医学
弗雷明翰风险评分
人口学
内科学
危险系数
冠心病
生命银行
无症状的
疾病
生物信息学
置信区间
生物
社会学
作者
Jacob Groenendyk,Philip Greenland,Sadiya S. Khan
标识
DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.3171
摘要
Importance Risk prediction for coronary heart disease (CHD) is a cornerstone of primary prevention strategies. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have emerged as a new approach to predict risk in asymptomatic people. Polygenic risk scores for CHD have been studied in several populations, but there is lack of agreement about the incremental value of PRS beyond traditional risk factor scores in the primary prevention of CHD. Observations This narrative review critically appraised the 5 most highly cited studies published through 2021 that also included a large number (>45 000) of single-nucleotide variations (formerly single-nucleotide polymorphisms) and evaluated the incremental value of PRS in CHD risk prediction according to published PRS reporting standards. The cohorts studied included the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study, FINRISK, the Framingham Heart Study, the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, and the UK Biobank. All of the studies focused predominantly on populations of European ancestry. The hazard ratio per standard deviation of PRS ranged from 1.24 (95% CI, 1.15-1.34) to 1.74 (95% CI, 1.61-1.86). The C statistic for PRS alone ranged from 0.549 to 0.623. The change in C statistic when PRS was added to a standard risk factor model ranged between −0.001 to +0.021. Net reclassification index was reported in 4 of the 5 studies and varied from 0.001 to 0.097. At a sensitivity (true-positive rate) of 90%, positive predictive values ranged from 1.8% to 16.6%, and false-positive rates ranged from 77.1% to 85.7%. Conclusions and Relevance In this review, PRS was significantly associated with CHD risk in all studies. The degree of improvement in C statistic and the net reclassification indexes when PRS was added to traditional risk scores ranged from negligible to modest. Based on established metrics to assess risk prediction scores, the addition of PRS to traditional risk scores does not appear to provide meaningful improvements in clinical decision-making in primary prevention populations.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI