Researchers presented data at the the annual scientific sessions of the American Heart Association showing that screening high-sensitivity C-reactive protein was not useful in refining cardiovascular risk assessment beyond that provided by the classic risk factors.
The data — from a new secondary analysis of the ASCOT (the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial) trial — throw into question the biomarker’s appropriate role in clinical practice. Our reporter Bruce Jancin was in Chicago and talked with Dr. Donald Lloyd-Jones, who was tasked with discussing the study’s findings at the meeting. Dr. Lloyd-Jones is a professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University in Chicago.
We have to remember that this is actually a secondary analysis — a post-hoc analysis — of a previously published trial. So we should take it with a grain of salt.
You can read Bruce’s story online at Internal Medicine News, where you can read more coverage of the AHA meeting.
I think like any part of clinical medicine, CRP has to be taken in context of the presentation, and also as one of a number of tests. It is most useful when initially elevated in an inflammatory condition and starts to decline in successful response to treatment – but how do you know it’s successful? By looking at the patient.