Observational analysis revealed improved hypertension risk stratification in Korean adults, suggesting age-specific integration of genetic and clinical markers enhances predictive models.
Background Hypertension is a prevalent age-related condition with varying life risk factors. This study aimed to develop age-stratified prediction models integrating genetic risk scores (GRS) with clinical factors to improve hypertension risk stratification. Methods A total of 2159 Korean adults aged 20–86 years were stratified into younger (20–49 years) and older (≥50 years) cohorts. Genome-wide association analysis identified hypertension-associated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for constructing the GRS. Age-specific prediction models were developed and evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results In younger adults, a GRS4 based on four SNPs with consistent effect directions and strong effects was significantly associated with hypertension after adjusting for body mass index (BMI) and sex (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.79, P < 0.001). Including another SNP with a suggestive effect (GRS5) produced comparable results. In older adults, GRS1 (rs149026664) was significant in the unadjusted model (unadjusted OR = 2.72, P = 0.024), while GRS2 (including rs116861740) remained significant after adjustment for BMI and sex (adjusted OR = 2.65, P = 0.005). Predictive models combining BMI, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (ba-PWV), and GRS achieved strong performance, with area under the curve (AUC) = 0.821 (GRS4) and 0.809 (GRS5) in younger adults, and AUC = 0.766 (GRS1) and 0.765 (GRS2) in older adults. Conclusion Age-specific integration of GRS with clinical markers such as BMI and ba-PWV significantly improves hypertension prediction, offering actionable thresholds for precision prevention across age groups. These models provide clinically actionable tools for precision prevention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: