol, HDL, SBP, high blood pressure medication use, and current smoking. When density and volume measures were included in the same model (Table 3), plaque volume remained consistently associated with elevated mortality (p ≤ 3.70 × 10−4), but associations with plaque density were attenuated to non-significance (p ≥ 0.252). In the smaller AA sample, plaque volume and Agatston scores were associated with elevated risk of all-cause and CVD mortality (p ≤ 0.046), but plaque density was not significantly associated with mortality risk (p ≥ 0.106) (Table 2). Similar to EAs, in models including both density and volume measures, volume was associated with elevated mortality risk in AAs (p ≤ 0.003), but no significant association with density was observed (p ≥ 0.117) (Table 3).
Table 2

Associations with incident all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality for coronary artery calcification measures analyzed in independent models in European American and African American participants with type 2 diabetes

Outcome

CAC measure

European Americans

African Americans

Hazard ratio

95% confidence interval

p-value

n

Hazard ratio

95% confidence interval

p-value

n

All-cause mortality

Volume (90 HU)

1.67

1.37

2.03

3.08 × 10−7

902

1.48

1.14

1.92

0.003

552

All-cause mortality

Agatston score (90 HU)

1.65

1.35

2.02

1.02 × 10−6

901

1.45

1.12

1.88

0.005

551

All-cause mortality

Agatston score (130 HU)

1.54

1.27

1.87

1.42 × 10−5

816

1.27

1.01

1.61

0.046

446

All-cause mortality

Density (90 HU)

1.31

1.12

1.53

6.98 × 10−4

889

1.13

0.92

1.38

0.233

552

CVD mortality

Volume (90 HU)

1.93

1.45

2.57

6.58 × 10−6

887

2.00

1.25

3.21

0.004

544

CVD mortality

Agatston score (90 HU)

1.86

1.39

2.49

3.46 × 10−5

886

1.98

1.25

3.13

0.004

543

CVD mortality

Agatston score (130 HU)

1.68

1.25

2.27

5.74 × 10−4

801

1.84

1.20

2.84

0.006

438

CVD mortality

Density (90 HU)

1.39

1.13

1.70

0.002

875

1.26

0.95

1.66

0.106

544

Hazard ratios for mortality associations reported per standard deviation change in coronary artery calcification measures. Models adjusted for age, sex, statin use, total cholesterol, HDL, systolic blood pressure, high blood pressure medication use, and current smoking; analyses additionally adjusted for study (Diabetes Heart Study or African American Diabetes Heart Study) in African Americans

HU Hounsfield unit

Table 3

Associations with incident all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality for density and volume measures analyzed in the same model in European American and African American participants with type 2 diabetes

Outcome

CAC measure

European Americans

African Americans

Hazard ratio

95% confidence interval

p-value

n

Hazard ratio

95% confidence interval

p-value

n

All-cause mortality

Volume

1.60

1.29

1.99

2.25 × 10−5

889

1.76

1.22

2.53

0.003

552

Density

1.10

0.94

1.28

0.225

889

0.77

0.55

1.07

0.117

552

CVD mortality

Volume

1.78

1.30

2.44

3.70 × 10−4

875

2.56

1.40

4.67

0.002

544

Density

1.13

0.92

1.39

0.252

875

0.69

0.43

1.10

0.121

544

Hazard ratios for mortality associations reported per standard deviation change in coronary artery calcification measures. Models adjusted for age, sex, statin use, total cholesterol, HDL, systolic blood pressure, high blood pressure medication use, and current smoking; analyses additionally adjusted for study (Diabetes Heart Study or African American Diabetes Heart Study) in African Americans. All calcification measures were derived using a 90 HU (Hounsfield unit) threshold

As a supplementary analysis, we also analyzed associations of CAC measures with self-reported history of CVD and MI. In EA participants, all CAC measures, including density, were associated with higher odds of having a history of CVD and MI events (p ≤ 4.65 × 10−6), with similar results in AA participants (p ≤ 1.84 × 10−4) (Additional file 1: Table S3). With density and volume measures included in the same model, in EA participants both volume and density were associated with higher odds of prior CVD and MI (p ≤ 0.046); trends were similar but density was not significantly associated in AA participants (Additional file 1: Table S4).

