1932

Abstract

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, despite decades of research focused on disease pathogenesis, we still lack a sufficient pharmacopeia for preventing CAD. The failure of many novel cardiovascular drugs to improve clinical outcomes reflects the major substantial challenge of drug development: identifying causal mechanisms that can be therapeutically manipulated to lower disease risk. Identifying genetic variants that are associated with risk of CAD has emerged as a clear path toward improving our understanding of the underlying mechanisms that lead to disease and to the development of new therapies. Here, we review the potential utility and limitations of using human genetics to guide the identification of therapeutic targets for CAD.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-med-041717-085853
2019-01-27
2024-04-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/med/70/1/annurev-med-041717-085853.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-med-041717-085853&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. 1.  Wang H, Naghavi M, Allen C et al. 2016. Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 388:1459–544
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 2.  Dawber TR, Moore FE, Mann GV 1957. Coronary heart disease in the Framingham study. Am. J. Public Health Nations Health 47:4–24
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.  Kannel WB, Dawber TR, Kagan A et al. 1961. Factors of risk in the development of coronary heart disease—six-year follow-up experience: the Framingham Study. Ann. Intern. Med. 55:33–50
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.  Khavjou O, Phelps D, Leib A 2016. Projection of Cardiovascular Disease Prevalence and Costs: 20152035 Washington, DC: Am. Heart Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 5.  DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG, Hansen RW 2016. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: new estimates of R&D costs. J. Health Econ. 47:20–33
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 6.  Butler J, Tahhan AS, Georgiopoulou VV et al. 2015. Trends in characteristics of cardiovascular clinical trials 2001–2012. Am. Heart J. 170:263–72
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.  Kaitin KI, DiMasi JA 2011. Pharmaceutical innovation in the 21st century: new drug approvals in the first decade, 2000–2009. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 89:183–88
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 8.  Hwang TJ, Lauffenburger JC, Franklin JM et al. 2016. Temporal trends and factors associated with cardiovascular drug development, 1990 to 2012. JACC: Basic Transl. Sci. 1:301–8
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 9.  Hay M, Thomas DW, Craighead JL et al. 2014. Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs. Nat. Biotechnol. 32:40–51
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 10.  Earl J, Kirkpatrick P 2003. Fresh from the pipeline. Ezetimibe. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2:97–98
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 11.  Clader JW 2004. The discovery of ezetimibe: a view from outside the receptor. J. Med. Chem. 47:1–9
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 12.  Barter PJ, Kastelein JJ 2006. Targeting cholesteryl ester transfer protein for the prevention and management of cardiovascular disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 47:492–99
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 13.  Barter PJ, Caulfield M, Eriksson M et al. 2007. Effects of torcetrapib in patients at high risk for coronary events. N. Engl. J. Med. 357:2109–22
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 14.  Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Abt M et al. 2012. Effects of dalcetrapib in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 367:2089–99
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 15.  Lincoff AM, Nicholls SJ, Riesmeyer JS et al. 2017. Evacetrapib and cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk vascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 376:1933–42
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 16. The AIM-HIGH Investigators Boden WE, Probstfield JL et al. 2011. Niacin in patients with low HDL cholesterol levels receiving intensive statin therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 365:2255–67
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 17. The HPS2-THRIVE Collaborative Group Landray MJ, Haynes R et al. 2014. Effects of extended-release niacin with laropiprant in high-risk patients. N. Engl. J. Med. 371:203–12
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 18.  Thompson A, Gao P, Orfei L et al. 2010. Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 and risk of coronary disease, stroke, and mortality: collaborative analysis of 32 prospective studies. Lancet 375:1536–44
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 19. The STABILITY Investigators White HD, Held C et al. 2014. Darapladib for preventing ischemic events in stable coronary heart disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 370:1702–11
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 20.  O'Donoghue ML, Braunwald E, White HD et al. 2014. Effect of darapladib on major coronary events after an acute coronary syndrome: the SOLID-TIMI 52 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 312:1006–15
