Prevalence of cardiovascular events in genetically confirmed versus unconfirmed familial hypercholesterolaemia

Authors

  • Tina Z Khan Harefield Hospital, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Hill End Road, Harefield UB9 6JH, United Kingdom
  • Jane Breen Harefield Hospital, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Hill End Road, Harefield UB9 6JH, United Kingdom
  • Emma Neves Harefield Hospital, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Hill End Road, Harefield UB9 6JH, United Kingdom
  • Richard Grocott-Mason Harefield Hospital, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Hill End Road, Harefield UB9 6JH, United Kingdom
  • Mahmoud Barbir Harefield Hospital, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust Hospital, Hill End Road, Harefield UB9 6JH, United Kingdom

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21542/gcsp.2020.24

Abstract

Introduction: Genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is not yet established for widespread use internationally to provide diagnostic confirmation, in part due to high cost and resource requirement. We need to establish whether genetic testing is clinically justified in terms of risk stratification and prediction of cardiovascular events.

Methods: We performed a single tertiary cardiac centre retrospective evaluation of patients with FH managed within our genetic screening service. We evaluated the prevalence of cardiovascular events in genetically confirmed cases of FH compared to those unconfirmed upon genetic testing, to assess whether gene positivity confers a higher risk phenotype. We also compared the clinical characteristics of the genetically confirmed and unconfirmed group.

Results: Amongst adult patients (≥18 years) with genetically confirmed heterozygous FH (n=87), 34% (30/87) had one or more documented CV events. In comparison a lower event rate was observed in adult patients with genetically unconfirmed FH (n=170) with 25% (42/170) experiencing one or more documented CV events. Additional cardiovascular risk factors were more prevalent in the unconfirmed group including hypertension, co- morbidities, higher age and body mass index which may have modified the difference in cardiovascular risk.

Conclusion: Genetic testing in FH may be clinically justified and appears to identify a subset of patients with higher risk of cardiovascular events. However, the risk difference is modified by alternative cardiovascular risk factors and co-morbidities which may be more prevalent in genetically unconfirmed FH.

Downloads

Published

2020-12-06

Issue

Section

Research articles