Key result
Diverse monogenic and polygenic architectures drive familial hypercholesterolemia with distinct clinical severity.
Why the study?
Familial hypercholesterolemia has been considered monogenic, but recent genetic analyses revealed polygenic and oligogenic forms with varying severity.
May prompt broader genetic evaluation in suspected FH; leaves open standardized polygenic scoring for clinical use.
Purpose of review Familial hypercholesterolemia has long been considered a monogenic disorder. However, recent advances in genetic analyses have revealed various forms of this disorder, including polygenic and oligogenic familial hypercholesterolemia. We review the current understanding of the genetic background of this disease. Recent findings Mutations in multiple alleles responsible for low-density lipoprotein regulation could contribute to the development of familial hypercholesterolemia, especially among patients with mutation-negative familial hypercholesterolemia. In oligogenic familial hypercholesterolemia, multiple rare genetic variations contributed to more severe familial hypercholesterolemia. Summary Familial hypercholesterolemia is a relatively common ‘genetic’ disorder associated with an extremely high risk of developing coronary artery disease. In addition to monogenic familial hypercholesterolemia, different types of familial hypercholesterolemia, including polygenic and oligogenic familial hypercholesterolemia, exist and have varying degrees of severity. Clinical and genetic assessments for familial hypercholesterolemia and clinical risk stratifications should be performed for accurate diagnosis, as should cascade screening and risk stratification for the offspring of affected patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tada et al. (2019) conducted a review in Familial hypercholesterolemia. Genetic variations (monogenic, polygenic, and oligogenic) was evaluated. Various genetic forms of familial hypercholesterolemia, including monogenic, polygenic, and oligogenic variations, contribute to the disease with varying degrees of clinical severity.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: