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
Review
. 2012 Sep;74(3):396-410.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04219.x.

Cardiovascular risk

Affiliations
Review

Cardiovascular risk

Rupert A Payne. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2012 Sep.

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease is a major, growing, worldwide problem. It is important that individuals at risk of developing cardiovascular disease can be effectively identified and appropriately stratified according to risk. This review examines what we understand by the term risk, traditional and novel risk factors, clinical scoring systems, and the use of risk for informing prescribing decisions. Many different cardiovascular risk factors have been identified. Established, traditional factors such as ageing are powerful predictors of adverse outcome, and in the case of hypertension and dyslipidaemia are the major targets for therapeutic intervention. Numerous novel biomarkers have also been described, such as inflammatory and genetic markers. These have yet to be shown to be of value in improving risk prediction, but may represent potential therapeutic targets and facilitate more targeted use of existing therapies. Risk factors have been incorporated into several cardiovascular disease prediction algorithms, such as the Framingham equation, SCORE and QRISK. These have relatively poor predictive power, and uncertainties remain with regards to aspects such as choice of equation, different risk thresholds and the roles of relative risk, lifetime risk and reversible factors in identifying and treating at-risk individuals. Nonetheless, such scores provide objective and transparent means of quantifying risk and their integration into therapeutic guidelines enables equitable and cost-effective distribution of health service resources and improves the consistency and quality of clinical decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • QRISK or Framingham?
    Robson J, Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C. Robson J, et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2012 Sep;74(3):545-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04293.x. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2012. PMID: 22486734 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Scarborough P, Bhatnagar P, Wickramasinghe K, Smolina K, Mitchell C, Rayner M. Coronary Heart Disease Statistics. London: British Heart Foundation; 2010.
    1. The NHS Information Centre, Prescribing Support Unit. Prescription Cost Analysis England 2010. Leeds: The Health and Social Care Information Centre; 2011.
    1. Alwan A. Global Status Report on Noncommunicable Diseases 2010. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.
    1. Hansson SO. Philosophical perspectives on risk. Techné. 2004;8:10–35.
    1. Spiegelhalter DJ. Understanding uncertainty. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6:196–7. - PMC - PubMed