|
This
paper was published in the American
Journal of Preventive Medicine 2003;
24(2):136-142 |
Family History Assessment:
Strategies for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease
(Print
Version)
Steven C. Hunt PhDa,
Marta Gwinn MD, MPHb and Ted D. Adams PhD, MPHa
a
Cardiovascular Genetics Research Program, Department of Internal Medicine,
University of Utah, School of Medicine (Hunt, Adams), Salt Lake City,
Utah, USA
b
Office of Genomics and Disease Prevention, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (Gwinn), Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Two general approaches to primary prevention of
cardiovascular disease (CVD) have been suggested: population-wide health
promotion and targeted intervention in high-risk groups.[1,2
and 3] Public health advocates have sometimes championed one
or the other approach, suggesting that they are in competition with each
other. We propose that family history of disease is a unifying theme that
bridges the two approaches and could overcome many of the objections to each
of them. We also explain the value of population-based family history
screening for identifying high-risk persons and families who are at high risk
for CVD.
Population and
High-Risk Screening Paradigms
Nationwide, population-based education and health
promotion activities have been instrumental in helping reduce CVD incidence.[4
and 5] Programs that recommend healthy lifestyles and institute
screening for risk factors (e.g., elevated lipids, glucose, and blood pressure)
have helped identify persons at increased risk for CVD and have encouraged
reductions in these risk factors. However, the substantial downward trends in
CVD incidence and mortality during the 20th century appear to be leveling off
for both coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke. [6 and 7]
The slowing rate of decline in CVD incidence
suggests that existing education and risk factor screening programs will need to
be strengthened to achieve greater reductions in risk factors. Current programs
have many shortcomings: Not all persons receive and understand public health
messages; those who receive and understand these messages may not be successful
in changing their behaviors; and recommended lifestyle changes may not be
intense enough to reduce risk in persons who are at highest risk of CVD.
Targeted prevention approaches have consisted of
identifying high-risk persons who can be offered more intensive intervention
than is recommended for the general population. This approach raises several
concerns: the cost of identifying high-risk persons may equal or exceed the cost
of intervention; determining who is at high risk is difficult; and most CVD
events occur in persons with risk factor levels below the extreme of the
distribution. Therefore, although extreme values of specific risk factors (e.g.,
cholesterol) are associated with increased risk of CVD, the associated
attributable risk is low because these values occur in only a small proportion
of the population.[8]
The Human Genome Project has increased enthusiasm
for the possibility of using specific genes to assess individual disease risk
and define high-risk subgroups.[9] However, the identification
of genes with a high attributable risk or even a consistently high relative risk
for common diseases, including CVD, has not yet been very successful. Although
many published reports have described associations of various genes with CVD,
most still require further confirmation before clinical use is indicated. Even
when more genes involved in CVD have been identified, the low penetrance of
specific high-risk genotypes may make disease prediction difficult. [10]
Furthermore, genes explain only a portion of the total variation in most risk
factors and diseases, [11 and 12] suggesting
that relying only on knowledge of disease pathophysiology gained through genetic
advances may not provide a sufficient basis for prevention.
While research continues to pursue more specific
genetic information that could be relevant to prevention of CVD and other common
diseases, the use of family history to capture genetic information can help
overcome the drawbacks of both population-based and high-risk approaches to
disease prevention.
The Importance of Using Family History to
Assess Risk of CVD
Family history has been used successfully to
evaluate risk of CHD in the high schoolbased Health Family Tree Study in Utah
(Table 1). [13] Family history of
early-onset disease was much more predictive of early CHD in unaffected family
members than was family history without respect to age. Older persons were at no
more risk for CHD than the general population unless they had at least two
family members who had been diagnosed with CHD (Table 1).
