Search

BACKGROUND: Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP)–the age-related clonal expansion of blood stem cells with leukemia-associated mutations–is a novel cardiovascular risk factor. Whether CHIP remains prognostic in individuals with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is less clear. OBJECTIVES: This study tested whether CHIP predicts adverse outcomes in individuals with established ASCVD. METHODS: Individuals aged 40 to 70 years from the UK Biobank with established ASCVD and available whole-exome sequences were analyzed. The primary outcome was a composite of ASCVD events and all-cause mortality. Associations of any CHIP (variant allele fraction ≥2%), large CHIP clones (variant allele fraction ≥10%), and the most commonly mutated driver genes (DNMT3A, TET2, ASXL1, JAK2, PPM1D/TP53 [DNA damage repair genes], and SF3B1/SRSF2/U2AF1 [spliceosome genes]) with incident outcomes were compared using unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 13,129 individuals (median age: 63 years) included, 665 (5.1%) had CHIP. Over a median follow-up of 10.8 years, any CHIP and large CHIP at baseline were associated with adjusted HRs of 1.23 (95% CI: 1.10-1.38; P < 0.001) and 1.34 (95% CI: 1.17-1.53; P < 0.001), respectively, for the primary outcome. TET2 and spliceosome CHIP, especially large clones, were most strongly associated with adverse outcomes (large TET2 CHIP: HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.40-2.55; P

A novel, common, and potent cardiovascular risk factor has recently emerged: clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP). CHIP arises from somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem cells that yield clonal progeny of mutant leukocytes in blood. Individuals with CHIP have a doubled risk of coronary heart disease and ischemic stroke, and worsened heart failure outcomes independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. The recognition of CHIP as a nontraditional risk factor challenges specialists in hematology/oncology and cardiovascular medicine alike. Should we screen for CHIP? If so, in whom? How should we assess cardiovascular risk in people with CHIP? How should we manage the excess cardiovascular risk in the absence of an evidence base? This review explains CHIP, explores the clinical quandaries, strives to provide reasonable recommendations for the multidisciplinary management of cardiovascular risk in individuals with CHIP, and highlights current knowledge gaps.

The incidence of cardiovascular diseases increases with age and is also correlated with increased inflammatory burden. Recently, human genetics provided a new paradigm linking aging, inflammation, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Next-generation genetic sequencing of whole blood-derived DNA in humans showed that clonal expansion of hematopoietic cells with somatic mutations in leukemogenic genes was associated with age and correlated with increased mortality. This phenomenon, termed clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), was associated with hematologic malignancy as well as ASCVD independently of age and other traditional risk factors. Because the implication of CHIP with ASCVD, genetic loss-of-function studies of Tet2 and Dnmt3a in murine models have supported a mechanistic role for CHIP in promoting vascular disease. Despite the potential contribution of CHIP to myriad cardiovascular and aging-related diseases, the epidemiology and biology surrounding this phenomenon remains incompletely appreciated and understood, especially as applied to clinical practice and prognostication. Here, the authors review this emerging key risk factor, defining its discovery, relationship to cardiovascular diseases, preclinical evidence for causality, and implications for risk prediction and mitigation.

A novel, common, and potent cardiovascular risk factor has recently emerged: clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP). CHIP arises from somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem cells that yield clonal progeny of mutant leukocytes in blood. Individuals with CHIP have a doubled risk of coronary heart disease and ischemic stroke, and worsened heart failure outcomes independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors. The recognition of CHIP as a non-traditional risk factor challenges specialists in hematology/oncology and cardiovascular medicine alike. Should we screen for CHIP? If so, in whom? How should we assess cardiovascular risk in people with CHIP? How do we manage the excess cardiovascular risk in the absence of an evidence base to guide us? This document explains CHIP, explores the clinical quandaries, strives to provide reasonable recommendations for the multidisciplinary management of cardiovascular risk in individuals with CHIP, and highlights current knowledge gaps.