METHODS: This study used data from national STEPS surveys (STEPwise Approach to Surveillance) conducted between 2005 and 2010 in Cambodia, Malaysia and Mongolia of men and women aged 40-64 years. The study compared the differences and implications of various approaches to risk estimation at a population level using the World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension (WHO/ISH) risk score charts. To aid interpretation and adjustment of scores and inform treatment in individuals, the charts are accompanied by practice notes about risk factors not included in the risk score calculations. Total risk was calculated amongst the populations using the charts alone and also adjusted according to these notes. Prevalence of traditional single risk factors was also calculated.
RESULTS: The prevalence of WHO/ISH "high CVD risk" (≥20% chance of developing a cardiovascular event over 10 years) of 6%, 2.3% and 1.3% in Mongolia, Malaysia and Cambodia, respectively, is in line with recent research when charts alone are used. However, these proportions rise to 33.3%, 20.8% and 10.4%, respectively when individuals with blood pressure > = 160/100 mm/Hg and/or hypertension medication are attributed to "high risk". Of those at "moderate risk" (10- < 20% chance of developing a cardio vascular event over 10 years), 100%, 94.3% and 30.1%, respectively are affected by at least one risk-increasing factor. Of all individuals, 44.6%, 29.0% and 15.0% are affected by hypertension as a single risk factor (systolic ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic ≥ 90 mmHg or medication).
CONCLUSIONS: Used on a population level, cardiovascular risk scores may offer useful insights that can assist health service delivery planning. An approach based on overall risk without adjustment of specific risk factors however, may underestimate treatment needs.At the individual level, the total risk approach offers important clinical benefits. However, countries need to develop appropriate clinical guidelines and operational guidance for detection and management of CVD risk using total CVD-risk approach at different levels of health system. Operational research is needed to assess implementation issues.
OBJECTIVE: Herein, we are highlighting the recent knowledge of vitamin D roles and functions with respect to pathophysiological disorders such as cancer, cardiovascular diseases, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and debate the potential avails of vitamin D on slowing cancer, cardiovascular disease and RA progression.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this review confirm that the importance of vitamin D metabolites or analogues which can provide a helpful platform to target some kinds of cancer, particularly when used in combination with existing therapies. Moreover, the correlation between vitamin D deficiencies with cardiovascular diseases and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) progression might suggest a pivotal role of vitamin D in either initiation or progression of these diseases.
METHODS: SUDOSCAN, a non-invasive tool, provides an age-adjusted electrochemical skin conductance (ESC) composite score incorporating hands/feet ESC measurements, with a score ≤53 indicating sudomotor dysfunction. A consecutive cohort of 2833 Chinese adults underwent structured diabetes assessment in 2012-13; 2028 participants without preexisting cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CKD were monitored for incident cardiovascular-renal events until 2015.
RESULTS: In this prospective cohort {mean age 57.0 [standard deviation (SD) 10.0] years; median T2D duration 7.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 3.0-13.0] years; 56.1% men; 72.5% never-smokers; baseline ESC composite score 60.7 (SD 14.5)}, 163 (8.0%) and 25 (1.2%) participants developed incident CKD and CVD, respectively, after 2.3 years of follow-up. The adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) per 1-unit decrease in the ESC composite score for incident CKD, CVD and all-cause death were 1.02 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.04], 1.04 (1.00-1.07) and 1.04 (1.00-1.08), respectively. Compared with participants with an ESC composite score >53, those with a score ≤53 had an aHR of 1.56 (95% CI 1.09-2.23) for CKD and 3.11 (95% CI 1.27-7.62) for CVD, independent of common risk markers. When added to clinical variables (sex and duration of diabetes), the ESC composite score improved discrimination of all outcomes with appropriate reclassification of CKD risk.
CONCLUSIONS: A low ESC composite score independently predicts incident cardiovascular-renal events and death in T2D, which may improve the screening strategy for early intervention.
METHODS: Literature databases were searched to June 2019. Observational studies were eligible if they measured short-term BPV, defined as variability in blood pressure measurements acquired either over a 24-hour period or several days. Data were extracted on method of BPV and reported association (or not) on future cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality. Methodological quality was assessed using the CASP observational study tool and data narratively synthesised.
RESULTS: Sixty-one studies including 3,333,801 individuals were eligible. BPV has been assessed by various methods including ambulatory and home-based BP monitors assessing 24-hour, "day-by-day" and "week-to-week" variability. There was moderate quality evidence of an association between BPV and cardiovascular events (43 studies analysed) or all-cause mortality (26 studies analysed) irrespective of the measurement method in the short- to longer-term. There was moderate quality evidence reporting inconsistent findings on the potential association between cardiovascular mortality, irrespective of methods of BPV assessment (17 studies analysed).
CONCLUSION: An association between BPV, cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular events and/or all-cause mortality were reported by the majority of studies irrespective of method of measurement. Direct comparisons between studies and reporting of pooled effect sizes were not possible.
METHODS: In this international, community-based cohort study, we prospectively enrolled adults aged 35-70 years who had no intention of moving residences for 4 years from rural and urban communities across 17 countries. A portable spirometer was used to assess FEV1. FEV1 values were standardised within countries for height, age, and sex, and expressed as a percentage of the country-specific predicted FEV1 value (FEV1%). FEV1% was categorised as no impairment (FEV1% ≥0 SD from country-specific mean), mild impairment (FEV1% <0 SD to -1 SD), moderate impairment (FEV1% cardiovascular disease outcomes (including myocardial infarction, stroke, sudden death, or congestive heart failure), and respiratory hospitalisations (from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, pneumonia, tuberculosis, or other pulmonary conditions). Fully adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated by multilevel Cox regression.
FINDINGS: Among 126 359 adults with acceptable spirometry data available, during a median 7·8 years (IQR 5·6-9·5) of follow-up, 5488 (4·3%) deaths, 5734 (4·5%) cardiovascular disease events, and 1948 (1·5%) respiratory hospitalisation events occurred. Relative to the no impairment group, mild to severe FEV1% impairments were associated with graded increases in mortality (HR 1·27 [95% CI 1·18-1·36] for mild, 1·74 [1·60-1·90] for moderate, and 2·54 [2·26-2·86] for severe impairment), cardiovascular disease (1·18 [1·10-1·26], 1·39 [1·28-1·51], 2·02 [1·75-2·32]), and respiratory hospitalisation (1·39 [1·24-1·56], 2·02 [1·75-2·32], 2·97 [2·45-3·60]), and this pattern persisted in subgroup analyses considering country income level and various baseline risk factors. Population-attributable risk for mortality (adjusted for age, sex, and country income) from mildly to moderately reduced FEV1% (24·7% [22·2-27·2]) was larger than that from severely reduced FEV1% (3·7% [2·1-5·2]) and from tobacco use (19·7% [17·2-22·3]), previous cardiovascular disease (5·5% [4·5-6·5]), and hypertension (17·1% [14·6-19·6]). Population-attributable risk for cardiovascular disease from mildly to moderately reduced FEV1 was 17·3% (14·8-19·7), second only to the contribution of hypertension (30·1% [27·6-32·5]).
INTERPRETATION: FEV1 is an independent and generalisable predictor of mortality, cardiovascular disease, and respiratory hospitalisation, even across the clinically normal range (mild to moderate impairment).
FUNDING: Population Health Research Institute, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, and GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and King Pharma. Additional funders are listed in the appendix.