ReviewThe Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology2026
Polygenic risk scores for cardiovascular disease: clinical utility and limitations.
Review in The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of mortality worldwide, highlighting the need for improved risk prediction and prevention strategies. Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS), derived from genome-wide association studies (GWAS), offer a novel approach to estimating an individual's genetic predisposition to conditions such as coronary artery disease (CAD), atrial fibrillation (AF), and heart failure (HF). MAIN TEXT: PRS can improve early risk stratification, particularly among individuals with high genetic susceptibility who may not yet present traditional risk factors. Evidence suggests that PRS enhances risk prediction in younger populations and may inform targeted prevention efforts. However, several limitations constrain their clinical utility. These include limited predictive power relative to conventional risk models, a lack of diverse population representation in GWAS, and challenges in incorporating PRS into routine clinical workflows.
conclusionsWhile PRS holds promise for advancing personalized cardiovascular care, its clinical implementation requires overcoming key limitations. Increasing diversity in genetic research and integrating PRS with established clinical risk tools are critical steps toward realizing their full potential in CVD prevention and management.
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.