ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2005
Impact of genetic testing on complex diseases.
Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gene-drug interaction in stroke.Stroke research and treatment · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWide applications for genetic testing in the clinical care of complex diseases have been discussed. However, it has never been quantified to what extent genetic testing could eventually be useful in the clinical care of common disorders. We aimed to quantify the theoretically possible utilization in common ischemic stroke, an example of a complex disease.
methodsWe computed the possible impact of genetic testing on risk assessment, secondary prevention and prognosis of ischemic stroke. This was done for hypothetical genotypes with different frequencies and effects.
resultsTo apply pharmacogenetic secondary prevention based on a genotype with a frequency of 10% and 33% risk reduction, 204 subjects would have to be screened and 110 given genotype specific treatment for 1 year, in order to prevent one recurrent stroke, compared with standard therapy. The application of genetic testing seems to be less promising in risk assessment and the assessment of prognosis of common ischemic stroke.
conclusionsThe highest impact of genetic testing on clinical practice of stroke will be in the areas of secondary prevention. Given the weak effects of reported susceptibility genotypes, it is theoretically unlikely that genetic screening will be used for the assessment of risk or prognosis of a complex disorder, except for Mendelian types of disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.