Back

Polygenic and clinical risk scores and their impact on age at onset of cardiometabolic diseases and common cancers

Mars, N. J.; Koskela, J. T.; Ripatti, P.; Kiiskinen, T. T. J.; Havulinna, A. S.; Lindbohm, J. V.; Ahola-Olli, A.; Kurki, M.; Karjalainen, J.; Palta, P.; FinnGen, ; Neale, B. M.; Daly, M.; Salomaa, V.; Palotie, A.; Widen, E.; Ripatti, S.

2019-08-06 genomics
10.1101/727057 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPolygenic risk scores (PRS) have shown promise in predicting susceptibility to common diseases. However, the extent to which PRS and clinical risk factors act jointly and identify high-risk individuals for early onset of disease is unknown.\n\nMethodsWe used large-scale biobank data (the FinnGen study; n=135,300), with up to 46 years of prospective follow-up, and the FINRISK study with standardized clinical risk factor measurements to build genome-wide PRSs with >6M variants for coronary heart disease (CHD), type 2 diabetes (T2D), atrial fibrillation (AF), and breast and prostate cancer. We evaluated their associations with first disease events, age at disease onset, and impact together with routinely used clinical risk scores for predicting future disease.\n\nResultsCompared to the 20-80th percentiles, a PRS in the top 2.5% translated into hazard ratios (HRs) for incident disease ranging from 2.03 to 4.28 (p-values 1.96x10-59 to <1.00x10-100) and the bottom 2.5% into HRs ranging from 0.20 to 0.61. The estimated difference in age at disease onset between top and bottom 2.5% of PRSs was 6 to 13 years. Among early-onset cases, 21.3-32.9% had a PRS in the highest decile and in CHD and AF.\n\nConclusionsThe properties of PRS were similar in all five diseases. PRS identified a considerable proportion early-onset cases, and for all ages the performance of PRS was comparable to established clinical risk scores. These findings warrant further clinical studies on application of polygenic risk information for stratified screening or for guiding lifestyle and preventive medical interventions.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
32.7%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 23%
8.3%
3
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
6.3%
4
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
5
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
6
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.6%
7
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.0%
8
Atherosclerosis
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.0%
9
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
10
Genetic Epidemiology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
11
Genetics in Medicine
69 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.7%
13
European Journal of Epidemiology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
14
European Journal of Human Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.5%
15
The American Journal of Human Genetics
206 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
16
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
17
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
18
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
19
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 23%
0.8%
20
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 68%
0.7%
21
Nature Aging
51 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
22
Human Molecular Genetics
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
23
Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology
65 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%