Finally, to increase comparability of our results with the prior analysis of calcified plaque density in the MESA cohort [12], we repeated our analyses with an alternate measure of plaque density (Agatston score over area), which was derived in MESA as reliable mass measurements were unavailable. Results were broadly similar; higher density was associated with higher CVD mortality and higher odds of history of CVD and MI in EA and AA participants (p ≤ 0.014), as well as with higher all-cause mortality in EAs (p = 9.62 × 10−6) (Additional file 1: Table S5). Adjusting for volume, no significant associations with this alternate density measure remained (Additional file 1: Table S6).

Discussion

The utility of CAC, usually assessed using Agatston or volume measures, in predicting CVD events and mortality is well-established in the general population [15] and in those with T2D [69]. Questions remain concerning whether CAC plaque density adds to the predictive power of CAC volume. This analysis from the DHS in both EA and AA participants with T2D assessed associations of multiple CAC measures, including plaque volume, Agatston scores, and density, with incident mortality. We found that all of these CAC measures, including density, were associated higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality in EA participants. In models adjusted for volume, however, no independent associations with density measures remained. Results were broadly similar in AA participants, though no association of density unadjusted for volume with mortality risk was observed. These results do not suggest a consistent association of CAC density with mortality independent of volume in patients with T2D.

While our results do not suggest an independent relationship of calcified plaque density with mortality, further study is needed to assess how the characteristics of calcified and non-calcified plaque may contribute to CVD risk. Our scans are done with non-contrast CT and we can comment on characteristics such as density for calcified plaque only, not the non-calcified portions; total coronary plaque area is generally ~ 5 times greater than calcified plaque area [27]. We did not assess more specific plaque characteristics such as the fibrous cap thickness or consider differential mortality risk based on characteristics such as lesion number and location in the coronary arteries [28]. Further understanding of plaque characteristics in multiple patient populations, including those with diabetes, may also help evaluate the usefulness of alternate calcified plaque scoring methods and density calculations [2932], which may have advantages over the Agatston method in certain clinical and research settings (such as increased speed in CAC assessment [32, 33], or increased sensitivity for detecting very small plaques [29]). Plaque characteristics, as opposed to simply total plaque, may also modify observed associations with CVD events. In individuals with diabetes [34], as well as other patient populations [35, 36], some reports suggest that very high CAC scores, which may represent larger, denser plaques, are associated with increased risk of more stable CVD phenotypes (such as angina) versus sudden death or MI; however, in our population, previous work has shown very high mortality rates in individuals with T2D and CAC > 1000 [37], suggesting substantial CVD burden in this population. Further study is needed to determine what levels of CAC and CAC characteristics are associated with particular CVD events, particularly in individuals with T2D.

Results in the DHS differ from those previously observed in MESA, in which the largest existing multi-ethnic study of CAC plaque density was performed. Calcified plaque density unadjusted for volume was not predictive of CHD or CVD events in MESA, but, when models included both CAC volume and CAC density, increased plaque density was associated with a decreased risk of CHD and CVD events [12]. In the DHS, calcified plaque density unadjusted for volume was predictive of higher mortality risk (in EA participants); however, in models adjusted for volume, plaque density was not associated with mortality. There was a non-significant trend towards reduced risk of all-cause and CVD mortality with increased density in models adjusted for volume in African Americans, which would be concordant with the MESA results.