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 21.  O'Donoghue ML 2014. Acute coronary syndromes: targeting inflammation—What has the VISTA-16 trial taught us?. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 11:130–32
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 22.  Nicholls SJ, Kastelein JJ, Schwartz GG et al. 2014. Varespladib and cardiovascular events in patients with an acute coronary syndrome: the VISTA-16 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 311:252–62
    [Google Scholar]
  23. 23.  Voight BF, Peloso GM, Orho-Melander M et al. 2012. Plasma HDL cholesterol and risk of myocardial infarction: a Mendelian randomisation study. Lancet 380:572–80
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 24.  Casas JP, Ninio E, Panayiotou A et al. 2010. PLA2G7 genotype, lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 activity, and coronary heart disease risk in 10,494 cases and 15,624 controls of European Ancestry. Circulation 121:2284–93
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 25.  Holmes MV, Simon T, Exeter HJ et al. 2013. Secretory phospholipase A2-IIA and cardiovascular disease: a Mendelian randomization study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 62:1966–76
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 26.  Guardiola M, Exeter HJ, Perret C et al. 2015. PLA2G10 gene variants, sPLA2 activity, and coronary heart disease risk. Circ. Cardiovasc. Genet. 8:356–62
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 27.  Thomsen SK, Gloyn AL 2017. Human genetics as a model for target validation: finding new therapies for diabetes. Diabetologia 60:960–70
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 28.  Nelson MR, Tipney H, Painter JL et al. 2015. The support of human genetic evidence for approved drug indications. Nat. Genet. 47:856–60Provides evidence for the benefit of incorporating genetic studies in drug development.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 29.  White PD 1957. Genes, the heart and destiny. N. Engl. J. Med. 256:965–69
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 30.  Chow CK, Islam S, Bautista L et al. 2011. Parental history and myocardial infarction risk across the world: the INTERHEART Study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 57:619–27
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 31.  Manolio TA, Collins FS, Cox NJ et al. 2009. Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases. Nature 461:747–53
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 32.  Marenberg ME, Risch N, Berkman LF et al. 1994. Genetic susceptibility to death from coronary heart disease in a study of twins. N. Engl. J. Med. 330:1041–46
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 33.  Zdravkovic S, Wienke A, Pedersen NL et al. 2002. Heritability of death from coronary heart disease: a 36-year follow-up of 20,966 Swedish twins. J. Intern. Med. 252:247–54
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 34.  Wienke A, Holm NV, Skytthe A et al. 2001. The heritability of mortality due to heart diseases: a correlated frailty model applied to Danish twins. Twin Res 4:266–74
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 35.  Mangino M, Spector T 2013. Understanding coronary artery disease using twin studies. Heart 99:373–75
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 36. The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium Auton A, Brooks LD et al. 2015. A global reference for human genetic variation. Nature 526:68–74
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 37.  Brown MS, Goldstein JL 1986. A receptor-mediated pathway for cholesterol homeostasis. Science 232:34–47
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 38.  Hirschhorn JN, Lohmueller K, Byrne E et al. 2002. A comprehensive review of genetic association studies. Genet. Med. 4:45–61
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 39.  MacArthur J, Bowler E, Cerezo M et al. 2017. The new NHGRI-EBI Catalog of published genome-wide association studies (GWAS Catalog). Nucleic Acids Res 45:D896–901
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 40.  Nikpay M, Goel A, Won HH et al. 2015. A comprehensive 1,000 Genomes-based genome-wide association meta-analysis of coronary artery disease. Nat. Genet. 47:1121–30
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 41.  van der Harst P, Verweij N 2017. The identification of 64 novel genetic loci provides an expanded view on the genetic architecture of coronary artery disease. Circ. Res. 122:433–43
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 42.  Kessler T, Wobst J, Wolf B et al. 2017. Functional characterization of the GUCY1A3 coronary artery disease risk locus. Circulation 136:476–89
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 43.  Khera AV, Kathiresan S 2017. Genetics of coronary artery disease: discovery, biology and clinical translation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 18:331–44