A similar pattern of risks was observed in families with a positive family
history of hypertension. [13] Because some diseases appear to
share certain environmental risk factors and common pathophysiologic pathways, a
family history of one of these diseases may be relevant to assessing risk of the
others. For example, families with a history of CHD are also more likely to have
a history of hypertension or diabetes. [14]
Throughout the United States, many
community-based programs screen for chronic diseases or risk factors. Most of
these programs target only one disease (e.g., CHD or diabetes) or one risk
factor (e.g., cholesterol or glucose) at a time. However, because an estimated
45% of families have a positive family history of one or more common chronic
diseases,[15] taking a family history can capture information
about many diseases and risk factors simultaneously. To assess risk of CHD,
information about smoking, alcohol consumption, exercise, weight, hypertension,
and diabetes in multiple family members can be correlated with incidence of CHD
and stroke in the family.
Family history of disease is important not only
because it is an independent predictor of future disease incidence, but because
it also defines the relatively small subset of families in the population that
account for the most cases. Table
2 summarizes data from
the Utah Health Family Tree Study, in which a quantitative family history score
(FHS) was calculated for each family by comparing the number of CHD events
(heart attack requiring hospitalization, coronary bypass surgery, or
percutaneous angioplasty) and stroke events (requiring hospitalization, with
symptoms persisting after hospitalization) that occurred in the family, with the
expected number of events based on the age and gender of family members and
population incidence rates.[16] Events occurring before age 55
were characterized as "early." Family history was considered positive
if the FHS was >0.5,
corresponding roughly to one event at any age in small- to medium-sized nuclear
families or one early event in large nuclear families. An FHS of >1.0
could be assigned only if the family had at least two affected members. Further
discussion of the FHS is provided in Hunt et al. [13]
Only 1% of Utah families had a strongly positive
family history of CHD (FHS >2.0,
corresponding roughly to >2
early CHD events), but they accounted for 17% of all early CHD events. Overall,
14% of Utah families had a positive family history of CHD (FHS >0.5);
these families accounted for 72% of all early CHD events and 48% of CHD events
at any age. The 11% of families with a positive family history of stroke (FHS >0.5)
accounted for 86% of all early strokes.
These results demonstrate that early CVD is
concentrated in families with a positive family history of CVD. Clearly, these
families need rigorous intervention to prevent disease in additional family
members. Because family history can be used to predict risk of future disease
and to identify the subset of families that account for the majority of
prevalent cases in the population, it is an excellent tool that combines
population and high-risk approaches to disease prevention. New American Heart
Association guidelines for primary prevention of CHD and stroke recommend
regular updating of a person's family history of CHD.[17]
Several published studies have found that family
history of CHD remains an independent predictor of CHD when controlling for
other known risk factors.[16, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 25, 26, 27
and 28] Three large studies have estimated directly
(without using statistical models) that as much as 75% of CHD occurs in
individuals with any combination of elevated blood pressure, high cholesterol,
and smoking (Figure 1), and the percentage of CHD increases
further if diabetes and obesity are included.[29, 30
and 31] Combining these results with the results of Table
2, in which half of all CHD can be explained by family history, suggests
that there is clearly overlap in subgroups with a positive family history and
subgroups with elevated blood pressure or high cholesterol or who smoke.
Therefore, finding an independent effect for family history of CHD seems
paradoxical if such a large percentage of CHD is due to known risk factors,
especially because these risk factors also tend to cluster in families. One
possible explanationthat interactions among risk factors confound their
relationships in linear modelshas not been substantiated by studies that
included statistical interaction terms. [19, 21,
22, 24, 26 and 27]
However, physiological interactions are probably much more complicated than can
be modeled by simple linear and interaction terms. Family history may capture
these additional effects of CHD risk factors (including unmeasured factors and
interactions) that family members have in common, either because of inheritance
or shared environment.
Perhaps an equally important explanation of
family history as an independent predictor for CVD is the large degree of
interfamily heterogeneity in the familial prevalence of other risk factors. If a
particular risk factor is shared in only a subset of families, its effect could
be underestimated by regression analysis of the entire study sample. However,
incorporating family history into the analysis can overcome the problem of
interfamily heterogeneity because it measures disease expression without regard
to the underlying causes. Thus, family history provides a surrogate measure of
physiologic processes leading to CHD without requiring complete understanding of
their underlying complexity.
