Tariq S. Marroush

Incorporating a Genetic Risk Score Into Coronary Heart Disease Risk Estimates: Effect on Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels (the MI-GENES Clinical Trial).

Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P=0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants (P=0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P=0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P<0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01936675.Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P =0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants ( P =0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P =0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P <0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: [NCT01936675][1]. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-33} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT01936675&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F133%2F12%2F1181.atom

Incorporating a Genetic Risk Score into Coronary Heart Disease Risk Estimates: Effect on LDL Cholesterol Levels (the MIGENES Clinical Trial)

Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P=0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants (P=0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P=0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P<0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01936675.Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P =0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants ( P =0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P =0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P <0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: [NCT01936675][1]. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-33} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT01936675&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F133%2F12%2F1181.atom

Shared decision-making following disclosure of coronary heart disease genetic risk: results from a randomized clinical trial

Whether disclosure of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) influences shared decision-making (SDM) regarding use of statins to reduce CHD risk is unknown. We randomized 207 patients, age 45–65 years, at intermediate CHD risk, and not on statins, to receive the 10-year risk of CHD based on conventional risk factors alone (n=103) or in combination with a genetic risk score (n=104). A genetic counselor disclosed this information followed by a physician visit for SDM regarding statin therapy. A novel decision aid was used in both encounters to disclose the CHD risk estimates and facilitate SDM regarding statin use. Patients reported their decision quality and physician visit satisfaction using validated surveys. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the SDM score, satisfaction with the clinical encounter, perception of the quality of the discussion or of participation in decision-making and physician visit satisfaction scores. Quantitative analyses of a random subset of 80 video-recorded encounters using the OPTION5 scale also showed no significant difference in SDM between the two groups. Disclosure of CHD genetic risk using an electronic health record-linked decision aid did not adversely affect SDM or patients’ satisfaction with the clinical encounter. Trial registration number NCT01936675; Results.

Plasma Osteopontin Levels and Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in the PEACE Trial

Osteopontin (OPN) is a secreted glycophosphoprotein that has a role in inflammation, immune response and calcification. We hypothesized that plasma OPN levels are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and preserved ejection fraction (EF) enrolled in the PEACE trial. We measured plasma OPN levels at baseline in 3567 CAD patients (mean age 64.5 ± 8.1 years, 81% men) by a sandwich chemiluminescent assay (coefficient of variation = 4.1%). OPN levels were natural log (Ln) transformed prior to analyses. We assessed whether Ln OPN levels were associated with the composite primary endpoint of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and hospitalization for heart failure using multiple event multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Adjustment was performed for: (a) age and sex; (b) additional potential confounders; and (c) a parsimonious set of statistically significant 10 variates. During a median follow-up of 4.8 years, 416 adverse cardiovascular outcomes occurred in 366 patients. Ln OPN was significantly associated with the primary endpoint; HR (95% CI) = 1.56 (1.27, 1.92); P <0.001, and remained significant after adjustment for age and sex [1.31 (1.06, 1.61); P = 0.01] and after adjustment for relevant covariates [1.24 (1.01, 1.52); P = 0.04]. In a secondary analysis of the individual event types, Ln OPN was significantly associated with incident hospitalization for heart failure: HR (95% CI) = 2.04 (1.44, 2.89); P <0.001, even after adjustment for age, sex and additional relevant covariates. In conclusion, in patients with stable CAD and preserved EF on optimal medical therapy, plasma OPN levels were independently associated with the composite incident endpoint of adverse cardiovascular outcomes as well as incident hospitalization for heart failure.

