ReviewCurrent opinion in lipidology2017
Leveraging information from genetic risk scores of coronary atherosclerosis.
Review in Current opinion in lipidology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Tools for Coronary Risk Assessment in Type 2 Diabetes: A Cohort Study From the ACCORD Clinical Trial.Diabetes care · 2018Trial
- Frequency and phenotype consequence of APOC3 rare variants in patients with very low triglyceride levels.BMC medical genomics · 2018Article
- Genome-Wide Association Studies of Coronary Artery Disease: Recent Progress and Challenges Ahead.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2018Review
- Cardiovascular Risk Factor Burden in Veterans and Non-Veterans with Parkinson Disease.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2018Article
- Genetic Risk Scores in Premature Coronary Artery Disease: Still Only One Piece of the Prevention Puzzle.Circulation. Genomic and precision medicine · 2018Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewGenome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified ∼60 loci for coronary artery disease (CAD). Through genetic risk scores (GRSs), investigators are leveraging this genomic information to gain insights on both the fundamental mechanisms driving these associations as well as their utility in improving risk prediction. RECENT
findingsGRSs of CAD track with the earliest atherosclerosis lesions in the coronary including fatty streaks and uncomplicated raised lesions. In multiple cohort studies, they predict incident CAD events independent of all traditional and lifestyle risk factors. The incorporation of SNPs with suggestive but not genome-wide association in GWAS into GRSs often increases the strength of these associations. GRS may also predict recurrent events and identify patients most likely to respond to statins. The effect of the GRS on discrimination metrics remains modest but the minimal degree of improvement needed for clinical utility is unknown. SUMMARY: Most novel loci for CAD identified through GWAS facilitate the formation of coronary atherosclerosis and stratify individuals based on their underlying burden of coronary atherosclerosis. GRSs may one day be routinely used in clinical practice to not only assess the risk of incident events but also to predict who will respond best to established prevention strategies.
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.