Family History Is Useful for Population and
High-Risk Approaches
The cost-effectiveness of screening the
population to identify persons with abnormal risk factors (e.g., cholesterol
levels greater than 90th percentile) has been questioned because of the cost of
screening and the limited effectiveness of focusing intervention only on a
high-risk subset.[3] Most CHD events occur in persons with
risk factor measurements in the middle of the distribution (e.g., total
cholesterol between 200 and 240 mg/dl) rather than at the extremes. For example,
in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT), 41% of all CHD events
occurred in persons with cholesterol levels between 203 and 244 mg/dl. [29]
Although persons with very high cholesterol
levels are at greatly increased risk of CHD, they constitute a small group and
thus account for only a small proportion of CHD events in the population. This
low attributable fraction favors a population-based intervention rather than one
directed to the highest-risk group.[8] One study that
contrasted population-based and high-risk approaches to CHD prevention estimated
that lowering total cholesterol in the entire population by 10% and blood
pressure by 5% would lower CHD mortality by 31%; a high-risk approach that
lowered total cholesterol by 20% only in the top 10% of the cholesterol
distribution (>325 mg/dl) and lowered diastolic blood pressure to 90 mmHg
would reduce CHD mortality by an estimated 28%. [3] The more
effective a population approach is in reducing cholesterol and blood pressure,
the more it will out-perform the high-risk approach using individual risk
factors. [3]
Family history evaluation can be used effectively
to define a subpopulation in which CHD expression is clustered. While persons
with extreme values of individual risk factors may or may not express disease
because of protective levels of other factors, a positive family history
identifies families who express the disease. These families include people with
risk factor values in the middle of the distribution as well as those with
extreme values. Family history is thus able to capture the effects of measured
and unmeasured factors that interact to cause CHD.
Therefore, the high-risk subset defined by the
extreme of the family history distribution accounts for more CVD events in the
population than the subset defined by extreme values of individual risk factors
and results in a higher attributable risk. Furthermore, because values of other
risk factors (e.g., cholesterol and blood pressure) in persons with a positive
family history of CVD are typically not extreme, less costly and intensive
interventions may be adequate in these families to produce the changes in risk
factor levels needed to reduce risk. Only a much smaller subset of families with
a positive family history will have extreme levels of risk factors that require
more intensive interventions.
Family
History and Gene-environment Interactions
Families
at highest risk will generally require medical assistance because behavior
changes recommended for the general population are usually inadequate to
reduce their risk. For example, even the best diet only reduces
cholesterol 20% to 25% in persons with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH).
[32] Because this reduction is not enough to
normalize cholesterol levels in persons with FH, they require prescribed
medication in addition to diet modification for proper control.
Identifying a strong family history of early-onset CHD, followed by
cholesterol testing, may identify families who have FH and can be
adequately treated. Current estimates from more than 30 countries suggest
that 80% of patients with FH remain undiagnosed and that only 7% have
controlled cholesterol levels. [33] The diagnosis of
FH in one family member allows confirmation of FH in close and extended
relatives using validated FH cholesterol criteria. [34]
If persons with FH can be found and adequately treated, most will enjoy
average life spans instead of dying prematurely. A recent analysis
suggests that treating hypercholesterolemia could prevent 95% of 5-year
CHD mortality in first-degree relatives aged <40 years of people with
diagnosed FH; reducing cholesterol in first-degree relatives of any age
could prevent 44% of all 5-year CHD mortality in men and 57% in women in
families with FH. [35]
Other single-gene disorders (e.g., hypertension
from glucocorticoid-remediable aldosteronism and Liddle syndrome) can also fit
the FH paradigm. Dietary and medication responses may also be greater in persons
with other genotypes less strongly associated with increased risk for CVD.[36,
37, 38 and 39]
Results from three different randomized, controlled hypertension clinical trials
have demonstrated the beneficial impact of intervention among persons at highest
risk. [40, 41 and 42]
These studies demonstrated that persons with the angiotensinogen gene variant,
which is associated with salt sensitivity and increased risk of hypertension,
experience the greatest blood pressure reduction through dietary salt reduction
[40]; weight loss [40]; salt reduction
with potassium, magnesium, and calcium supplementation [41];
and high fruit/vegetable and low-fat diets. [42]
Even in the absence of a specific
"high-risk" genotype, persons at increased risk of CVD because of
their genetic makeup may realize the greatest benefit from intervention. In this
setting, family history can be an effective surrogate for the underlying genes
and their environmental interactions. For example, quitting smoking is projected
to decrease CHD to a greater extent in men with a positive family history of CHD
compared with men without a positive family history.[43]
These results suggest that intervening even on mild-risk factor levels in
families with positive family histories may have more preventive benefit than
expected because both the main and interactive effects of these risk factors are
removed.
All family members share the same positive family
history as a risk factor, but they often share other risk factors as well.
Interventions such as dietary modification or weight control may be more
effective when delivered to the family than to the individual because of the
built-in support mechanisms of the family. For example, guidelines from the
Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of
High Blood Pressure encourage involving family members in the treatment of
hypertension.[44]
Cost
Effectiveness Considerations
Family history can be inexpensively collected
from the entire population to educate families about risk factors and family
history, promote healthy lifestyles, and identify the subset of persons at
highest risk of CVD. The cost of identifying an unaffected relative in a
high-risk family was $4.60 in a study that used optical scanning sheets to
collect family history.[45] In the absence of actual data,
we estimate the cost of an Internet-based, family-history collection program to
range from $1 to $3 per family (approximately $5 per high-risk family) if
administered through school systems. If such a program were made accessible to
the general population, the cost would probably be substantially <$1, because
the need for personnel to recruit and interact with schoolteachers would be
eliminated. This cost would cover collecting and reporting family history
information on every participating family in the population and identifying
high-risk families for targeted intervention. Participating families would bear
no direct costs for family history collection, and subsequent costs for actual
risk factor evaluation would be limited to the high-risk family members. The
collection and analysis of family history using the Internet will become even
more effective as a greater number of people gain access to the Internet.
School-based family history programs that provide such access can help overcome
the access drawback of the Internet.
In contrast, traditional population screening
programs for CVD risk factors are much more expensive. For example, in the MRFIT
study, measuring smoking, blood pressure, and cholesterol risk factors cost an
estimated $100 per person.[46]
Several studies have compared the costs of
different screening and intervention programs. In North Karelia, Finland, the
cost of community screening for blood pressure and cholesterol was an estimated
$25.50 per person, whereas the cost of a community education program was only
$3.75 per person.[47] The cost-effectiveness of a screening
program also depends on the relative costs and benefits of alternative
interventions for persons found to be at increased risk. For example, one
analysis estimated that a population approach designed to reduce CHD deaths by
28% by lowering cholesterol levels would cost $20 per person per year; the same
effect could be achieved by using cholesterol-lowering drugs to treat persons
with cholesterol levels in the top 20% at an approximate cost of $400 per person
per year. [48]
The cost per year-of-life saved by statin
treatment has been estimated for both primary and secondary CHD.[49]
The cost of primary intervention was analyzed further by comparing persons who
had a single elevated risk factor (cholesterol) with persons who had multiple
risk factors. Secondary prevention was the least expensive per year-of-life
saved, and primary prevention for persons with only one risk factor was most
expensive. However, the cost of primary prevention in persons with multiple risk
factors was only slightly higher than that of secondary prevention. Because
family history identifies families with multiple risk factors, which have
contributed to increased prevalence of disease in the family, using a family
history approach to direct treatment to high-risk families could be very
cost-effective.
Potential
Public Health Value of Family History Evaluation
Family history evaluation with subsequent
feedback to participating family members has great potential for educating and
motivating entire populations about their familial health risks and increasing
awareness about the importance of preventive health practices. Many families are
unaware of their family history and risk for CVD until they start contacting
relatives and putting the data together to see the complete picture. Even if a
family is found to be at average population risk, this information can be used
to reinforce the importance of risk factor control for everyone. Internet links
to more comprehensive population advice written for the public as part of a
family history program would provide the potential for greater understanding of
how to reduce risks. In addition, families who become aware of disease in their
families, as opposed to risk factors, are likely to be more motivated to heed
the population advice given. Further research in these areas is needed.
Using a school-based approach to family risk
assessment provides an opportunity to teach young people to adopt lifelong
healthy habits. Enhancing the family's awareness of their shared disease risk
provides an opportunity to promote family-based changes in lifestyle, enhanced
by family support mechanisms, family education, and family referral, which can
translate into decreased long-term health risk and improved quality of life.
Some studies have demonstrated behavior change in families that are made aware
of their increased risk of certain diseases[50 and 51];
however, not all studies have found a positive effect. [52]
High-risk families may require extra help to reduce their risk. Using family
history to identify a subset of the population for more intensive intervention
can make this additional intervention more feasible. By drawing the attention of
all participating families to standard guidelines for risk reduction, a family
history program does not supplant but rather enhances population-wide prevention
efforts.
Family history effectively bridges clinical
medicine with public health by focusing risk assessment and intervention at a
level between the extremes of "one at a time" and "one size fits
all."[53 and 54] Although physicians
are trained to ask their patients about family history, few physicians use this
information to guide prevention recommendations for patients or their family
members. [15 and 54] Combining family
history information with clinical assessment could change the clinical threshold
for instituting more intensive intervention or treatment. Asking patients to
complete a family history questionnaire in advance and to bring it to their
medical appointment offers several advantages: giving patients time to obtain
information from family members, saving time during the visit, and prompting
physicians to discuss family history with their patients. Making the
questionnaire available to patients on a computer [55] or on
the Internet could provide additional benefits by collecting family history more
consistently and storing the information in a format that is easy to retrieve
and update as family history changes over time.
Summary
Screening
the general population for family history combines the benefits of
population-wide education with more intensive screening directed only to a
defined high-risk subset of the population. This approach is relatively
inexpensive and efficient because most CVD events, especially those that
occur at an early age, are concentrated in a relatively limited number of
families. Assessing family history also serves to remind families with
average population risk of the general health recommendations that they
should follow to reduce their risk of CVD. High-risk families can be
directed to health education and health promotion services at the
community level (including school and family) and to more intensive
counseling to reduce the risk of CVD in family members. Persons at high
risk can be reassured that, in most cases, specific lifestyle changes and
preventive therapies are available to help reduce their risk. Family
history assessment provides a starting point for family-based intervention
(e.g., improved diet or increased physical activity), which can be very
effective if it draws on the inherent social support found in most
families. New strategies to collect family history (e.g., on the Internet)
may further reduce the costs and substantially increase the effectiveness
of family history as a tool for preventive medicine and public health.
References
- Expert Committee on Prevention
of Coronary Heart DiseasePrevention of coronary heart disease, World
Health Organization, Geneva (1982).
- M.F. Oliver , Should we not
forget about mass control of coronary risk factors?. Lancet 2
(1983), pp. 3738. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- T.E. Kottke, P. Puska, J.T.
Salonen, J. Tuomilehto and A. Nissinen , Projected effects of high-risk
versus population-based prevention strategies in coronary heart disease. Am
J Epidemiol 121 (1985), pp. 697704. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- W.B. Kannel , Prevalence,
incidence, and mortality of coronary heart disease. In: V. Fuster, R. Ross
and E.J. Topol, Editors, Atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease,
Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia (1996), pp. 1321.
- G.L. Burke, J.M. Sprafka, A.R.
Folsom, R.V. Luepker, S.W. Norsted and H. Blackburn , Trends in CHD
mortality, morbidity and risk factor levels from 1960 to 1986: the Minnesota
Heart Survey. Int J Epidemiol 18 suppl (1989), pp.
7381.
- W.D. Rosamond, A.R. Folsom,
L.E. Chambless and C.H. Wang , Coronary heart disease trends in four United
States communities: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study
19871996. Int J Epidemiol 30 suppl 1 (2001), pp.
1722.