Effect of Disclosing Genetic Risk for Coronary Heart Disease on Information Seeking and SharingCLINICAL PERSPECTIVE: The MI-GENES Study (Myocardial Infarction Genes)

Background— Whether disclosing genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) to individuals influences information seeking and information sharing is not known. We hypothesized that disclosing genetic risk for CHD to individuals influences information seeking and sharing. Methods and Results— The MI-GENES study (Myocardial Infarction Genes) randomized participants (n=203) aged 45 to 65 years who were at intermediate CHD risk based on conventional risk factors and not on statins to receive their conventional risk score alone or also a genetic risk score based on 28 variants. CHD risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor and then discussed with a physician. Surveys assessing information seeking were completed before and after risk disclosure. Information sharing was assessed post-disclosure. Six-month post-disclosure, genetic risk score participants were more likely than conventional risk score participants to visit a website to learn about CHD (odds ratio [OR], 4.88 [confidence interval (CI), 1.55–19.13]; P=0.01), use the internet for information about how genetic factors affect CHD risk (OR, 2.11 [CI, 1.03–4.47]; P=0.04), access their CHD risk via a patient portal (OR, 2.99 [CI, 1.35–7.04]; P=0.01), and discuss their CHD risk with others (OR, 3.13 [CI, 1.41–7.47]; P=0.01), particularly their siblings (OR, 1.92 [CI, 1.06–3.51]; P=0.03), extended family (OR, 3.8 [CI, 1.37–12.38]; P=0.01), coworkers (OR, 2.42 [CI, 1.09–5.76]; P=0.03), and primary care provider (PCP; OR, 2.00 [CI, 1.08–3.75]; P=0.03). Conclusions— Disclosure of a genetic risk score for CHD increased information seeking and sharing. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01936675.

Incorporating a Genetic Risk Score Into Coronary Heart Disease Risk EstimatesCLINICAL PERSPECTIVE

Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P=0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants (P=0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P=0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P<0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01936675.Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P =0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants ( P =0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P =0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P <0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: [NCT01936675][1]. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-33} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT01936675&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F133%2F12%2F1181.atom

Incorporating a Genetic Risk Score Into Coronary Heart Disease Risk EstimatesCLINICAL PERSPECTIVE: Effect on Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels (the MI-GENES Clinical Trial)

Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P=0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants (P=0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P=0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P<0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01936675.Background— Whether knowledge of genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) affects health-related outcomes is unknown. We investigated whether incorporating a genetic risk score (GRS) in CHD risk estimates lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods and Results— Participants (n=203, 45–65 years of age, at intermediate risk for CHD, and not on statins) were randomly assigned to receive their 10-year probability of CHD based either on a conventional risk score (CRS) or CRS + GRS (+GRS). Participants in the +GRS group were stratified as having high or average/low GRS. Risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor followed by shared decision making regarding statin therapy with a physician. We compared the primary end point of LDL-C levels at 6 months and assessed whether any differences were attributable to changes in dietary fat intake, physical activity levels, or statin use. Participants (mean age, 59.4±5 years; 48% men; mean 10-year CHD risk, 8.5±4.1%) were allocated to receive either CRS (n=100) or +GRS (n=103). At the end of the study period, the +GRS group had a lower LDL-C than the CRS group (96.5±32.7 versus 105.9±33.3 mg/dL; P =0.04). Participants with high GRS had lower LDL-C levels (92.3±32.9 mg/dL) than CRS participants ( P =0.02) but not participants with low GRS (100.9±32.2 mg/dL; P =0.18). Statins were initiated more often in the +GRS group than in the CRS group (39% versus 22%, P <0.01). No significant differences in dietary fat intake and physical activity levels were noted. Conclusions— Disclosure of CHD risk estimates that incorporated genetic risk information led to lower LDL-C levels than disclosure of CHD risk based on conventional risk factors alone. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: [NCT01936675][1]. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-33} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT01936675&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F133%2F12%2F1181.atom

SERUM OSTEOPONTIN LEVELS AND ADVERSE OUTCOMES IN THE PREVENTION OF EVENTS WITH ANGIOTENSIN CONVERTING ENZYME INHIBITION TRIAL

Osteopontin is a secreted glycophosphoprotein that has a role in normal and pathological calcification, inflammation and immune response. We hypothesized that serum OPN levels are associated with incident adverse outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) enrolled in NHLBI’s