ArticleAmerican journal of preventive cardiology2026
Polygenic risk scores enhance LDL cholesterol-based risk stratification for coronary artery disease.
Article in American journal of preventive cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validated Polygenic Risk Scores Complement Monogenic Testing in South Asian Patients With Familial Hypercholesterolemia.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- The Standard Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factor Paradox Revisited: Does the Count Matter?JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Polygenic risk scores and LDL cholesterol: Improving precision in primary cardiovascular prevention.American journal of preventive cardiology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Genetic risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) can be estimated using polygenic risk scores (PRS), but greater clarity is needed on how PRS might inform clinical risk assessment and prevention. We assessed the risk for CAD jointly conferred by LDL-C and CAD PRS relative to established treatment thresholds. Methods: This study followed 257,158 UK Biobank (UKBB) participants and 67,668 from the Results: Over a median (IQR) follow-up of 13.5 (12.8-14.2) years, 13,886 (5.4%) participants developed CAD in UKBB. Higher CAD PRS was associated with CAD risk that was comparable to, or in some strata exceeding, that associated with LDL-C ≥ 190 mg/dL by pairwise Wald tests at progressively lower LDL-C concentrations in both cohorts. Conclusions: Individuals with high genetic risk and moderate LDL-C elevations, representing 14.8% of the study population, have CAD risk comparable to or greater than that of SH. Consideration of dynamic LDL-C thresholds among those with high CAD PRS may identify individuals with risk sufficiently high to warrant preventive therapy.
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.