Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aims Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is the most common genetic disorder in medicine, with a prevalence of 1/250. Affected individuals have elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and an increased lifetime risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The diagnosis of FH is based on algorithms that include LDL-C levels, physical manifestations, family history of high LDL-C and premature ASCVD, and, more recently, genetic testing. We sought to determine the impact of genetic testing on the: 1) diagnosis of ‘definite familial hypercholesterolemia’, 2) initiation and adherence of lipid-lowering therapy and 3) risk of ASCVD. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, pooling odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for ASCVD from studies comparing risk estimates in individuals harboring FH-causing variants and unaffected individuals. Results After screening 3304 unique publications, 56 studies were included in the analysis. 1) Genetic testing provided confirmation of FH in 28–80%, over clinical criteria alone, depending on the diagnostic algorithm and the method of analysis. In two large population-based studies comprising 76,751 individuals, an FH-causing variant was identified in only 1.7–2.5% of subjects with an LDL-C > 4.9 mmol/L (190 mg/dL). 2) A confirmed molecular diagnosis increased lipid-lowering therapy adherence (five studies, n = 4181 definite FH). 3) Loss-of-function variant of the LDLR were at a markedly increased risk of myocardial infarction (odds ratio 6.77, 95% confidence interval 4.75–9.66), and patients with a milder (hypomorphic) pathogenic LDLR change had a 4.4-fold increase in risk (odds ratio 4.4, 95% confidence interval 2.34–8.26), compared with controls. Conclusion DNA sequencing confirms the diagnosis of FH but has a poor yield in unselected patients whose sole criterion is an elevated LDL-C. Initiation and adherence to treatment is improved. The risk of ASCVD is 4.4- to 6.8-fold increased in patients with an FH-causing variant compared with controls, depending on the severity of the DNA change.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: