ArticlePloS one2026
Genetic yield of next-generation sequencing for detecting monogenic familial hypercholesterolemia in uzbek patients with coronary artery disease.
Article in PloS one, 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
backgroundFamilial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is an inherited disorder with markedly elevated LDL-C and increased risk of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, most often caused by pathogenic variants in LDLR and less frequently APOB/PCSK9 (or recessive LDLRAP1). FH is commonly assessed using the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) score (definite >8, probable 6-8, possible 3-5). In Uzbekistan, genetic evidence for FH remains limited and largely based on candidate-variant studies, and the diagnostic yield of NGS for monogenic FH in CAD patients is not well defined.
aimFor the first time in Uzbekistan and Central Asia, to investigate FH-associated monogenic variants using next-generation sequencing (NGS) and to assess the validity of the DLCN criteria against genetic testing as the diagnostic reference standard in Uzbek patients with CAD and suspected FH.
methodsThis study included 95 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent targeted NGS of LDLR, APOB, PCSK9, and LDLRAP1. The suspected/phenotypic FH group comprised 56 patients: 53 with DLCN-predicted heterozygous FH (HeFH)-possible (3-5 points, n = 22), probable (6-8 points, n = 16), and definite (>8 points, n = 15)-and 3 siblings from one family with a homozygous FH (HoFH) phenotype. The control group included 39 CAD patients with hypercholesterolemia without an FH diagnosis (DLCN 1-2 points). Only pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were used for genetic confirmation of FH.
resultsPathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were detected in 10/53 (18.9%) DLCN-predicted HeFH patients and in all three HoFH siblings. Genetic confirmation rates (PPV) were 46.7% (7/15) in definite HeFH, 12.5% (2/16) in probable HeFH, and 4.5% (1/22) in possible HeFH; no P/LP variants were detected in controls (0/39). Using a DLCN >8 threshold, sensitivity was 70.0% (7/10) and specificity was 90.2% (74/82) in the CAD cohort excluding the HoFH family.
conclusionNGS confirmed the highest diagnostic yield in patients with DLCN >8, supporting its use as a practical threshold to prioritise genetic testing; however, monogenic FH may still be present in patients with probable or possible DLCN scores.
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.