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
. 2022 May 23;12(5):848.
doi: 10.3390/jpm12050848.

Cardiovascular Risk Assessment by SCORE2 Predicts Risk for Colorectal Neoplasia and Tumor-Related Mortality

Affiliations

Cardiovascular Risk Assessment by SCORE2 Predicts Risk for Colorectal Neoplasia and Tumor-Related Mortality

Sarah Wernly et al. J Pers Med. .

Abstract

Objectives: The European Society of Cardiology endorsed SCORE2 to assess cardiovascular risk. The aim of this observational, retrospective study was to assess whether SCORE2 is associated with colorectal neoplasia in an asymptomatic screening population. Further, we evaluated if SCORE2 predicts tumor-related mortality. Methods: We included 3408 asymptomatic patients who underwent a screening colonoscopy. We calculated SCORE2 for each participant and stratified patients according to their predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease: SCORE2 0−4.9%, SCORE2 5−9.9%, and SCORE2 ≥ 10%. We assessed the association between SCORE2 as a continuous variable, the presence of colorectal neoplasia using multilevel logistic regression, and SCORE2 and mortality using Cox regression. Results: In total, 1537 patients had a SCORE2 of 0−4.9%, 1235 a SCORE2 of 5−9.9%, and 636 a SCORE2 ≥ 10%. The respective rates of colorectal neoplasia were 20%, 37%, and 44%. SCORE2 was associated with the presence of any (OR 1.11 95%CI 1.09−1.12; p < 0.001) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (OR 1.06 95%CI 1.08−1.13; p < 0.001) in univariate analysis. After multivariable adjustment (age, sex, family history, and metabolic syndrome) a higher SCORE2 remained associated with higher odds for any (aOR 1.04 95%CI 1.02−1.06; p = 0.001) and advanced (aOR 1.06 95%CI 1.03−1.10; p < 0.001) colorectal neoplasia. SCORE2 was associated with both all-cause (HR 1.11 95%CI 1.09−1.14; p < 0.001) and tumor-related mortality (HR 1.10 95%CI 1.05−1.14; p < 0.001). Conclusions: We found that SCORE2 is associated with the presence of colorectal neoplasia. Clinicians could kill two birds with one stone calculating SCORE2. In patients with a high SCORE2, screening colonoscopy aside from cardiovascular risk mitigation could improve outcomes.

Keywords: cancer screening; colorectal adenoma and carcinoma; primary prevention; risk assessment; risk score.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. However, the following author discloses a conflict of interests outside the submitted work: C.D. is part of the scientific advisory board of SPAR Österreich AG.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Predicted risk for any colorectal neoplasia based on the SCORE2 obtained by univariable multilevel logistic regression, using the year of inclusion as random effect and the SCORE2 as continuous variable as fixed effect.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Predicted risk for any advanced colorectal neoplasia based on the SCORE2 obtained by univariable multilevel logistic regression, using the year of inclusion as random effect and the SCORE2 as continuous variable as fixed effect.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Sensitivity analyses stratifying the presence of the primary endpoint (any colorectal neoplasia) according to patient-specific baseline characteristics (stratified for sex, age (in categories), BMI (in categories according to the World Health Organization), smoking status, metabolic syndrome, and positive family history). For the sensitivity analyses, model-1 was fitted with SCORE2 as continuous variable as independent variable and any colorectal neoplasia as dependent variable in the strata. Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; CI: confidence interval; and OR: odds ratio.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Sensitivity analyses stratifying the presence of the primary endpoint (any colorectal neoplasia) according to patient-specific baseline characteristics (stratified for sex, age (in categories), BMI (in categories according to the World Health Organization), smoking status, metabolic syndrome, and positive family history). For the sensitivity analyses, model-1 was fitted with SCORE2 as continuous variable as independent variable and advanced colorectal neoplasia as dependent variable in the strata. We plotted the OR and 95%CI. Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; CI: confidence interval; and OR: odds ratio.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Survival data for all-cause mortality in the three SCORE2 strata. The all-cause mortality was 7% over a median follow-up of 2768 days. In the Cox regression model, SCORE2 was associated with all-cause (HR 1.11 95%CI 1.09–1.14; p < 0.001) mortality. Abbreviations: CI: confidence interval; and HR: hazard ratio.

References

    1. GBD 2019 Demographics Collaborators Global age-sex-specific fertility, mortality, healthy life expectancy (HALE), and population estimates in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2019: A comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396:1160–1203. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30977-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chen Y., Chen X., Wang X., Liu Z., Zhou H., Xu S. Association of Cardiovascular Risk Assessment with Early Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in Asymptomatic Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin. Epidemiol. 2020;12:865–873. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S262939. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Niederseer D., Bracher I., Stadlmayr A., Huber-Schönauer U., Plöderl M., Obeid S., Schmied C., Hammerl S., Stickel F., Lederer D., et al. Association between Cardiovascular Risk and Diabetes with Colorectal Neoplasia: A Site-Specific Analysis. J. Clin. Med. 2018;7:484. doi: 10.3390/jcm7120484. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gini A., Jansen E.E.L., Zielonke N., Meester R.G.S., Senore C., Anttila A., Segnan N., Mlakar D.N., de Koning H.J., Lansdorp-Vogelaar I., et al. Impact of colorectal cancer screening on cancer-specific mortality in Europe: A systematic review. Eur. J. Cancer. 2020;127:224–235. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.12.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Quintero E., Castells A., Bujanda L., Cubiella J., Salas D., Lanas A., Andreu M., Carballo F., Morillas J.D., Hernández C., et al. Colonoscopy versus Fecal Immunochemical Testing in Colorectal-Cancer Screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012;366:697–706. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1108895. - DOI - PubMed

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources