Back

Repurposing cardiovascular disease risk models to predict incident and co-occurring cardiovascular, cardiometabolic and neurocognitive outcomes.

Quill, S.; Chaturvedi, N.; van Vugt, M.; Hingorani, A. D.; Schmidt, A. F.

2026-06-15 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.06.07.26355105 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD), cardiometabolic and neurocognitive conditions share risk factors and frequently co-occur. We evaluated whether four established CVD risk prediction models (QRISK3, PCE, SCORE2, SCORE2-OP) can be repurposed to predict 10-year risk of these conditions and their co-occurrence with CVD. Methods: The models were recalibrated using 20% of the UK Biobank (UKB) and evaluated in the remaining 80%. We performed external validation using data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum, assessing model discrimination (c-statistics) and calibration (intercept and slope). We used permuted feature importance to determine the influence of each individual predictor in the models. Results: Depending on the model, the c-statistics for incident CVD ranged from 0.71 to 0.74 in the UKB test set (16,137 events). Discrimination was equal to or higher than CVD when evaluated against non-traditional CVD outcomes: 0.74 to 0.77 for heart failure (3,471 events), 0.72 to 0.73 for atrial fibrillation (9,213 events), 0.73 to 0.75 for peripheral arterial disease (1,927 events) and 0.80 to 0.82 for abdominal aortic aneurysm (595 events). For the multimorbidity endpoints, model discrimination ranged from 0.74 for the composite of CVD and T2DM (SCORE2-OP) to 0.83 for the composite of CVD and dementia or Parkinson's disease (QRISK3). When considering the onset of any cardiovascular, cardiometabolic, or neurocognitive outcome discrimination ranged from 0.71 to 0.72. The repurposed models slightly underestimated the predicted risk in the CPRD compared to the UKB: average difference in calibration intercept was at most -0.64. After age and sex, smoking status and systolic blood pressure contributed most to model predictions. Conclusions: Repurposed CVD models can be used to identify 10-year risk of many CVD-related conditions and their multimorbidity. These may be used to support risk-based approaches to prevention and screening. The repurposed models have been made available at: https://repurposed-cvd-risk-models.shinyapps.io/cvd_cmd_dementia_app/ Keywords: Risk prediction; cardiovascular disease; cardiometabolic disease; dementia; disease prevention.

Matching journals

The top 12 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
European Heart Journal
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.7%
2
Journal of the American Heart Association
140 papers in training set
Top 1%
7.3%
3
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.9%
4
PLOS Medicine
110 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.9%
5
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
6
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.1%
7
European Journal of Epidemiology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.3%
8
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.8%
9
BMC Public Health
158 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
10
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.7%
11
BMC Medicine
176 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
12
BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
16 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
50% of probability mass above
13
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.5%
14
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
15
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
16
Clinical Epidemiology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
17
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
18
American Journal of Epidemiology
67 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
19
International Journal of Epidemiology
88 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
20
Diabetologia
44 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
21
BMC Infectious Diseases
133 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
22
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.1%
23
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
24
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
25
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
26
Journal of Clinical Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
27
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
28
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
29
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
30
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%