Improving reporting standards for polygenic scores in risk prediction studies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wand H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8609771 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Purpose of reviewThere is considerable interest in using polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for assessing risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). A barrier to the clinical use of PRSs is heterogeneity in how PRS studies are reported. In this review, we summarize approaches to establish a uniform reporting framework for PRSs for coronary heart disease (CHD), the most common form of ASCVD.Recent findingsReporting standards for PRSs need to be contextualized for disease specific applications. In addition to metrics of predictive performance, reporting standards for PRSs for CHD should include how cases/control were ascertained, degree of adjustment for conventional CHD risk factors, portability to diverse genetic ancestry groups and admixed individuals, and quality control measures for clinical deployment. Such a framework will enable PRSs to be optimized and benchmarked for clinical use.
| S-EPMC10495216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Methods for genetic risk prediction have been widely investigated in recent years. However, most available training data involves European samples, and it is currently unclear how to accurately predict disease risk in other populations. Previous studies have used either training data from European samples in large sample size or training data from the target population in small sample size, but not both. Here, we introduce a multiethnic polygenic risk score that combines training data from European samples and training data from the target population. We applied this approach to predict type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a Latino cohort using both publicly available European summary statistics in large sample size (Neff = 40k) and Latino training data in small sample size (Neff = 8k). Here, we attained a >70% relative improvement in prediction accuracy (from R2 = 0.027 to 0.047) compared to methods that use only one source of training data, consistent with large relative improvements in simulations. We observed a systematically lower load of T2D risk alleles in Latino individuals with more European ancestry, which could be explained by polygenic selection in ancestral European and/or Native American populations. We predict T2D in a South Asian UK Biobank cohort using European (Neff = 40k) and South Asian (Neff = 16k) training data and attained a >70% relative improvement in prediction accuracy, and application to predict height in an African UK Biobank cohort using European (N = 113k) and African (N = 2k) training data attained a 30% relative improvement. Our work reduces the gap in polygenic risk prediction accuracy between European and non-European target populations.
| S-EPMC5726434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified over 30 susceptibility loci associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Using AD GWAS data from the International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project (IGAP), Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) was successfully applied to predict life time risk of AD development. A recently introduced Polygenic Hazard Score (PHS) is able to quantify individuals with age-specific genetic risk for AD. The aim of this study was to quantify the age-specific genetic risk for AD with PRS and compare the results generated by PRS with those from PHS. Methods:Quantification of individual differences in age-specific genetic risk for AD identified by the PRS, was performed with Cox Regression on 9903 (2626 cases and 7277 controls) individuals from the Genetic and Environmental Risk in Alzheimer's Disease consortium (GERAD). Polygenic Hazard Scores were generated for the same individuals. The age-specific genetic risk for AD identified by the PRS was compared with that generated by the PHS. This was repeated using varying SNPs P-value thresholds for disease association. Results:Polygenic Risk Score significantly predicted the risk associated with age at AD onset when SNPs were preselected for association to AD at P ? 0.001. The strongest effect (B = 0.28, SE = 0.04, P = 2.5 × 10-12) was observed for PRS based upon genome-wide significant SNPs (P ? 5 × 10-8). The strength of association was weaker with less stringent SNP selection thresholds. Interpretation:Both PRS and PHS can be used to predict an age-specific risk for developing AD. The PHS approach uses SNP effect sizes derived with the Cox Proportional Hazard Regression model. When SNPs were selected based upon AD GWAS case/control P ? 10-3, we found no advantage of using SNP effects sizes calculated with the Cox Proportional Hazard Regression model in our study. When SNPs are selected for association with AD risk at P > 10-3, the age-specific risk prediction results are not significant for either PRS or PHS. However PHS could be more advantageous than PRS of age specific AD risk predictions when SNPs are prioritized for association with AD age at onset (i.e., powerful Cox Regression GWAS study).
| S-EPMC6414493 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We test 26 polygenic predictors using tens of thousands of genetic siblings from the UK Biobank (UKB), for whom we have SNP genotypes, health status, and phenotype information in late adulthood. Siblings have typically experienced similar environments during childhood, and exhibit negligible population stratification relative to each other. Therefore, the ability to predict differences in disease risk or complex trait values between siblings is a strong test of genomic prediction in humans. We compare validation results obtained using non-sibling subjects to those obtained among siblings and find that typically most of the predictive power persists in between-sibling designs. In the case of disease risk we test the extent to which higher polygenic risk score (PRS) identifies the affected sibling, and also compute Relative Risk Reduction as a function of risk score threshold. For quantitative traits we examine between-sibling differences in trait values as a function of predicted differences, and compare to performance in non-sibling pairs. Example results: Given 1 sibling with normal-range PRS score (< 84 percentile, < + 1 SD) and 1 sibling with high PRS score (top few percentiles, i.e. > + 2 SD), the predictors identify the affected sibling about 70-90% of the time across a variety of disease conditions, including Breast Cancer, Heart Attack, Diabetes, etc. 55-65% of the time the higher PRS sibling is the case. For quantitative traits such as height, the predictor correctly identifies the taller sibling roughly 80 percent of the time when the (male) height difference is 2 inches or more.
| S-EPMC7411027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeNon-European populations are under-represented in genetics studies, hindering clinical implementation of breast cancer polygenic risk scores (PRSs). We aimed to develop PRSs using the largest available studies of Asian ancestry and to assess the transferability of PRS across ethnic subgroups.MethodsThe development data set comprised 138,309 women from 17 case-control studies. PRSs were generated using a clumping and thresholding method, lasso penalized regression, an Empirical Bayes approach, a Bayesian polygenic prediction approach, or linear combinations of multiple PRSs. These PRSs were evaluated in 89,898 women from 3 prospective studies (1592 incident cases).ResultsThe best performing PRS (genome-wide set of single-nucleotide variations [formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism]) had a hazard ratio per unit SD of 1.62 (95% CI = 1.46-1.80) and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.635 (95% CI = 0.622-0.649). Combined Asian and European PRSs (333 single-nucleotide variations) had a hazard ratio per SD of 1.53 (95% CI = 1.37-1.71) and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.621 (95% CI = 0.608-0.635). The distribution of the latter PRS was different across ethnic subgroups, confirming the importance of population-specific calibration for valid estimation of breast cancer risk.ConclusionPRSs developed in this study, from association data from multiple ancestries, can enhance risk stratification for women of Asian ancestry.
| S-EPMC7612481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Polygenic prediction using genome-wide SNPs can provide high prediction accuracy for complex traits. Here, we investigate the question of how to account for genetic ancestry when conducting polygenic prediction. We show that the accuracy of polygenic prediction in structured populations may be partly due to genetic ancestry. However, we hypothesized that explicitly modeling ancestry could improve polygenic prediction accuracy. We analyzed three GWAS of hair color (HC), tanning ability (TA), and basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in European Americans (sample size from 7,440 to 9,822) and considered two widely used polygenic prediction approaches: polygenic risk scores (PRSs) and best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP). We compared polygenic prediction without correction for ancestry to polygenic prediction with ancestry as a separate component in the model. In 10-fold cross-validation using the PRS approach, the R(2) for HC increased by 66% (0.0456-0.0755; P < 10(-16)), the R(2) for TA increased by 123% (0.0154 to 0.0344; P < 10(-16)), and the liability-scale R(2) for BCC increased by 68% (0.0138-0.0232; P < 10(-16)) when explicitly modeling ancestry, which prevents ancestry effects from entering into each SNP effect and being overweighted. Surprisingly, explicitly modeling ancestry produces a similar improvement when using the BLUP approach, which fits all SNPs simultaneously in a single variance component and causes ancestry to be underweighted. We validate our findings via simulations, which show that the differences in prediction accuracy will increase in magnitude as sample sizes increase. In summary, our results show that explicitly modeling ancestry can be important in both PRS and BLUP prediction.
| S-EPMC4734143 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPolygenic risk scores (PRS), which offer information about genomic risk for common diseases, have been proposed for clinical implementation. The ways in which PRS information may influence a patient's health trajectory depend on how both the patient and their primary care provider (PCP) interpret and act on PRS information. We aimed to probe patient and PCP responses to PRS clinical reporting choices METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews of both patients (N=25) and PCPs (N=21) exploring responses to mock PRS clinical reports of two different designs: binary and continuous representations of PRS.ResultsMany patients did not understand the numbers representing risk, with high numeracy patients being the exception. However, all the patients still understood a key takeaway that they should ask their PCP about actions to lower their disease risk. PCPs described a diverse range of heuristics they would use to interpret and act on PRS information. Three separate use cases for PRS emerged: to aid in gray-area clinical decision-making, to encourage patients to do what PCPs think patients should be doing anyway (such as exercising regularly), and to identify previously unrecognized high-risk patients. PCPs indicated that receiving "below average risk" information could be both beneficial and potentially harmful, depending on the use case. For "increased risk" patients, PCPs were favorable towards integrating PRS information into their practice, though some would only act in the presence of evidence-based guidelines. PCPs describe the report as more than a way to convey information, viewing it as something to structure the whole interaction with the patient. Both patients and PCPs preferred the continuous over the binary representation of PRS (23/25 and 17/21, respectively). We offer recommendations for the developers of PRS to consider for PRS clinical report design in the light of these patient and PCP viewpoints.ConclusionsPCPs saw PRS information as a natural extension of their current practice. The most pressing gap for PRS implementation is evidence for clinical utility. Careful clinical report design can help ensure that benefits are realized and harms are minimized.
| S-EPMC9540716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPolygenic risk scores (PRSs) can stratify populations into cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk groups. We aimed to quantify the potential advantage of adding information on PRSs to conventional risk factors in the primary prevention of CVD.Methods and findingsUsing data from UK Biobank on 306,654 individuals without a history of CVD and not on lipid-lowering treatments (mean age [SD]: 56.0 [8.0] years; females: 57%; median follow-up: 8.1 years), we calculated measures of risk discrimination and reclassification upon addition of PRSs to risk factors in a conventional risk prediction model (i.e., age, sex, systolic blood pressure, smoking status, history of diabetes, and total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol). We then modelled the implications of initiating guideline-recommended statin therapy in a primary care setting using incidence rates from 2.1 million individuals from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The C-index, a measure of risk discrimination, was 0.710 (95% CI 0.703-0.717) for a CVD prediction model containing conventional risk predictors alone. Addition of information on PRSs increased the C-index by 0.012 (95% CI 0.009-0.015), and resulted in continuous net reclassification improvements of about 10% and 12% in cases and non-cases, respectively. If a PRS were assessed in the entire UK primary care population aged 40-75 years, assuming that statin therapy would be initiated in accordance with the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines (i.e., for persons with a predicted risk of ≥10% and for those with certain other risk factors, such as diabetes, irrespective of their 10-year predicted risk), then it could help prevent 1 additional CVD event for approximately every 5,750 individuals screened. By contrast, targeted assessment only among people at intermediate (i.e., 5% to <10%) 10-year CVD risk could help prevent 1 additional CVD event for approximately every 340 individuals screened. Such a targeted strategy could help prevent 7% more CVD events than conventional risk prediction alone. Potential gains afforded by assessment of PRSs on top of conventional risk factors would be about 1.5-fold greater than those provided by assessment of C-reactive protein, a plasma biomarker included in some risk prediction guidelines. Potential limitations of this study include its restriction to European ancestry participants and a lack of health economic evaluation.ConclusionsOur results suggest that addition of PRSs to conventional risk factors can modestly enhance prediction of first-onset CVD and could translate into population health benefits if used at scale.
| S-EPMC7808664 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPolygenic risk scores (PRS) serve as valuable tools for connecting initial genetic discoveries with clinical applications in disease risk estimation. However, limited studies have explored the association between PRS and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), particularly in predicting GDM risk among Chinese populations.AimTo evaluate the relationship between PRS and GDM and explore the predictive capability of PRS for GDM risk in a Chinese population.MethodsA prospective cohort study was conducted, which included 283 GDM and 2,258 non-GDM cases based on demographic information on pregnancies. GDM was diagnosed using the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 24-28 weeks. The strength of the association between PRS and GDM odds was assessed employing odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) derived from logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic curves, net reclassification improvement (NRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) were employed to evaluate the improvement in prediction achieved by the new model.ResultsWomen who developed GDM exhibited significantly higher PRS compared to control individuals (OR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.33-3.07). The PRS value remained positively associated with fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 1-hour post-glucose load (1-h OGTT), and 2-hour post-glucose load (2-h OGTT) (all p < 0.05). The incorporation of PRS led to a statistically significant improvement in the area under the curve (0.71, 95% CI: 0.66-0.75, p = 0.024) and improved discrimination and classification (IDI: 0.007, 95% CI: 0.003-0.012, p < 0.001; NRI: 0.258, 95% CI: 0.135-0.382, p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study highlights the increased odds of GDM associated with higher PRS values and modest improvements in predictive capability for GDM.
| S-EPMC11333217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe multifactorial risk prediction model BOADICEA enables identification of women at higher or lower risk of developing breast cancer. BOADICEA models genetic susceptibility in terms of the effects of rare variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes and a polygenic component, decomposed into an unmeasured and a measured component - the polygenic risk score (PRS). The current version was developed using a 313 SNP PRS. Here, we evaluated approaches to incorporating this PRS and alternative PRS in BOADICEA.MethodsThe mean, SD, and proportion of the overall polygenic component explained by the PRS (α2) need to be estimated. $\alpha $ was estimated using logistic regression, where the age-specific log-OR is constrained to be a function of the age-dependent polygenic relative risk in BOADICEA; and using a retrospective likelihood (RL) approach that models, in addition, the unmeasured polygenic component.ResultsParameters were computed for 11 PRS, including 6 variations of the 313 SNP PRS used in clinical trials and implementation studies. The logistic regression approach underestimates $\alpha $, as compared with the RL estimates. The RL $\alpha $ estimates were very close to those obtained by assuming proportionality to the OR per 1 SD, with the constant of proportionality estimated using the 313 SNP PRS. Small variations in the SNPs included in the PRS can lead to large differences in the mean.ConclusionsBOADICEA can be readily adapted to different PRS in a manner that maintains consistency of the model.Impact: The methods described facilitate comprehensive breast cancer risk assessment.
| S-EPMC9986688 | biostudies-literature