- R.F. Gillum and C.T. Sempos ,
The end of the long-term decline in stroke mortality in the United States?. Stroke
28 (1997), pp. 15271529. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
- N.J. Wald, A.K. Hackshaw and
C.D. Frost , When can a risk factor be used as a worthwhile screening test?.
BMJ 319 (1999), pp. 15621565. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE
- F.S. Collins and V.A. McKusick
, Implications of the Human Genome Project for medical science. JAMA 285
(2001), pp. 540544. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-BIOTECHNOBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- N.A. Holtzman and T.M.
Marteau , Will genetics revolutionize medicine?. N Engl J Med 343
(2000), pp. 141144. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-BIOTECHNOBASE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- R.R. Williams, S.J. Hasstedt,
S.C. Hunt et al., Genetic traits related to hypertension and
electrolyte metabolism. Hypertension 17 suppl 1
(1991), pp. 6973.
- S.C. Hunt, S.J. Hasstedt, H.
Kuida, B.M. Stults, P.H. Hopkins and R.R. Williams , Genetic heritability
and common environmental components of resting and stressed blood pressures,
lipids, and body mass index in Utah pedigrees and twins. Am J Epidemiol
129 (1989), pp. 625638. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- S.C. Hunt, R.R. Williams and
G.K. Barlow , A comparison of positive family history definitions for
defining risk of future disease. J Chron Dis 39
(1986), pp. 809821. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- R.R. Williams, S.C. Hunt, M.C.
Schumacher et al., Genes, hypertension and coronary heart disease:
evidence for shared metabolic pathophysiology. In: U. Smith, N.E. Bruun, T.
Hedner and B. Hokfelt, Editors, Hypertensionan insulin-resistant
disorder. Genetic factors and cellular mechanisms, Elsevier, Amsterdam
(1991), pp. 89101.
- M.T. Scheuner, S.J. Wang, L.J.
Raffel, S.K. Larabell and J.I. Rotter , Family history: a comprehensive
genetic risk assessment method for the chronic conditions of adulthood. Am
J Med Genet 71 (1997), pp. 315324. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- R.R. Williams, S.C. Hunt, G.
Heiss et al., Usefulness of cardiovascular family history data for
population-based preventive medicine and medical research (the Health Family
Tree Study and the NHLBI Family Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 87
(2001), pp. 129135. SummaryPlus
| Full
Text + Links | PDF
(87 K)
- T.A. Pearson, S.N. Blair,
S.R. Daniels et al., AHA Guidelines for primary prevention of
cardiovascular disease and stroke: 2002 update: consensus panel guide to
comprehensive risk reduction for adult patients without coronary or other
atherosclerotic vascular diseases. Circulation 106
(2002), pp. 388391. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-MEDLINE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- A.G. Shaper, S.J. Pocock, A.N.
Phillips and M. Walker , Identifying men at high risk of heart attacks:
strategy for use in general practice. BMJ 293
(1986), pp. 474479. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- P.N. Hopkins, R.R. Williams,
H. Kuida et al., Family history as an independent risk factor for
incident coronary artery disease in a high-risk cohort in Utah. Am J
Cardiol 62 (1988), pp. 703707. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- T.I. Sorensen, G.G. Nielsen,
P.K. Andersen and T.W. Teasdale , Genetic and environmental influences on
premature death in adult adoptees. N Engl J Med 318
(1988), pp. 727732. Abstract-EMBASE
- R.H. Myers, D.K. Kiely, L.A.
Cupples and W.B. Kannel , Parental history is an independent risk factor for
coronary artery disease: the Framingham Study. Am Heart J 120
(1990), pp. 963969. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- M.C. Roncaglioni, L. Santoro,
B. D'Avanzo et al., Role of family history in patients with
myocardial infarction. An Italian case-control study. GISSI-EFRIM
Investigators. Circulation 85 (1992), pp.
20652072. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- E.D. Grech, D.R. Ramsdale,
C.L. Bray and E.B. Faragher , Family history as an independent risk factor
of coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 13 (1992),
pp. 13111315. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
- A. Castro-Beiras, J. Muniz,
I. Fernandez-Fuertes et al., Family history as an independent risk
factor for ischaemic heart disease in a low incidence area (Galicia, Spain).
Eur Heart J 14 (1993), pp. 14451450. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- M.E. Marenberg, N. Risch, L.F.
Berkman, B. Floderus and U. de Faire , Genetic susceptibility to death from
coronary heart disease in a study of twins. N Engl J Med 330
(1994), pp. 10411046. Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- C.B. Eaton, A.G. Bostom, L.
Yanek et al., Family history and premature coronary heart disease. J
Am Board Fam Pract 9 (1996), pp. 312318. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
- J.M. Boer, E.J. Feskens, W.M.
Verschuren, J.C. Seidell and D. Kromhout , The joint impact of family
history of myocardial infarction and other risk factors on 12-year coronary
heart disease mortality. Epidemiology 10 (1999), pp.
767770. Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- Y. Friedlander, P. Arbogast,
S.M. Schwartz et al., Family history as a risk factor for early onset
myocardial infarction in young women. Atherosclerosis 156
(2001), pp. 201207. SummaryPlus
| Full
Text + Links | PDF
(87 K)
- J. Stamler, D. WentworthMRFIT
Cooperative Research Group and J.D. Neaton , Is the relationship between
serum cholesterol and risk of premature death from coronary heart disease
continuous and graded? Findings in 356,222 primary screenees of the Multiple
Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT). JAMA 256
(1986), pp. 28232828. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
- J. Stamler, R. Stamler, J.D.
Neaton et al., Low risk-factor profile and long-term cardiovascular
and noncardiovascular mortality and life expectancy: findings for 5 large
cohorts of young adult and middle-aged men and women. JAMA 282
(1999), pp. 20122018. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-MEDLINE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- P. Magnus and R. Beaglehole ,
The real contribution of the major risk factors to the coronary epidemics:
time to end the "only-50%" myth. Arch Intern Med 161
(2001), pp. 26572660. Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- W.E. Connor and S.L. Connor ,
Importance of diet in the treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia. Am
J Cardiol 72 (1993), pp. 4253.
- R.R. Williams, I.
Hamilton-Craig, G.M. Costner et al., MED-PED: an integrated genetic
strategy for preventing early deaths. In: K. Berg, V. Boulyjenkov and Y.
Christen, Editors, Genetic approaches to noncommunicable diseases,
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1996), pp. 3545.
- R.R. Williams, S.C. Hunt, M.C.
Schumacher et al., Diagnosing heterozygous familial
hypercholesterolemia using new practical criteria validated by molecular
genetics. Am J Cardiol 72 (1993), pp. 171176. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- M.A. Austin, R.L. Zimmern and
S.E. Humphries , High "population attributable fraction" for
coronary heart disease mortality among relatives in monogenic familial
hypercholesterolemia. Genet Med 4 (2002), pp.
275278. Abstract-MEDLINE
- L.U. Gerdes, C. Gerdes, K.
Kervinen et al., The apolipoprotein epsilon4 allele determines
prognosis and the effect on prognosis of simvastatin in survivors of
myocardial infarction: a substudy of the Scandinavian simvastatin survival
study. Circulation 101 (2000), pp. 13661371. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-EMBASE
- J. Pedro-Botet, E.J.
Schaefer, R.G. Bakker-Arkema et al., Apolipoprotein E genotype
affects plasma lipid response to atorvastatin in a gender specific manner. Atherosclerosis
158 (2001), pp. 183193. SummaryPlus
| Full
Text + Links | PDF
(168 K)
- P. Perez-Martinez, P. Gomez,
E. Paz et al., Interaction between smoking and the Sstl polymorphism
of the apo C-III gene determines plasma lipid response to diet. Nutr
Metab Cardiovasc Dis 11 (2001), pp. 237243. Abstract-MEDLINE
- J.M. Ordovas and J.R.
Galluzzi , Genetic predictors of plasma lipid response to diet intervention.