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 44.  Abifadel M, Varret M, Rabes JP et al. 2003. Mutations in PCSK9 cause autosomal dominant hypercholesterolemia. Nat. Genet. 34:154–56This study identified PCSK9 mutations associated with familial hypercholesterolemia which was the first step in a series of studies that ultimately led to the development of PCSK9 inhibitors.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 45.  Cohen JC, Boerwinkle E, Mosley TH Jr. et al. 2006. Sequence variations in PCSK9, low LDL, and protection against coronary heart disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 354:1264–72This study demonstrated that loss-of-function mutations in PCSK9 are protective against CAD.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 46.  Robinson JG, Farnier M, Krempf M et al. 2015. Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in reducing lipids and cardiovascular events. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:1489–99
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 47.  Sabatine MS, Giugliano RP, Keech AC et al. 2017. Evolocumab and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 376:1713–22
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 48.  Fitzgerald K, White S, Borodovsky A et al. 2017. A highly durable RNAi therapeutic inhibitor of PCSK9. N. Engl. J. Med. 376:41–51
    [Google Scholar]
  49. 49.  Garcia-Calvo M, Lisnock J, Bull HG et al. 2005. The target of ezetimibe is Niemann-Pick C1-like 1 (NPC1L1). PNAS 102:8132–37
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 50.  Stitziel NO, Won HH, Morrison AC et al. 2014. Inactivating mutations in NPC1L1 and protection from coronary heart disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 371:2072–82
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 51.  Kastelein JJ, Akdim F, Stroes ES et al. 2008. Simvastatin with or without ezetimibe in familial hyper-cholesterolemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 358:1431–43
    [Google Scholar]
  52. 52.  Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP et al. 2015. Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes. N. Engl. J. Med. 372:2387–97
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 53.  Ference BA, Majeed F, Penumetcha R et al. 2015. Effect of naturally random allocation to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol on the risk of coronary heart disease mediated by polymorphisms in NPC1L1, HMGCR, or both: a 2×2 factorial Mendelian randomization study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 65:1552–61
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 54.  Nomura A, Won HH, Khera AV et al. 2017. Protein-truncating variants at the cholesteryl ester transfer protein gene and risk for coronary heart disease. Circ. Res. 121:81–88
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 55.  Ference BA, Kastelein JJP, Ginsberg HN et al. 2017. Association of genetic variants related to CETP inhibitors and statins with lipoprotein levels and cardiovascular risk. JAMA 318:947–56
    [Google Scholar]
  56. 56.  Millwood IY, Bennett DA, Holmes MV et al. 2018. Association of CETP gene variants with risk for vascular and nonvascular diseases among Chinese adults. JAMA Cardiol 3:34–43
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 57. HPS3/TIMI55–REVEAL Collaborative Group Bowman L, Hopewell JC et al. 2017. Effects of anacetrapib in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 377:1217–27
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 58.  Tall AR 2018. Plasma high density lipoproteins: therapeutic targeting and links to atherogenic inflammation. Atherosclerosis 276:39–43
    [Google Scholar]
  59. 59.  Anderson CD, Falcone GJ, Phuah CL et al. 2016. Genetic variants in CETP increase risk of intracerebral hemorrhage. Ann. Neurol. 80:730–40
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 60.  Cheng CY, Yamashiro K, Chen LJ et al. 2015. New loci and coding variants confer risk for age-related macular degeneration in East Asians. Nat. Commun. 6:6063
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 61.  Kronenberg F, Utermann G 2013. Lipoprotein(a): resurrected by genetics. J. Intern. Med. 273:6–30
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 62.  Tsimikas S 2017. A test in context: lipoprotein(a): diagnosis, prognosis, controversies, and emerging therapies. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 69:692–711
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 63. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration Erqou S, Kaptoge S et al. 2009. Lipoprotein(a) concentration and the risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, and nonvascular mortality. JAMA 302:412–23
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 64.  Kamstrup PR, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Steffensen R et al. 2009. Genetically elevated lipoprotein(a) and increased risk of myocardial infarction. JAMA 301:2331–39
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 65.  Clarke R, Peden JF, Hopewell JC et al. 2009. Genetic variants associated with Lp(a) lipoprotein level and coronary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 361:2518–28
    [Google Scholar]
  66. 66.  Emdin CA, Khera AV, Natarajan P et al. 2017. Genetic association of waist-to-hip ratio with cardiometabolic traits, type 2 diabetes, and coronary heart disease. JAMA 317:626–34
    [Google Scholar]