A number of differences exist between our analysis of the DHS and AA-DHS studies and the analysis in MESA. Most notably, our study was limited to participants with T2D, while MESA included only 17.9% T2D-affected participants. However, there was no significant interaction for diabetes in the most recent MESA analysis of density adjusted for volume [15]. The DHS is characterized by a high average burden of CAC, with a mean CAC Agatston score at the 130 HU threshold of 828 in EA participants and 446 in AA participants, compared to a mean CAC Agatston score of 293 for MESA participants, which recruited individuals free of clinical CVD at baseline. MESA had relatively low rates of statin use in those with non-zero CAC (20.1% of participants), likely due to lack of clinical CVD at baseline, while many EA and AA DHS participants reported a history of clinical CVD at baseline (> 35% in both groups), and statin use was higher (> 40%). Statin use may impact the differing relationships of CAC density and CVD in DHS and MESA, though both analyses did adjust for statin use; some studies indicate statins may increase CAC progression [38] and may impact CAC density, for example by reducing low attenuation plaque volume [39, 40]. A recent analysis from MESA suggested that statin use may attenuate the association between calcified plaque density and incident CVD in those with diabetes or metabolic syndrome [41]. We used a more intuitive mass over volume measure for density for our main analyses, though results were similar with an alternate density measure calculated as Agatston score over area (similar to that analyzed in MESA) in supplementary analyses. The Agatston score weighting of area is not based on a true measured density of each pixel, but instead incorporates a weighted measure from 1 to 4 based on the highest density pixel, limiting the interpretability of the Agatston/area estimate [13]. Other differences include smaller sample size, stratification by self-reported ethnicity (supported by significant interactions between self-reported ancestry and calcified plaque measures (p < 0.05) in joint models), higher correlation between density and volume (though no extreme collinearity problems (variance inflation factor > 4) were observed), and no data for incident events. We also acknowledge that inaccuracies in cause of death data from death certificates have been documented [42, 43]; under- or over-reporting by physicians may be a concern for our CVD mortality measure. It should be noted, however, that this ambiguity is not present when assessing all-cause mortality.

Analyses in MESA used the less sensitive but slightly more specific [30] 130 HU threshold for CAC assessment, as compared to use of a 90 HU threshold in the DHS cohorts, which may have contributed to different results between reports, as inclusion of more edge voxels at the 90 HU threshold can impact the measured area, volume, and density. As Agatston scores, but not volume and mass, were recorded in the DHS cohorts at both the 130 and 90 HU thresholds, we attempted to address this difference by limiting our analysis of density, Agatston score, and volume measures from the 90 HU threshold to only those with a non-zero Agatston score at the 130 HU threshold (n = 816 for EA participants, n = 446 for AA participants). Results were similar to the analysis in the full sample, with results displayed in Additional file 1: Tables S7 and S8. We ran similar models in European participants with all participants with an Agatston score less than 10 at the 130 HU threshold excluded. Again, results were similar, suggesting that small, potentially low density calcified plaques are not overly influencing our results.

Conclusions

In the T2D-affected DHS populations higher CAC plaque density was not consistently associated with risk of incident mortality in models adjusted for plaque volume. These results suggest that the role of CAC density may differ in the high CVD risk population of individuals affected by T2D; further study is needed to determine whether CAC density is independently predictive of CVD risk and its direction of effect in different patient populations. Longitudinal analyses of changes in CAC plaque density remain an important future goal.

Abbreviations

AA: 

African American

AA-DHS: 

African American-Diabetes Heart Study

CVD: 

cardiovascular disease

CT: 

computed tomography

CAC: 

coronary artery calcified plaque

CHD: 

coronary heart disease

DHS: 

Diabetes Heart Study

EA: 

European American

HDL: 

high-density lipoprotein cholesterol

HU: 

Hounsfield unit

MESA: 

Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

MI: 

myocardial infarction

SD: 

standard deviation

SBP: 

systolic blood pressure

T2D: 

type 2 diabetes

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

LMR analyzed and interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript. AJC, FH, and JX helped clean the data, design the statistical analysis, and critically review the manuscript. MHC critically reviewed the data analysis and manuscript. JGT played a major role in acquisition and interpretation of the coronary artery calcification data and critically reviewed the manuscript. BIF, JJC, and DWB obtained funding, designed the study, and critically reviewed the data analysis and manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the other investigators, the staff, and the participants of the Diabetes Heart Study for their valuable contributions.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Availability of data and materials

Most data for the Diabetes Heart Study is available, including genetic data not used in this study, at dbGaP Accession phs001012.v1.p1. The full datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due participant privacy and consent issues but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Written informed consent was obtained from each participant; the study protocol conforms to the ethical guidelines of the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki, and the study protocol was approved by Institutional Review Board at Wake Forest School of Medicine.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health [R01 HL67348 and R01 HL092301 (to DWB), R01 AR48797 (to JJC), and F31 AG044879 (to LMR)].

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
(2)
Center for Diabetes Research, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA
(3)
Center for Human Genomics, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA
(4)
Molecular Basis of Disease, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
(5)
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, USA
(6)
Department of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA
(7)
Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
(8)
Department of Internal Medicine—Section on Nephrology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA
(9)
Department of Biochemistry, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, USA

