Validation of Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons in the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population cohort

Abstract

Abstract Aims The European Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons (OP) models are recommended to identify individuals at high 10-year risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Independent validation and assessment of clinical utility is needed. This study aims to assess discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of low-risk SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP. Methods and results Validation in individuals aged 40–69 years (SCORE2) and 70–79 years (SCORE2-OP) without baseline CVD or diabetes from the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer (EPIC) Norfolk prospective population study. We compared 10-year CVD risk estimates with observed outcomes (cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke). For SCORE2, 19 560 individuals (57% women) had 10-year CVD risk estimates of 3.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6–3.7] vs. observed 3.8% (95% CI 3.6–4.1) [observed (O)/expected (E) ratio 1.0 (95% CI 1.0–1.1)]. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.75 (95% CI 0.74–0.77), with underestimation of risk in men [O/E 1.4 (95% CI 1.3–1.6)] and overestimation in women [O/E 0.7 (95% CI 0.6–0.8)]. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed clinical benefit. Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2-Older Persons in 3113 individuals (58% women) predicted 10-year CVD events in 10.2% (95% CI 10.1–10.3) vs. observed 15.3% (95% CI 14.0–16.5) [O/E ratio 1.6 (95% CI 1.5–1.7)]. The AUC was 0.63 (95% CI 0.60–0.65) with underestimation of risk across sex and risk ranges. Decision curve analysis showed limited clinical benefit. Conclusion In a UK population cohort, the SCORE2 low-risk model showed fair discrimination and calibration, with clinical benefit for preventive treatment initiation decisions. In contrast, in individuals aged 70–79 years, SCORE2-OP demonstrated poor discrimination, underestimated risk in both sexes, and limited clinical utility.