Okay, you made me do it! Thank you AI for making this easy...
Below is a concise, evidence-based summary of the
five landmark human studies (and a few key meta-analyses) that together
established CAC as the most powerful non-invasive predictor of cardiac risk ever validated.
MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis)
Reference: Budoff MJ et al.,
JACC 2018;72:434-447.
Design: 6,814 asymptomatic adults, ages 45–84, followed >15 years across 4 ethnic groups.
Findings:
- CAC was the strongest predictor of future coronary events, outperforming age, cholesterol, BP, and smoking combined.
- 10-yr event rate:
- CAC = 0 → 0.4–0.8 %
- CAC 1–100 → 3 %
- CAC 101–300 → 13 %
- CAC > 300 → >20 %
- Every doubling of CAC raised event risk ≈ 20–25 %.
Conclusion: CAC = 0 = “power of zero”; CAC > 100 = high-risk even if LDL and BP normal.
Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study (Germany)
Reference: Erbel R et al.,
Eur Heart J 2020;41:3504-3512.
Design: 4,814 adults, median follow-up 13 yrs.
Findings:
- Event-free survival:
- CAC = 0 → 99 % survival at 10 yrs.
- CAC > 400 → event rate > 25 %.
- CAC outperformed Framingham risk factors and all serum biomarkers.
Conclusion: CAC gives quantitative, independent risk discrimination across all ages and sexes.
St. Francis Heart Study (USA)
Reference: Arad Y et al.,
Circulation 2005;111:402–409.
Design: 4,903 asymptomatic adults followed 4 yrs.
Findings:
- Subjects in the top CAC quartile (>100) had a 10-fold increase in cardiac events vs CAC = 0.
- CAC predicted events independently of LDL, HDL, and CRP.
Conclusion: CAC directly measures disease burden — not just risk factors.
BioImage Study (USA)
Reference: Baber U et al.,
JACC Imaging 2016;9:1621-1633.
Design: 5,808 adults ≥ 55 yrs, 3-yr follow-up with carotid ultrasound, biomarkers, and CAC CT.
Findings:
- CAC was the single best predictor of events (AUC 0.79 vs 0.68 for carotid plaque).
- CAC = 0 subjects had annual event rate 0.1 % despite high risk-factor burden.
Conclusion: Imaging calcium beats all other non-invasive screening methods.
CARDIA (Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults)
Reference: Carr JJ et al.,
JAMA Cardiol 2017;2:391-399.
Design: 3,043 participants first scanned at mean age 40, followed >12 yrs.
Findings:
- Even small CAC > 0 in midlife predicted a 5- to 10-fold higher risk of events by age 50.
- Early CAC = “premature atherosclerosis” marker.
Conclusion: CAC predicts future disease decades before symptoms.
Key Meta-Analyses
| Study | Population | Key result |
|---|
| Pletcher et al., Arch Intern Med 2004 | 27 000+ people | Adding CAC to Framingham risk doubled C-statistic; net reclassification +25 %. |
| Polonsky et al., NEJM 2010 | 6 700 MESA | CAC improved risk discrimination far more than CRP, carotid IMT, or family history. |
| Yeboah et al., Eur Heart J 2012 | MESA subset | CAC was the only biomarker (of 30 tested) with significant independent predictive value. |
Overall Proof Summary
| Evidence type | Key outcome | Quantitative strength |
|---|
| >15 prospective cohorts | CAC predicts coronary events independent of all risk factors | HR ≈ 2.3 per SD; HR ≈ 0.1 for CAC = 0 |
| AUC / C-statistic improvement | +0.10–0.20 over Framingham models | Highest of any imaging or lab marker |
| Reclassification benefit (NRI) | 25–35 % of patients moved correctly between risk tiers | Proven clinical utility |
| Validation for low risk (CAC = 0) | 10-yr event rate < 1 % in all major studies | “Power of zero” established |
Clinical Consensus
- ACC/AHA 2018, ESC 2021, SCCT 2022, and USPSTF 2022 all recognize CAC scoring as the most accurate non-invasive method to refine ASCVD risk.
- CAC = 0 → “no statin, reassess in 5 yrs” (except smokers, diabetics, or LDL ≥ 190).
- CAC > 100 → “statin strongly recommended.”
Bottom line
