Table 4.

Comparison of C-statistics for Discriminating CHD and CVD Risks Between Models with and Without CAC Density

	DM (n = 668)	MetS (n = 1122)	Neither DM/MetS (n = 2028)	Total (n = 3818)
CHD
Model 1	0.60†	0.64§	0.63‡	0.63§
Model 2	0.67	0.70†	0.70	0.69*
Model 3	0.67	0.70*	0.70	0.70
Model 4	0.67	0.72	0.70	0.70
CVD
Model 1	0.59‡	0.65†	0.66§	0.66§
Model 2	0.66	0.69	0.70	0.69*
Model 3	0.66	0.69	0.70	0.69
Model 4	0.67	0.70	0.71	0.70

Model 1 (Base model): 10-year ASCVD risk score + race/ethnicity + education + BMI + statin therapy

Model 2: Base model + ln(Agatston)

Model 3: Base model + ln(Volume)

Model 4: Base model + ln(Volume) + CAC Density

Harrell’s c-statistics were compared between model 4 versus model 1, 2 or 3

ASCVD  Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, BMI   Body mass index, CAC  Coronary artery calcium, CHD   Coronary heart disease, CVD  Cardiovascular disease, DM  Diabetes mellitus, MetS , Metabolic syndrome

*p < 0.05, †p < 0.01, ‡p < 0.001, § p < 0.0001