ArticleJACC. CardioOncology2024
Use of Polygenic Risk Score for Prediction of Heart Failure in Cancer Survivors.
Article in JACC. CardioOncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk-guided cardioprotection in cardio-oncology.Nature cardiovascular research · 2026Review
- Research Priorities and Future Directions in Cardio-Oncology.Current treatment options in oncology · 2026Review
- Integrating Polygenic Scores with Clinical, Lifestyle, and Social Risk Factors to Improve Heart Failure Risk Prediction.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2026Article
- The continuum of prevention and heart failure in cardiovascular medicine: A joint scientific statement from the Heart Failure Society of America and the American Society for Preventive Cardiology.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Review
- Surveillance of left ventricular function among cancer survivors.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2025Article
- Development of an Electronic Medical Record-Based Score for Heart Failure Prediction in Cancer Survivors.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Genetic Background in Patients with Cancer Therapy-Induced Cardiomyopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Genomics for Improving Heart Failure Risk Assessment in Cancer Patients.JACC. CardioOncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The risk for heart failure (HF) is increased among cancer survivors, but predicting individual HF risk is difficult. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for HF prediction summarize the combined effects of multiple genetic variants specific to the individual. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare clinical HF prediction models with PRS in both cancer and noncancer populations. Methods: Cancer and HF diagnoses were identified using International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision codes. HF risk was calculated using the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) HF score (ARIC-HF). The PRS for HF (PRS-HF) was calculated according to the Global Biobank Meta-analysis Initiative. The predictive performance of the ARIC-HF and PRS-HF was compared using the area under the curve (AUC) in both cancer and noncancer populations. Results: After excluding 2,644 participants with HF prior to consent, 440,813 participants without cancer (mean age 57 years, 53% women) and 43,720 cancer survivors (mean age 60 years, 65% women) were identified at baseline. Both the ARIC-HF and PRS-HF were significant predictors of incident HF after adjustment for chronic kidney disease, overall health rating, and total cholesterol. The PRS-HF performed poorly in predicting HF among cancer (AUC: 0.552; 95% CI: 0.539-0.564) and noncancer (AUC: 0.561; 95% CI: 0.556-0.566) populations. However, the ARIC-HF predicted incident HF in the noncancer population (AUC: 0.804; 95% CI: 0.800-0.808) and provided acceptable performance among cancer survivors (AUC: 0.748; 95% CI: 0.737-0.758). Conclusions: The prediction of HF on the basis of conventional risk factors using the ARIC-HF score is superior compared to the PRS, in cancer survivors, and especially among the noncancer population.
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.