ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)2016
Marginal role for 53 common genetic variants in cardiovascular disease prediction.
Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- A 19-SNP coronary heart disease gene score profile in subjects with type 2 diabetes: the coronary heart disease risk in type 2 diabetes (CoRDia study) study baseline characteristics.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2016Trial
- Prognostic Modelling Studies of Coronary Heart Disease-A Systematic Review of Conventional and Genetic Risk Factor Studies.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Review
- Personalization of medical treatments in oncology: time for rethinking the disease concept to improve individual outcomes.The EPMA journal · 2021Review
- Genetics of Cardiovascular Disease: How Far Are We from Personalized CVD Risk Prediction and Management?International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- When will individuals meet their personalized probabilities? A philosophical note on risk prediction.European journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
- Preventive Cardiology and Risk Assessment: Beyond LDL.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2020Review
- The Gene Score for Predicting Hypertriglyceridemia: New Insights from a Czech Case-Control Study.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2019Article
- Genetic risk factors identified in populations of European descent do not improve the prediction of osteoporotic fracture and bone mineral density in Chinese populations.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Promises, promises, and precision medicine.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2019Review
- Prediction of treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis patients using genome-wide SNP data.Genetic epidemiology · 2018Article
- Predictive accuracy of combined genetic and environmental risk scores.Genetic epidemiology · 2018Article
- Cardiovascular Risk Stratification: From Phenotype to Genotype?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2018Article
- Development and validation of QRISK3 risk prediction algorithms to estimate future risk of cardiovascular disease: prospective cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe investigated discrimination and calibration of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scores when genotypic was added to phenotypic information. The potential of genetic information for those at intermediate risk by a phenotype-based risk score was assessed.
methodsData were from seven prospective studies including 11 851 individuals initially free of CVD or diabetes, with 1444 incident CVD events over 10 years' follow-up. We calculated a score from 53 CVD-related single nucleotide polymorphisms and an established CVD risk equation 'QRISK-2' comprising phenotypic measures. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), detection rate for given false-positive rate (FPR) and net reclassification improvement (NRI) index were estimated for gene scores alone and in addition to the QRISK-2 CVD risk score. We also evaluated use of genetic information only for those at intermediate risk according to QRISK-2.
resultsThe AUROC was 0.635 for QRISK-2 alone and 0.623 with addition of the gene score. The detection rate for 5% FPR improved from 11.9% to 12.0% when the gene score was added. For a 10-year CVD risk cut-off point of 10%, the NRI was 0.25% when the gene score was added to QRISK-2. Applying the genetic risk score only to those with QRISK-2 risk of 10%-<20% and prescribing statins where risk exceeded 20% suggested that genetic information could prevent one additional event for every 462 people screened.
conclusionThe gene score produced minimal incremental population-wide utility over phenotypic risk prediction of CVD. Tailored prediction using genetic information for those at intermediate risk may have clinical utility.
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.