References

  1. Polonsky TS, McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, Bild DE, Burke GL, Guerci AD, Greenland P. Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction. JAMA. 2010;303:1610–6.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Erbel R, Mohlenkamp S, Moebus S, Schmermund A, Lehmann N, Stang A, Dragano N, Gronemeyer D, Seibel R, Kalsch H, et al. Coronary risk stratification, discrimination, and reclassification improvement based on quantification of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis: the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1397–406.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Detrano R, Guerci A, Carr J, Bild D, Burke G, Folsom A, Liu K, Shea S, Szklo M, Bluemke D, et al. Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1336–45.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Shaw LJ, Raggi P, Schisterman E, Berman DS, Callister TQ. Prognostic value of cardiac risk factors and coronary artery calcium screening for all-cause mortality. Radiology. 2003;228:826–33.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Carr J, Jacobs DR Jr, Terry JG, Shay CM, Sidney S, Liu K, Schreiner PJ, Lewis CE, Shikany JM, Reis JP, Goff DC Jr. Coronary artery calcium in adults 32–46 years and incident coronary heart disease and death: the CARDIA Study. JAMA Cardiol. 2017;2:391–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Agarwal S, Cox A, Herrington D, Jorgensen N, Xu J, Freedman B, Carr J, Bowden D. Coronary calcium score predicts cardiovascular mortality in diabetes: diabetes heart study. Diab Care. 2013;36:972–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Agarwal S, Morgan T, Herrington D, Xu J, Cox A, Freedman B, Carr J, Bowden D. Coronary calcium score and prediction of all-cause mortality in diabetes: the Diabetes Heart Study. Diab Care. 2011;34:1219–24.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Yeboah J, Erbel R, Delaney JC, Nance R, Guo M, Bertoni AG, Budoff M, Moebus S, Jockel KH, Burke GL, et al. Development of a new diabetes risk prediction tool for incident coronary heart disease events: the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis and the Heinz Nixdorf recall Study. Atherosclerosis. 2014;236:411–7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Kramer CK, Zinman B, Gross JL, Canani LH, Rodrigues TC, Azevedo MJ, Retnakaran R. Coronary artery calcium score prediction of all cause mortality and cardiovascular events in people with type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:f1654.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoff J, Quinn L, Sevrukov A, Lipton R, Daviglus M, Garside D, Ajmere N, Gandhi S, Kondos G. The prevalence of coronary artery calcium among diabetic individuals without known coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:1008–12.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, Benjamin EJ, Berry JD, Blaha MJ, Dai S, Ford ES, Fox CS, Franco S, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014;129:e28–292.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Criqui MH, Denenberg JO, Ix JH, McClelland RL, Wassel CL, Rifkin DE, Carr JJ, Budoff MJ, Allison MA. Calcium density of coronary artery plaque and risk of incident cardiovascular events. JAMA. 2014;311:271–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M Jr, Detrano R. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;15:827–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Alluri K, Joshi PH, Henry TS, Blumenthal RS, Nasir K, Blaha MJ. Scoring of coronary artery calcium scans: history, assumptions, current limitations, and future directions. Atherosclerosis. 2015;239:109–17.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Criqui MH, Knox JB, Denenberg JO, Forbang NI, McClelland RL, Novotny TE, Sandfort V, Waalen J, Blaha MJ, Allison MA. Coronary artery calcium volume and density: potential interactions and overall predictive value: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10:845–54.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Freedman BI, Hsu FC, Langefeld CD, Rich SS, Herrington DM, Carr JJ, Xu J, Bowden DW, Wagenknecht LE. The impact of ethnicity and sex on subclinical cardiovascular disease: the Diabetes Heart Study. Diabetologia. 2005;48:2511–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Bild DE, Detrano R, Peterson D, Guerci A, Liu K, Shahar E, Ouyang P, Jackson S, Saad MF. Ethnic differences in coronary calcification: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circulation. 2005;111:1313–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee TC, O’Malley PG, Feuerstein I, Taylor AJ. The prevalence and severity of coronary artery calcification on coronary artery computed tomography in black and white subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:39–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gebreab SY, Riestra P, Khan RJ, Xu R, Musani SK, Tekola-Ayele F, Correa A, Wilson JG, Rotimi CN, Davis SK. Genetic ancestry is associated with measures of subclinical atherosclerosis in African Americans: the Jackson Heart Study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2015;35:1271–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Bowden D, Cox A, Freedman B, Hugenschimdt C, Wagenknecht L, Herrington D, Agarwal S, Register T, Maldjian J, Ng M, et al. Review of the Diabetes Heart Study (DHS) family of studies: a comprehensively examined sample for genetic and epidemiological studies of type 2 diabetes and its complications. Rev Diab Stud. 2010;7:188–201.Google Scholar
