iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: http://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12796068/
The value of C-reactive protein in cardiovascular risk prediction: the Rotterdam Study - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2003 Jun 9;163(11):1323-8.
doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.11.1323.

The value of C-reactive protein in cardiovascular risk prediction: the Rotterdam Study

Irene M van der Meer  1 , Moniek P M de Maat, Amanda J Kiliaan, Deirdre A M van der Kuip, Albert Hofman, Jacqueline C M Witteman
Affiliations

The value of C-reactive protein in cardiovascular risk prediction: the Rotterdam Study

Irene M van der Meer et al. Arch Intern Med. .

Abstract

Background: Epidemiologic studies have shown that C-reactive protein (CRP) is a risk factor for coronary heart disease. Whether routine measurement of CRP has a role in the prediction of future coronary disease in everyday clinical practice has not yet been investigated.

Methods: Within the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort study of 7983 men and women 55 years and older, we conducted a nested case-control study to investigate the value of CRP in coronary disease prediction. Data are based on 157 participants who experienced a myocardial infarction during follow-up and 500 randomly selected controls. High-sensitivity CRP and traditional cardiovascular risk factors were measured at baseline.

Results: The age- and sex-adjusted relative risk of myocardial infarction for subjects in the highest quartile of the population distribution of CRP compared with the lowest quartile was 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.4). After additional adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the increase in risk largely disappeared (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-2.2). Adding CRP to a coronary disease risk function based on risk factors that are routinely assessed in clinical practice or to the Framingham risk function did not improve the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of these risk functions. Sensitivity and specificity of both risk functions, computed after dichotomizing the estimated disease probabilities using prespecified cutoff points, hardly improved when CRP was added.

Conclusion: Measurement of CRP in elderly people has no additional value in coronary disease risk prediction when traditional cardiovascular risk factors are known.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types