ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential and cardiovascular disease: mechanistic insights, clinical implications, and the dawn of precision cardio-hematology.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. 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.
- Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a gene-specific biomarker of JAK2-driven inflammation across CHIP and myeloproliferative neoplasms.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) has substantially advanced our understanding of cardiovascular pathogenesis by demonstrating how somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem cells amplify the bone marrow-heart axis to accelerate atherosclerosis and heart failure, building upon the established role of hematopoietic cells in vascular inflammation. Characterized by the age-associated expansion of hematopoietic stem cell clones harboring somatic mutations-most commonly in TET2, DNMT3A, ASXL1, and JAK2-CHIP affects over 10% of individuals older than 70 years and confers a 1.5- to 2-fold increased risk of coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality, independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. This review synthesizes current evidence on the epidemiological associations, molecular mechanisms, and therapeutic implications of CHIP in cardiovascular disease. We critically examine how loss-of-function mutations in epigenetic regulators promote a pro-inflammatory macrophage phenotype through NLRP3 inflammasome activation and IL-1β/IL-6 signaling, thereby accelerating atherogenesis, plaque instability, and myocardial fibrosis. Notably, the cardiovascular impact of CHIP exhibits marked gene-specific heterogeneity: TET2 mutations confer the highest risk and demonstrate the greatest responsiveness to anti-inflammatory therapies, whereas DNMT3A mutations show more modest associations and may operate through distinct pathways. The CANTOS trial exploratory analyses and subsequent studies suggest that IL-1β inhibition with canakinumab and colchicine may preferentially benefit TET2-mutant CHIP carriers, suggesting a future of mutation-guided cardiovascular prevention. However, significant knowledge gaps remain, including the lack of prospective, genotype-stratified clinical trials and limited data in non-European populations. We propose that CHIP represents not merely a risk marker but a modifiable therapeutic target, and advocate for the emergence of "Cardio-Hematology" as a new subspecialty bridging hematology and cardiovascular medicine. As the field evolves from discovery to translation, precision approaches targeting specific CHIP genotypes may fundamentally transform cardiovascular risk stratification and treatment.
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.