ArticlePloS one2024
Clinical use of polygenic risk scores for detection of peripheral artery disease and cardiovascular events.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnosis models to predict peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review and meta analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in Peripheral Artery Disease: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association.Circulation. Population health and outcomes · 2026Review
- Cardiac echocardiographic analysis with multi-scale effective fusion module: a novel stroke prediction approach.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- A Genetic Risk Prediction Model for Coronary Artery Disease Integrating CYP17A1 Polymorphisms and Clinical Variables in a Chinese Population.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence system for predicting hand-foot skin reaction induced by vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An interpretable machine learning model with demographic variables and dietary patterns for ASCVD identification: from U.S. NHANES 1999-2018.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Optimized machine learning framework for cardiovascular disease diagnosis: a novel ethical perspective.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Article
- Large Language Models in Healthcare: A Bibliometric Analysis and Examination of Research Trends.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Independent prognostic importance of the albumin-corrected anion gap in critically ill patients with congestive heart failure: a retrospective study from MIMIC-IV database.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- An e-learning platform for clinical reasoning in cardiovascular diseases: a study reporting on learner and tutor satisfaction.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- A novel recommender framework with chatbot to stratify heart attack risk.Discover medicine · 2024Article
- An exercise prescription algorithm for clinicians to use with their patients with cardiovascular disease risk factors.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We have previously shown that polygenic risk scores (PRS) can improve risk stratification of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in a large, retrospective cohort. Here, we evaluate the potential of PRS in improving the detection of PAD and prediction of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and adverse events (AE) in an institutional patient cohort. We created a cohort of 278 patients (52 cases and 226 controls) and fit a PAD-specific PRS based on the weighted sum of risk alleles. We built traditional clinical risk models and machine learning (ML) models using clinical and genetic variables to detect PAD, MACCE, and AE. The models' performances were measured using the area under the curve (AUC), net reclassification index (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and Brier score. We also evaluated the clinical utility of our PAD model using decision curve analysis (DCA). We found a modest, but not statistically significant improvement in the PAD detection model's performance with the inclusion of PRS from 0.902 (95% CI: 0.846-0.957) (clinical variables only) to 0.909 (95% CI: 0.856-0.961) (clinical variables with PRS). The PRS inclusion significantly improved risk re-classification of PAD with an NRI of 0.07 (95% CI: 0.002-0.137), p = 0.04. For our ML model predicting MACCE, the addition of PRS did not significantly improve the AUC, however, NRI analysis demonstrated significant improvement in risk re-classification (p = 2e-05). Decision curve analysis showed higher net benefit of our combined PRS-clinical model across all thresholds of PAD detection. Including PRS to a clinical PAD-risk model was associated with improvement in risk stratification and clinical utility, although we did not see a significant change in AUC. This result underscores the potential clinical utility of incorporating PRS data into clinical risk models for prevalent PAD and the need for use of evaluation metrics that can discern the clinical impact of using new biomarkers in smaller populations.
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.