ArticleHypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979)2026
Value of Multiomics Over Clinical Risk Factors in Hypertension Prediction.
Article in Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic factors contributing to atherosclerosis.Current opinion in cardiology · 2026Review
- Machine learning and multi-omics technologies for precision cardiovascular medicine: advancing diagnosis, risk prediction, and therapeutic guidance.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral omics methods have been successfully used in hypertension prediction. However, the predictive ability of various multiomics data has not been compared in the same study sample, and it is unknown whether they provide additional predictive value over a good clinical risk factor score.
methodsClinical data augmented with modern multiomics methods (systolic blood pressure polygenic risk score, nuclear magnetic resonance metabolite profiling, and gut microbiota) were assessed in 2573 nonhypertensive participants of the FINRISK 2002 cohort. All combinations of these different methods were incorporated into cross-validated machine learning models to predict incident hypertension. Model performance of all combinations of these was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC). Information on incident hypertension was collected using nationwide healthcare register data.
resultsOver a mean follow-up of 18.0 years, 393 participants developed hypertension. Models that included the clinical and genetic data resulted in the highest mean AUC (0.735) compared with clinical risk factors alone (AUC=0.725). In the whole study sample, an SD increase in the polygenic risk score was associated with 29% (95% CI, 14%-46%) greater odds of incident hypertension after adjusting for clinical risk factors. Combining metabolome (AUC=0.709) or microbiota (AUC=0.720) data with clinical risk factors did not result in improved risk prediction.
conclusionsThe best prediction combination model for incident hypertension was the clinical model augmented with a polygenic risk score. These data suggest that polygenic risk scores provide limited incremental value over clinical risk factors when assessing risk of incident hypertension.
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.