Curr Atheroscler Rep 1 (1999), pp. 196203. Abstract-MEDLINE
- S.C. Hunt, N.R. Cook, A.
Oberman et al., Angiotensinogen genotype, sodium reduction, weight
loss, and prevention of hypertension: trials of hypertension prevention,
phase II. Hypertension 32 (1998), pp. 393401. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- S.C. Hunt, J.M. Geleijnse,
L.L. Wu, J.C.M. Witteman, R.R. Williams and D.E. Grobbee , Enhanced blood
pressure response to mild sodium reduction in subjects with the 235T variant
of the angiotensinogen gene. Am J Hypertens 12
(1999), pp. 460466. SummaryPlus
| Full
Text + Links | PDF
(166 K)
- L.P. Svetkey, T.J. Moore, D.G.
Simons-Morton et al., Angiotensinogen genotype and blood pressure
response in the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) study. J
Hypertens 19 (2001), pp. 19491956. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-BIOTECHNOBASE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-MEDLINE
- P.N. Hopkins, R.R. Williams
and S.C. Hunt , Magnified risks from cigarette smoking for coronary prone
families in Utah. West J Med 141 (1984), pp.
196202. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
- Joint National Committee on
Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure, The
sixth report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection,
Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Arch Intern Med 157
(1997), pp. 24132446.
- R.R. Williams, S.C. Hunt, G.K.
Barlow et al., Health family trees: a tool for finding and helping
young members of coronary and cancer prone pedigrees in Texas and Utah. Am
J Public Health 78 (1988), pp. 12831286. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- Multiple Risk Factor
Intervention Trial Research Group, Multiple risk factor intervention trial.
Risk factor changes and mortality results. Multiple Risk Factor Intervention
Trial Research Group. JAMA 248 (1982), pp.
14651477.
- T.E. Kottke and H. Daida ,
Evaluating the effectiveness of dyslipidemia control strategies. Atherosclerosis
108 suppl (1994), pp. 127135.
- T.E. Kottke, L.C. Gatewood
and H.A. Park , Using serum cholesterol to identify high risk and stimulate
behavior change: will it work?. Ann Med 21 (1989),
pp. 181187. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-PsycINFO
- L. Goldman, M.C. Weinstein,
P.A. Goldman and L.W. Williams , Cost-effectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase
inhibition for primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. JAMA
265 (1991), pp. 11451151. Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-EMBASE
- I.M. Strychar, F. Champagne,
P. Ghadirian, A. Bonin, M. Jenicek and T.M. Lasater , Impact of receiving
blood cholesterol test results on dietary change. Am J Prev Med 14
(1998), pp. 103110. Abstract
| PDF
(651 K)
- B.K. Rimer, J.M. Schildkraut,
C. Lerman, T.H. Lin and J. Audrain , Participation in a women's breast
cancer risk counseling trial. Who participates? Who declines? High Risk
Breast Cancer Consortium. Cancer 77 (1996), pp.
23482355. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
- B.A. Polley, J.M. Jakicic,
E.M. Venditti, S. Barr and R.R. Wing , The effects of health beliefs on
weight loss in individuals at high risk for NIDDM. Diabetes Care 20
(1997), pp. 15331538. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- J. Emery and P. Rose ,
Expanding the role of the family history in primary care. Br J Gen Pract
49 1999), pp. 260261. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-MEDLINE
- J.R. Swanson and T.A. Pearson
, Screening family members at high risk for coronary disease. Why isn't it
done?. Am J Prev Med 20 (2001), pp. 5055. SummaryPlus
| Full
Text + Links | PDF
(160 K) SummaryPlus
| Full
Text + Links | PDF
(109 K)
- J. Westman, H. Hampel and T.
Bradley , Efficacy of a touchscreen computer based family cancer history
questionnaire and subsequent cancer risk assessment. J Med Genet 37
(2000), pp. 354360. Abstract-EMBASE
| Abstract-Elsevier
BIOBASE | Abstract-MEDLINE
| Abstract-BIOTECHNOBASE
| Full
Text via CrossRef
|