SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
GP6 polymorphisms and venous thromboembolism: a Chinese case-control study with cross-population assessment.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile genome-wide association studies having implicated the GP6 rs1613662 polymorphism as a risk factor for venous thrombosis, subsequent studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding this association.
objectivesHere, we performed a case-control study in a Chinese cohort to evaluate the association between rs1613662 and venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. We further conducted a comprehensive cross-population assessment by integrating multi-ethnic data to assess this association.
methodsWe recruited 225 patients with VTE and 203 healthy controls for the Chinese case-control study, with rs1613662 genotyped using the Sequenom assay. Additionally, we systematically integrated genotyping data from nine cohorts (with a total of 5,669 VTE cases and 8,976 controls) for the cross-population analysis.
resultsAnalysis of the Chinese cohort revealed no statistically significant association between rs1613662 and VTE susceptibility. However, the multi-ethnic meta-analysis revealed significant VTE risk associations for rs1613662 in both the additive (odds ratio [OR] = 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.07-1.22, P = 0.00014) and dominant models (OR = 1.16, 95% CI:1.07-1.25, P = 0.00019), but not in the recessive model (OR = 1.22, 95% CI:0.96-1.52, P = 0.082). Sensitivity analysis via the sequential exclusion of individual studies demonstrated remarkable stability.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that rs1613662 is associated with a modest but statistically significant increase in VTE susceptibility on average, with heterogeneous effect sizes across different populations. The observed ethnic heterogeneity suggests the necessity of additional investigation into population-specific genetic architectures. Integrated polygenic risk scores could be used to optimize risk stratification and develop preventive strategies against VTE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.