ArticleFrontiers in genetics2025
Impact of polygenic risk score (PRS) for coronary artery disease on physician decision-making and patient care.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have emerged as a promising tool for refining cardiovascular risk prediction, yet their real-world impact on physician decision-making remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate how the integration of a coronary artery disease (CAD) PRS with traditional clinical risk factors influences physician management strategies. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, open-label pilot study across three clinical sites. A total of 150 patients (aged 18-55 years, LDL-C ≤130 mg/dL, no history of diabetes or coronary artery disease) were recruited. Buccal swabs were collected for PRS analysis, and results were integrated with clinical data to generate personalized risk profiles. Physicians utilized these profiles during consultations and completed structured feedback surveys assessing PRS influence on their clinical decisions. Results: PRS findings impacted clinical decision-making in 67% of cases (100 participants). The most frequent physician response was raising patient awareness and offering patient education (73 cases), while emphasizing PRS as a tool for risk communication. In 4 specific cases, PRS findings led to new statin recommendations, while 23 cases resulted in other management modifications, including lifestyle adjustments and increased risk monitoring. Discussion: These findings highlight the potential of PRS in enhancing risk communication and clinical decision-making, primarily by reinforcing patient awareness rather than directly by altering pharmacologic management. Further research is needed to optimize PRS implementation and assess its long-term clinical impact.
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.