Semergen. 2026 Feb 6;52(4):102689. doi: 10.1016/j.semerg.2026.102689. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to review the clinical utility of Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) in predicting cardiovascular risk from a primary care perspective. A structured narrative review according to the PRISMA guidelines was conducted that included original studies from the last 10 years identified in the PubMed database, excluding those that did not correspond to observational or experimental study designs or were not published in English or Spanish. Publications were selected, and information on study design, PRS used, results, and statistical measures was extracted and synthesized. The QUADAS-2 tool was applied to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Of the 170 studies identified, 22 publications were selected, most of them cohort studies, all presenting an acceptable risk-of-bias profile. Across all studies, PRS showed a consistent association with cardiovascular events, particularly coronary artery disease. Studies conducted in multiethnic populations also produced promising results, supporting the extrapolation of findings. Research assessing the discriminative performance of PRS to more accurately identify high cardiovascular-risk patients yielded significant, though modest, improvements. In conclusion, PRS may be a useful tool for clinicians in primary care when aiming to determine cardiovascular risk with greater precision. The main limitations include the use of a single database and the fact that study selection and data extraction were conducted by one reviewer, which may increase the risk of selection and extraction bias.
PMID:41653897 | DOI:10.1016/j.semerg.2026.102689