Usefulness of the genetic risk score to identify phenocopies in families with familial hypercholesterolemia?

21Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is caused by mutations in LDLR (low-density lipoprotein receptor), APOB (apolipoprotein B), PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9), or APOE (apolipoprotein E) genes in approximately 80% of the cases. Polygenic forms of hypercholesterolemia may be present among patients clinically diagnosed with FH but with no identified mutation (FH mutation-negative (FH/M-)). To address whether polygenic forms may explain phenocopies in FH families, we calculated a 6-single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genetic risk score (GRS) in all members from five French FH families where a mutation was identified (FH/M+) as well as some phenocopies (FH/M-). In two families, three FH/M- patients present a high GRS suggesting a polygenic hypercholesterolemia for these phenocopies. However, a high GRS is also observed in nine FH/M+ patients and in four unaffected relatives from three families. These observations indicate that the GRS does not seem to be a good diagnostic tool at the individual level. Nevertheless, the GRS seems to be a contributor of the severity of hypercholesterolemia since patients who cumulate a mutation and a high GRS exhibit higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels when compared to patients with only FH (p = 0.054) or only polygenic hypercholesterolemia (p = 0.0039). In conclusion, the GRS can be used as a marker of the severity of hypercholesterolemia but does not seem to be a reliable tool to distinguish phenocopies within FH families.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ghaleb, Y., Elbitar, S., El Khoury, P., Bruckert, E., Carreau, V., Carrié, A., … Varret, M. (2018). Usefulness of the genetic risk score to identify phenocopies in families with familial hypercholesterolemia? European Journal of Human Genetics, 26(4), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-017-0078-y

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free