Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38390792›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2024

Genetic-Guided Pharmacotherapy for Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic and Critical Review of Economic Evaluations.

Ka Keat Lim, Rositsa Koleva-Kolarova, Hanin Farhana Kamaruzaman, Ahmad Amir Kamil, Phil Chowienczyk, Charles D A Wolfe, Julia Fox-Rushby

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ka Keat LimSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London London United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2340-4097
Rositsa Koleva-KolarovaHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health University of Oxford Oxford United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8924-4671
Hanin Farhana KamaruzamanHealth Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), School of Health and Wellbeing University of Glasgow Glasgow United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4926-5232
Ahmad Amir KamilSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London London United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7532-5158
Phil ChowienczykSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London London United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4507-038X
Charles D A WolfeSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London London United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8264-0981
Julia Fox-RushbySchool of Life Course & Population Sciences Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London London United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0748-0871
King's College London · GBMinistry of Health · MYSt Thomas' Hospital · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenetic-guided pharmacotherapy (PGx) is not recommended in clinical guidelines for coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to examine the extent and quality of evidence from economic evaluations of PGx in CAD and to identify variables influential in changing conclusions on cost-effectiveness. METHODS AND

resultsFrom systematic searches across 6 databases, 2 independent reviewers screened, included, and rated the methodological quality of economic evaluations of PGx testing to guide pharmacotherapy for patients with CAD. Of 35 economic evaluations included, most were model-based cost-utility analyses alone, or alongside cost-effectiveness analyses of PGx testing to stratify patients into antiplatelets (25/35), statins (2/35), pain killers (1/35), or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (1/35) to predict CAD risk (8/35) or to determine the coumadin doses (1/35). To stratify patients into antiplatelets (96/151 comparisons with complete findings of PGx versus non-PGx), PGx was more effective and more costly than non-PGx clopidogrel (28/43) but less costly than non-PGx prasugrel (10/15) and less costly and less effective than non-PGx ticagrelor (22/25). To predict CAD risk (51/151 comparisons), PGx using genetic risk scores was more effective and less costly than clinical risk score (13/17) but more costly than no risk score (16/19) or no treatment (9/9). The remaining comparisons were too few to observe any trend. Mortality risk was the most common variable (47/294) changing conclusions.

conclusionsEconomic evaluations to date found PGx to stratify patients with CAD into antiplatelets or to predict CAD risk to be cost-effective, but findings varied based on the non-PGx comparators, underscoring the importance of considering local practice in deciding whether to adopt PGx.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsDrug CostsHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsPharmacogenomic TestingPharmacogenomic VariantsPrecision MedicineRisk AssessmentHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsPlatelet Aggregation Inhibitorscardiovascular diseasecoronary artery diseaseeconomic evaluationgenetic testingpharmacogeneticssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38390792
PMCPMC10944053
OpenAlexW4392104445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.