  67. 67.  Viney NJ, van Capelleveen JC, Geary RS et al. 2016. Antisense oligonucleotides targeting apolipoprotein(a) in people with raised lipoprotein(a): two randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trials. Lancet 388:2239–53
    [Google Scholar]
  68. 68.  Willer CJ, Schmidt EM, Sengupta S et al. 2013. Discovery and refinement of loci associated with lipid levels. Nat. Genet. 45:1274–83
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 69.  Ference BA, Robinson JG, Brook RD et al. 2016. Variation in PCSK9 and HMGCR and risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes. N. Engl. J. Med. 375:2144–53
    [Google Scholar]
  70. 70.  Swerdlow DI, Preiss D, Kuchenbaecker KB et al. 2015. HMG-coenzyme A reductase inhibition, type 2 diabetes, and bodyweight: evidence from genetic analysis and randomised trials. Lancet 385:351–61
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 71.  Sattar N, Preiss D, Murray HM et al. 2010. Statins and risk of incident diabetes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomised statin trials. Lancet 375:735–42
    [Google Scholar]
  72. 72.  Lotta LA, Sharp SJ, Burgess S et al. 2016. Association between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering genetic variants and risk of type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. JAMA 316:1383–91
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 73.  Liu DJ, Peloso GM, Yu H et al. 2017. Exome-wide association study of plasma lipids in >300,000 individuals. Nat. Genet. 49:1758–66
    [Google Scholar]
  74. 74.  Plenge RM, Scolnick EM, Altshuler D 2013. Validating therapeutic targets through human genetics. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 12:581–94Reviews the use of genetic studies in drug development.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 75.  Stitziel NO, Stirrups KE, Masca NG et al. 2016. Coding variation in ANGPTL4, LPL, and SVEP1 and the risk of coronary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 374:1134–44
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 76.  Do R, Stitziel NO, Won HH et al. 2015. Exome sequencing identifies rare LDLR and APOA5 alleles conferring risk for myocardial infarction. Nature 518:102–6
    [Google Scholar]
  77. 77. The TG and HDL Working Group of the Exome Sequencing Project, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute Crosby J et al. 2014. Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3, triglycerides, and coronary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 371:22–31
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 78.  Jorgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, Nordestgaard BG et al. 2014. Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3 and risk of ischemic vascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 371:32–41
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 79.  Dewey FE, Gusarova V, O'Dushlaine C et al. 2016. Inactivating variants in ANGPTL4 and risk of coronary artery disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 374:1123–33
    [Google Scholar]
  80. 80.  Do R, Willer CJ, Schmidt EM et al. 2013. Common variants associated with plasma triglycerides and risk for coronary artery disease. Nat. Genet. 45:1345–52
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 81. Triglyceride Coronary Disease Genetics Consortium and Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration Sarwar N, Sandhu MS et al. 2010. Triglyceride-mediated pathways and coronary disease: collaborative analysis of 101 studies. Lancet 375:1634–39
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 82.  Musunuru K, Strong A, Frank-Kamenetsky M et al. 2010. From noncoding variant to phenotype via SORT1 at the 1p13 cholesterol locus. Nature 466:714–19
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 83.  Stitziel NO, Khera AV, Wang X et al. 2017. ANGPTL3 deficiency and protection against coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 69:2054–63This study demonstrated that ANGPTL3 deficiency decreases risk of CAD in humans.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 84.  Dewey FE, Gusarova V, Dunbar RL et al. 2017. Genetic and pharmacologic inactivation of ANGPTL3 and cardiovascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 377:211–21
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 85.  Graham MJ, Lee RG, Brandt TA et al. 2017. Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of ANGPTL3 antisense oligonucleotides. N. Engl. J. Med. 377:222–32
    [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. The HPS3/TIMI55-REVEAL Collaborative Group Bowman L, Hopewell JC et al. 2017. Effects of anacetrapib in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 377:1217–27
    [Google Scholar]
  87. 87.  Emdin CA, Khera AV, Natarajan P et al. 2016. Phenotypic characterization of genetically lowered human lipoprotein(a) levels. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 68:2761–72
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 88.  Nioi P, Sigurdsson A, Thorleifsson G et al. 2016. Variant ASGR1 associated with a reduced risk of coronary artery disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 374:2131–41
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-med-041717-085853
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-med-041717-085853
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error