Cardiovascular Pharmacogenetics: From Discovery of Genetic Association to Clinical Adoption of Derived Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent breakthroughs in human genetics and in information technologies have markedly expanded our understanding at the molecular level of the response to drugs, i.e., pharmacogenetics (PGx), across therapy areas. This review is restricted to PGx for cardiovascular (CV) drugs. First, we examined the PGx information in the labels approved by regulatory agencies in Europe, Japan, and North America and related recommendations from expert panels. Out of 221 marketed CV drugs, 36 had PGx information in their labels approved by one or more agencies. The level of annotations and recommendations varied markedly between agencies and expert panels. Clopidogrel is the only CV drug with consistent PGx recommendation (i.e., "actionable"). This situation prompted us to dissect the steps from discovery of a PGx association to clinical translation. We found 101 genome-wide association studies that investigated the response to CV drugs or drug classes. These studies reported significant associations for 48 PGx traits mapping to 306 genes. Six of these 306 genes are mentioned in the corresponding PGx labels or recommendations for CV drugs. Genomic analyses also highlighted the wide between-population differences in risk allele frequencies and the individual load of actionable PGx variants. Given the high attrition rate and the long road to clinical translation, additional work is warranted to identify and validate PGx variants for more CV drugs across diverse populations and to demonstrate the utility of PGx testing. To that end, pre-emptive PGx combining genomic profiling with electronic medical records opens unprecedented opportunities to improve healthcare, for CV diseases and beyond. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Despite spectacular breakthroughs in human molecular genetics and information technologies, consistent evidence supporting PGx testing in the cardiovascular area is limited to a few drugs. Additional work is warranted to discover and validate new PGx markers and demonstrate their utility. Pre-emptive PGx combining genomic profiling with electronic medical records opens unprecedented opportunities to improve healthcare, for CV diseases and beyond.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".