Why the study?
Evaluating women with symptoms suggestive of CAD remains challenging, and the effect of an age/sex/gene expression score on their management in community settings needed evaluation.
Does an age/sex/gene expression score (ASGES) reduce unnecessary cardiac referrals in women with suspected obstructive CAD?
Does an age/sex/gene expression score (ASGES) reduce unnecessary cardiac referrals in women with suspected obstructive CAD?
The use of an age/sex/gene expression score (ASGES) in women with suspected obstructive CAD is associated with significantly lower rates of further cardiac referral in those with low scores, without a significant increase in 1-year MACE.
Low ASGES was associated with reduced testing in women with suspected CAD; leaves open whether test-guided care improves outcomes.
Background: Evaluating women with symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD) remains challenging. A blood-based precision medicine test yielding an age/sex/gene expression score (ASGES) has shown clinical validity in the diagnosis of obstructive CAD. We assessed the effect of the ASGES on the management of women with suspected obstructive CAD in a community-based registry. Materials and Methods: The prospective PRESET (A Registry to Evaluate Patterns of Care Associated with the Use of Corus ® CAD in Real World Clinical Care Settings) Registry (NCT01677156) enrolled 566 patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of stable obstructive CAD from 21 United States primary care practices from 2012 to 2014. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and referrals to cardiology or further functional and/or anatomical cardiac studies after ASGES testing were collected for this subgroup analysis of women from the PRESET Registry. Patients were followed for 1-year post-ASGES testing. Results: This study cohort included 288 women with a median age 57 years. The median body mass index was 29.2, with hyperlipidemia and hypertension present in 48% and 43% of patients, respectively. Median ASGES was 8.5 (range 1–40), with 218 (76%) patients having low (≤15) ASGES. Clinicians referred 9% (20/218) low ASGES versus 44% (31/70) elevated ASGES women for further cardiac evaluation (odds ratio 0.14, p < 0.0001, adjusted for patient demographics and clinical covariates). Across the score range, higher ASGES were associated with a higher likelihood of posttest cardiac referral. At 1-year follow-up, low ASGES women experienced fewer major adverse cardiac events than elevated ASGES women (1.3% vs. 4.2% respectively, p = 0.16). Conclusions: Incorporation of ASGES into the diagnostic workup demonstrated clinical utility by helping clinicians identify women less likely to benefit from further cardiac evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gül et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: