Pharmacogenetics in Cardiovascular Disease: The Challenge of Moving From Promise to Realization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pharmacogenetics in cardiovascular medicine brings the potential for personalized therapeutic strategies that improve efficacy and reduce harm. Studies evaluating the impact of genetic variation on pharmacologic effects have been undertaken for most major cardiovascular drugs, including antithrombotic agents, β-adrenergic receptor blockers, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Across these drug classes, many polymorphisms associated with pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, or surrogate outcomes have been identified. However, their impact on clinical outcomes and their ability to improve clinical practice remains unclear. This review will examine the current clinical evidence supporting pharmacogenetic testing in cardiovascular medicine, provide clinical guidance based on the current evidence, and identify further steps needed to determine the utility of pharmacogenetics in cardiovascular care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.084 | 0.088 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".