Selection, optimization, and validation of ten chronic disease polygenic risk scores for clinical implementation in diverse populations
Lennon, N. J.; Kottyan, L. C.; Kachulis, C.; Abul-Husn, N.; Arias, J.; Belbin, G.; Below, J. E.; Berndt, S.; Chung, W.; Cimino, J. J.; Clayton, E. W.; Connolly, J. J.; Crosslin, D.; Dikilitas, O.; Edwards, D. R. V.; Feng, Q.; Fisher, M.; Freimuth, R.; Ge, T.; Glessner, J. T.; Gordon, A.; Guiducci, C.; Hakonarson, H.; Harden, M.; Harr, M.; Hirschhorn, J.; Hoggart, C.; Hsu, L.; Irvin, R.; Jarvik, G. P.; Karlson, E. W.; Karlson, E. W.; Khan, A.; Khera, A.; Kiryluk, K.; Kullo, I.; Larkin, K.; Limdi, N.; Linder, J. E.; Loos, R.; Luo, Y.; Malolepsza, E.; Manolio, T.; Martin, L. J.; McCarthy, L.; Mei
Show abstract
Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have improved in predictive performance supporting their use in clinical practice. Reduced predictive performance of PRS in diverse populations can exacerbate existing health disparities. The NHGRI-funded eMERGE Network is returning a PRS-based genome-informed risk assessment to 25,000 diverse adults and children. We assessed PRS performance, medical actionability, and potential clinical utility for 23 conditions. Standardized metrics were considered in the selection process with additional consideration given to strength of evidence in African and Hispanic populations. Ten conditions were selected with a range of high-risk thresholds: atrial fibrillation, breast cancer, chronic kidney disease, coronary heart disease, hypercholesterolemia, prostate cancer, asthma, type 1 diabetes, obesity, and type 2 diabetes. We developed a pipeline for clinical PRS implementation, used genetic ancestry to calibrate PRS mean and variance, created a framework for regulatory compliance, and developed a PRS clinical report. eMERGEs experience informs the infrastructure needed to implement PRS-based implementation in diverse clinical settings.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Validation of a Trans-Ancestry Polygenic Risk Score for Type 2 Diabetes in Diverse Populations 94%
- Evaluating Genome Sequencing Strategies: Trio, Singleton, and Standard Testing in Rare Disease Diagnosis 93%
- Beyond gene-disease validity: capturing structured data on inheritance, allelic-requirement, disease-relevant variant classes, and disease mechanism for inherited cardiac conditions 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Gene Curation Coalition: A global effort to harmonize gene-disease evidence resources 94%
- Genetic-Ancestry Analysis on >93,000 Individuals Undergoing Expanded Carrier Screening Reveals Limitations of Ethnicity-Based Medical Guidelines 93%
- Estimating diagnostic noise in panel-based genomic analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Returning Actionable Genomic Results in a Research Biobank: Analytic Validity, Clinical Implementation and Resource Utilization 95%
- Cancer PRSweb - an Online Repository with Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) for Major Cancer Traits and Their Phenome-wide Exploration in Two Independent Biobanks 94%
- The Phenotype-Genotype Reference Map: Improving biobank data science through replication. 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Body mass index and birth weight improve polygenic risk score for type 2 diabetes 91%
- Development and validation of decision rules models to stratify coronary artery disease, diabetes, and hypertension risk in preventive care: cohort study of returning UK Biobank participants 90%
- Dynamic Biobanking for Advancing Breast Cancer Research 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Validating and automating learning of cardiometabolic polygenic risk scores from direct-to-consumer genetic and phenotypic data: implications for scaling precision health research 95%
- Polygenic risk score portability for common diseases across genetically diverse populations 95%
- Critical assessment of variant prioritization methods for rare disease diagnosis within the Rare Genomes Project 92%
"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.