Abstract
Background Peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) presents substantial risk of maternal mortality, but underlying cause remains unsettled.
Methods We compared the prevalence of dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM)-relevant genetic variants in 452 female patients (probands) of African and European ancestry (AA, EA) with PPCM or DCM who had been pregnant at least once. Pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were identified in DCM-associated genes. Risk of DCM or partial DCM, defined as left ventricular enlargement or a left ventricular ejection fraction of <50%, were compared in 665 FDRs of PPCM and DCM probands.
Results The estimated prevalences of P/LP findings among 67 probands with PPCM compared to 385 probands with DCM were comparable within ancestry (for AA, 7.8% [95% CI: 0.0%- 15.7%] vs. 7.8% [95% CI: 1.1%-14.4%]; for EA, 29.5% [12.5%-46.5%] vs. 29.8% [15.5%-44.2%]). The risk of DCM/partial DCM was not lower for FDRs of PPCM probands relative to FDRs of DCM probands (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.47 – 1.28). For an FDR of a non-Hispanic EA proband with PPCM, the lowest estimated DCM/partial DCM risk by age 80 was 26.8% (95% CI, 15.0%-45.0%) compared to 33.2% (95% CI, 21.2%-49.5%) for an FDR of a proband with DCM. Further validating PPCM genetic risk by using a set of genes common between studies, the estimated prevalence of P/LP variants among EA PPCM probands (26.6%; 95% CI, 12.6%- 40.6%) was higher than the general population estimate from a UK Biobank study (0.6%), Also, the estimated DCM prevalence among the lowest-risk FDRs of non-Hispanic EA probands with PPCM (7.0% [95% CI, 0%-14.1%] females, 9.0% [95% CI, 1.6%-16.3%] males) was higher than general population estimates from another UK Biobank study (0.30% females, 0.63% males).
Conclusions Comparing women with PPCM to those with DCM, a similar prevalence of DCM-relevant genetic variants and similar risk of DCM or partial DCM among their first-degree relatives were observed. These findings, along with comparisons to the general population showing higher prevalence of DCM-relevant genetic variants in women with PPCM and higher DCM prevalence in their FDRs, strengthen evidence for the genetic basis of PPCM and underscore the need for clinical genetic evaluations for PPCM patients.
Clinical Trial clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03037632
What is new?
This is the first study to use familial risk, as shown by DCM and partial DCM phenotypes in first-degree relatives (FDRs) of women with PPCM, to gain insight into the genetics of PPCM.
The prevalence of DCM-relevant rare genetic variants was similar between women probands diagnosed with PPCM and DCM within European and African ancestry groups.
In PPCM probands of European ancestry, the prevalence of rare variants in DCM-relevant genes was higher than a general population estimate.
In the first-degree relatives of women with PPCM and DCM, the familial risk of DCM or a partial phenotype of DCM was similar for PPCM and DCM but higher than a population-based estimate.
What are the clinical implications?
The genetic findings of this study from PPCM probands and their first-degree relatives strengthens evidence that DCM-related genetics is a key underlying factor in the risk of PPCM.
A genetics evaluation is indicated following established guidelines for women with PPCM as is the case for women and men with DCM.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Research reported in this publication was supported by a parent award from the National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HL128857 to Dr. Hershberger, which included a supplement from the National Human Genome Research Institute. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Institutional Review Boards (IRB) at the Ohio State University and all clinical sites approved the initial study, followed by single IRB oversight at the University of Pennsylvania. All participants gave written informed consent.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos