Precision Prostate Cancer Screening with a Polygenic Risk Score
Tasa, T.; Puustusmaa, M.; Tonisson, N.; Kolk, B.; Padrik, P.
Show abstract
Prostate cancer (PC) is the second-most common type of cancer and the fifth-leading cause of cancer-related death in men worldwide. Genome-wide association studies have identified numerous genetic variants (SNPs) independently associated with PC. The effects of such SNPs can be combined into a single polygenic risk score (PRS). Stratification of men according to PRS could be applied in secondary prevention. We aimed to construct a PRS model and to develop a pipeline for personalized prostate cancer screening. Previously published PRS models for predicting the risk of prostate cancer were collected from the literature. These were validated on the Estonian Biobank (EGC) consisting of a total of 16,390 quality-controlled genotypes with 262 prevalent and 428 incident PC cases and on 209 634 samples in the UK Biobank with 3254 prevalent cases and 6959 incident cases. The best performing model was selected based on the AUC in prevalent data and independently validated in both incident datasets. Using Estonian PC background information, we performed absolute risk simulations and developed individual risk-based clinical follow-up recommendations. The best-performing PRS included 121 SNPs. The C-index of the Cox regression model associating PC status with PRS was 0.641 (SE = 0.015) with a hazard ratio of 1.65 (95% confidence interval 1.51 - 1.81) on the incident EGC dataset. The model is able to identify individuals with more than a 3-fold risk increase. The risk of an average 45-year old could be attained by individuals between the ages of 41 and 52. A 41-year old male on the 95th percentile has the same risk as an average 45-year old but by age 55, he has attained the same genetic risk as an average 68-year-old. PRS is a powerful predictor of prostate cancer risk that can be combined with current non-invasive practices of PC screening. We have developed PRS-based recommendations for personalized PSA testing. Our approach is easily adaptable to other nationalities by using population-specific background data of other genetically similar populations.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-coding genetic variants underlying higher prostate cancer risk in men of African ancestry 94%
- Androgen deprivation upregulates SPINK1 expression and potentiates cellular plasticity in prostate cancer 91%
- TNF Blockade Reduces Prostatic Hyperplasia and Inflammation while Limiting BPH Diagnosis in Patients with Autoimmune Disease 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Accurate prognosis for localized prostate cancer through coherent voting networks and multi-omic data 94%
- PathProfiler: Automated Quality Assessment of Retrospective Histopathology Whole-Slide Image Cohorts by Artificial Intelligence, A Case Study for Prostate Cancer Research 91%
- CD117/c-kit Represents a Prostate Cancer Stem-Like Subpopulation Driving Progression, Migration, and TKI Resistance 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Applying a genetic risk score for prostate cancer to men with lower urinary tract symptoms in primary care to predict prostate cancer diagnosis: a cohort study in the UK Biobank 94%
- Loss of ARID1A accelerates prostate tumourigenesis with a proliferative collagen-poor phenotype through co-operation with AP1 subunit cFos 91%
- Peroxisomal β-oxidation enzyme, DECR2, regulates lipid metabolism and promotes treatment resistance in advanced prostate cancer 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- African-specific improvement of a polygenic hazard score for age at diagnosis of prostate cancer 95%
- Circulating insulin-like growth factor-I, total and free testosterone concentrations and prostate cancer risk in 200,000 men in UK Biobank 93%
- Biomarker-based outcome prediction in prostate adenocarcinoma depends on the TMPRSS2-ERG status 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.