Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

Prediction of HIV-1 Coreceptor Usage Tropism by Sequence Analysis using a Genotypic Approach
Published on: December 1, 2011
Predictive Performance of Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction Algorithms in People Living With HIV
Rosan A van Zoest1,2, Matthew Law3, Caroline A Sabin4
1Department of Global Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam Universitair Medische Centra (Amsterdam UMC), University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Insights
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk algorithms perform adequately in people living with HIV (PLWH), but clinicians must recognize their limitations, including potential underestimation of risk in certain groups.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Infectious Diseases
- Public Health
Background:
- People living with HIV (PLWH) have an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD).
- Traditional CVD risk algorithms may not accurately reflect risk in PLWH.
- This study evaluates the performance of commonly used CVD risk algorithms in PLWH.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the predictive performance of four established CVD risk algorithms in a large cohort of people living with HIV.
- To compare the discrimination and calibration of these algorithms within this specific population.
- To inform clinical practice regarding the use of CVD risk prediction tools in PLWH.
Main Methods:
- Utilized data from 16,070 PLWH in the Netherlands (2000-2016).
- Evaluated four algorithms: D:A:D, SCORE-NL, FRS, and PCE.
- Assessed model discrimination (Harrell's C-statistic) and calibration (observed-expected ratios, calibration plots, goodness-of-fit tests).
Main Results:
- All algorithms demonstrated acceptable discrimination (C-statistic 0.73-0.79).
- D:A:D, SCORE-NL, and PCE underestimated CVD risk; FRS overestimated it.
- D:A:D, FRS, and PCE showed the best fit but still had statistically significant lack of fit, particularly underestimating risk in low-risk groups.
Conclusions:
- Existing CVD risk algorithms perform reasonably well in PLWH, though SCORE-NL performed the poorest.
- Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of these algorithms, including potential lack of fit and underestimation in low-risk individuals.
- Prediction algorithms remain valuable tools in clinical practice for managing CVD risk in PLWH, with careful consideration of their performance characteristics.
Background:
People living with HIV (PLWH) experience a higher cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Yet, traditional algorithms are often used to estimate CVD risk. We evaluated the performance of 4 commonly used algorithms.
Setting:
The Netherlands.
Methods:
We used data from 16,070 PLWH aged ≥18 years, who were in care between 2000 and 2016, had no pre-existing CVD, had initiated first combination antiretroviral therapy >1 year ago, and had available data on CD4 count, smoking status, cholesterol, and blood pressure. Predictive performance of 4 algorithms [Data Collection on Adverse Effects of Anti-HIV Drugs Study (D:A:D); Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation adjusted for national data (SCORE-NL); Framingham CVD Risk Score (FRS); and American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE)] was evaluated using a Kaplan-Meier approach. Model discrimination was assessed using Harrell's C-statistic. Calibration was assessed using observed-versus-expected ratios, calibration plots, and Greenwood-Nam-D'Agostino goodness-of-fit tests.
Results:
All algorithms showed acceptable discrimination (Harrell's C-statistic 0.73-0.79). On a population level, D:A:D, SCORE-NL, and PCE slightly underestimated, whereas FRS slightly overestimated CVD risk (observed-versus-expected ratios 1.35, 1.38, 1.14, and 0.92, respectively). D:A:D, FRS, and PCE best fitted our data but still yielded a statistically significant lack of fit (Greenwood-Nam-D'Agostino χ ranged from 24.57 to 34.22, P < 0.05). Underestimation of CVD risk was particularly observed in low-predicted CVD risk groups.
Conclusions:
All algorithms perform reasonably well in PLWH, with SCORE-NL performing poorest. Prediction algorithms are useful for clinical practice, but clinicians should be aware of their limitations (ie, lack of fit and slight underestimation of CVD risk in low-risk groups).
Related Concept Videos
Predicting Molecular Geometry
Prediction Intervals
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y.
End Point Prediction: Gran Plot
For potentiometric titration, the Gran plot is created by plotting...
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Predicting Reaction Outcomes
Predicting Products: Substitution vs. Elimination
The following factors can influence the mechanisms competing against each other:

