Table 3.
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
---|---|---|---|
Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | |||
Age, per y | 0.982 (0.959, 1.006) | 0.977 (0.954, 1.001) | 0.973 (0.950, 0.997) |
Diabetes (vs none) | 1.785 (1.197, 2.661) | 1.623 (1.079, 2.442) | 1.590 (1.059, 2.385) |
Triglyceride, per 10 mg/dL | 1.020 (1.003, 1.037) | 1.018 (1.001, 1.035) | 1.017 (1.000, 1.033) |
CACS 100 to 400 (vs <400) | 2.018 (1.180, 3.451) | 2.122 (1.236, 3.642) | |
CACS >400 (vs <400) | 2.049 (1.203, 3.489) | 2.185 (1.285, 3.715) | |
Nonculprit CT-HRP (vs none) | 2.202 (1.237, 3.918) | ||
Harrell’s C, % (bootstrap SE)* | 60.67 (3.36) | 63.19 (2.83) | 65.81 (2.69) |
Two-sided P for c-increment*† | 0.336 | 0.144 | |
Minus-2 times log likelihood | 1048.6 | 1039.4 | 1033.3 |
Likelihood ratio P† | 0.010 | 0.049 |
CACS indicates coronary artery calcium score; CT-HRP, computed tomography–verified high-risk plaque; SE, standard error.
Based on 500 bootstrap samples.
Comparison between adjacent models using bootstrap SE (Models 1 vs 2 or Models 2 vs 3).