Genetic polymorphisms and cardiovascular outcomes in Chinese patients undergoing PCI and treated with clopidogrel and aspirin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Genetic polymorphisms of key proteins involved in clopidogrel absorption, metabolism, and action may contribute to variability in platelet inhibition in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but their impacts on cardiovascular outcomes remain unclear. Purpose To examine the associations between genetic polymorphisms and cardiovascular outcomes in Chinese patients undergoing PCI and treated with clopidogrel and aspirin. Methods This prospective cohort study consecutively enrolled 2,453 post-PCI patients treated with clopidogrel and aspirin. Adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation was measured by light transmission aggregometry. A total of 40 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of 18 genes selected according to published studies were investigated using an improved multiplex ligation detection reaction technique. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemic stroke within one year after PCI. Results We restricted the analyses to the first 1,452 patients who had finished one-year follow-up and complete data on genotyping and platelet aggregation. 44 (3.03%) patients suffered MACE. Among the 40 SNPs, only the A-allele carriers of CYP2C19*2 had a significant higher risk of MACE (adjusted HR 2.05; 95% CI, 1.01–4.19; p=0.048) and platelet aggregation than non-A-carriers after adjusting age, sex, MI presentation, and left ventricular ejection fraction. CYP2C19*3, CYP2B6 rs3745274, and PEAR1 rs12041331 variants were also significantly associated with platelet aggregation (all p<0.05) but not with MACE at 1 year. Conclusion About 54.2% of Chinese patients with PCI were A-allele carriers of CYP2C19*2, who face a two-fold higher risk of MACE than non-A-allele carriers in Chinese patients after PCI. It would help identify low clopidogrel responders and optimize antiplatelet therapy before drug administration. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): National Natural Science Funding of China
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".