Author + information
- Received December 4, 2010
- Revision received January 17, 2011
- Accepted January 26, 2011
- Published online April 12, 2011.
- Alan Rozanski, MD⁎,
- Heidi Gransar, MS†,
- Leslee J. Shaw, PhD‡,
- Johanna Kim, MPH†,
- Lisa Miranda-Peats, MPH†,
- Nathan D. Wong, PhD§,
- Jamal S. Rana, MD, PhD†,
- Raza Orakzai, MD†,
- Sean W. Hayes, MD†,
- John D. Friedman, MD†,
- Louise E.J. Thomson, MBChB†,
- Donna Polk, MD∥,
- James Min, MD¶,
- Matthew J. Budoff, MD# and
- Daniel S. Berman, MD†,⁎ ()
- ↵⁎Reprint requests and correspondence:
Dr. Daniel S. Berman, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Building, Room 1258, Los Angeles, California 90048
Objectives We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare the clinical impact of conventional risk factor modification to that associated with the addition of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scanning.
Background Although CAC scanning predicts cardiac events, its impact on subsequent medical management and coronary artery disease risk is not known.
Methods We assigned 2,137 volunteers to groups that either did undergo CAC scanning or did not undergo CAC scanning before risk factor counseling. The primary end point was 4-year change in coronary artery disease risk factors and Framingham Risk Score. We also compared the groups for differences in downstream medical resource utilization.
Results Compared with the no-scan group, the scan group showed a net favorable change in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.02), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p = 0.04), and waist circumference for those with increased abdominal girth (p = 0.01), and tendency to weight loss among overweight subjects (p = 0.07). While there was a mean rise in Framingham Risk Score (FRS) in the no-scan group, FRS remained static in the scan group (0.7 ± 5.1 vs. 0.002 ± 4.9, p = 0.003). Within the scan group, increasing baseline CAC score was associated with a dose-response improvement in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.001), total cholesterol (p < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p < 0.001), triglycerides (p < 0.001), weight (p < 0.001), and Framingham Risk Score (p = 0.003). Downstream medical testing and costs in the scan group were comparable to those of the no-scan group, balanced by lower and higher resource utilization for subjects with normal CAC scans and CAC scores ≥400, respectively.
Conclusions Compared with no scanning, randomization to CAC scanning was associated with superior coronary artery disease risk factor control without increasing downstream medical testing. Further study of CAC scanning, including pre-specified treatment recommendations, to assess its impact of cardiovascular outcomes is warranted. (Early Identification of Subclinical Atherosclerosis Using Non-Invasive Imaging Research [EISNER]; NCT00927693)
This study was supported by a grant from The Eisner Foundation, Los Angeles, California, and partially supported by the NIH NCRR GCRC grant (M01-RR00425). Dr. Shaw discloses research grants from Astellas and Bracco; and has relationships with GE Healthcare and CV Therapeutics. Dr. Min is on the speaker's bureau of and receives grant support from GE Healthcare. Dr. Budoff has served as a consultant to and is on the speaker's bureau for GE Healthcare. Dr. Berman has research grants from Siemens and GE/Amersham, and has both research grants from and is on the speaker's bureau of Astelles and Lantheus. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships to disclose.
- Received December 4, 2010.
- Revision received January 17, 2011.
- Accepted January 26, 2011.
- American College of Cardiology Foundation