  21. Wagenknecht L, Langefeld C, Freedman B, Carr J, Bowden D. A comparison of risk factors for calcified atherosclerotic plaque in the coronary, carotid, and abdominal aortic arteries: the Diabetes Heart Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166:340–7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Carr J, Register T, Hsu F-C, Lohman K, Lenchik L, Bowden D, Langefeld C, Xu J, Rich S, Wagenknecht L, Freedman B. Calcified atherosclerotic plaque and bone mineral density in type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes Heart Study. Bone. 2008;42:43–52.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Divers J, Palmer ND, Lu L, Register TC, Carr JJ, Hicks PJ, Hightower RC, Smith SC, Xu J, Cox AJ, et al. Admixture mapping of coronary artery calcified plaque in African Americans with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2013;6:97–105.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Carr JJ, Crouse JR 3rd, Goff DC Jr, D’Agostino RB Jr, Peterson NP, Burke GL. Evaluation of sub-second gated helical CT for quantification of coronary artery calcium and comparison with electron beam CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:915–21.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Carr JJ, Nelson JC, Wong ND, McNitt-Gray M, Arad Y, Jacobs DR Jr, Sidney S, Bild DE, Williams OD, Detrano RC. Calcified coronary artery plaque measurement with cardiac CT in population-based studies: standardized protocol of Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) and Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study. Radiology. 2005;234:35–43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Brown ER, Kronmal RA, Bluemke DA, Guerci AD, Carr JJ, Goldin J, Detrano R. Coronary calcium coverage score: determination, correlates, and predictive accuracy in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Radiology. 2008;247:669–75.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Rumberger JA, Simons DB, Fitzpatrick LA, Sheedy PF, Schwartz RS. Coronary artery calcium area by electron-beam computed tomography and coronary atherosclerotic plaque area: a Histopathologic Correlative Study. Circulation. 1995;92:2157–62.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Williams M, Shaw LJ, Raggi P, Morris D, Vaccarino V, Liu ST, Weinstein SR, Mosler TP, Tseng PH, Flores FR, et al. Prognostic value of number and site of calcified coronary lesions compared with the total score. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;1:61–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Liang CJ, Budoff MJ, Kaufman JD, Kronmal RA, Brown ER. An alternative method for quantifying coronary artery calcification: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). BMC Med Imaging. 2012;12:14–14.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Broderick LS, Shemesh J, Wilensky RL, Eckert GJ, Zhou X, Torres WE, Balk MA, Rogers WJ, Conces DJ Jr, Kopecky KK. Measurement of coronary artery calcium with dual-slice helical CT compared with coronary angiography: evaluation of CT scoring methods, interobserver variations, and reproducibility. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167:439–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Shemesh J, Tenenbaum A, Kopecky KK, Apter S, Rozenman J, Itzchak Y, Motro M. Coronary calcium measurements by double helical computed tomography. Using the average instead of peak density algorithm improves reproducibility. Invest Radiol. 1997;32:503–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Htwe Y, Cham MD, Henschke CI, Hecht H, Shemesh J, Liang M, Tang W, Jirapatnakul A, Yip R, Yankelevitz DF. Coronary artery calcification on low-dose computed tomography: comparison of Agatston and ordinal scores. Clin Imaging. 2015;39:799–802.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Vehmas T. Visually scored calcifications in thoracic arteries predict death: follow-up study after lung cancer CT screening. Acta Radiol. 2012;53:643–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Shemesh J, Tenenbaum A, Fisman EZ, Koren-Morag N, Grossman E. Coronary calcium in patients with and without diabetes: first manifestation of acute or chronic coronary events is characterized by different calcification patterns. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2013;12:161.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Coylewright M, Rice K, Budoff MJ, Blumenthal RS, Greenland P, Kronmal R, Barr RG, Burke GL, Tracy R, Post WS. Differentiation of severe coronary artery calcification in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis. 2011;219:616–22.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Shemesh J, Apter S, Itzchak Y, Motro M. Coronary calcification compared in patients with acute versus in those with chronic coronary events by using dual-sector spiral CT. Radiology. 2003;226:483–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Cox AJ, Hsu FC, Freedman BI, Herrington DM, Criqui MH, Carr JJ, Bowden DW. Contributors to mortality in high-risk diabetic patients in the Diabetes Heart Study. Diab Care. 2014;37:2798–803.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Henein M, Granasen G, Wiklund U, Schmermund A, Guerci A, Erbel R, Raggi P. High dose and long-term statin therapy accelerate coronary artery calcification. Int J Cardiol. 2015;184:581–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Inoue K, Motoyama S, Sarai M, Sato T, Harigaya H, Hara T, Sanda Y, Anno H, Kondo T, Wong ND, et al. Serial coronary CT angiography-verified changes in plaque characteristics as an end point: evaluation of effect of statin intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:691–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Zeb I, Li D, Nasir K, Malpeso J, Batool A, Flores F, Dailing C, Karlsberg RP, Budoff M. Effect of statin treatment on coronary plaque progression—a serial coronary CT angiography study. Atherosclerosis. 2013;231:198–204.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhao Y, Malik S, Criqui M, Allison M, Budoff M, Sandfort V, Wong N. Coronary calcium density and incident coronary heart disease among those with diabetes or the metabolic syndrome: the Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:A1154.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Coady SA, Sorlie PD, Cooper LS, Folsom AR, Rosamond WD, Conwill DE. Validation of death certificate diagnosis for coronary heart disease: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:40–50.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wexelman BA, Eden E, Rose KM. Survey of New York City resident physicians on cause-of-death reporting, 2010. Prev Chron Dis. 2013;10:E76.Google Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2018

Advertisement