Back

Large-Scale Multi-Omics Enhance Risk Prediction for Type 2 Diabetes

Xie, R.; Herder, C.; Schoettker, B.

2026-02-20 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.02.19.26346636 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionPolygenic risk scores (PRS), metabolomics, and proteomics have each shown promise in improving type 2 diabetes risk prediction, but their combined utility beyond established clinical models remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate whether integrating multi-omics biomarkers enhances 10-year type 2 diabetes risk prediction beyond single-omics extensions and the clinical Cambridge Diabetes Risk Score (CDRS), which includes HbA1c measurements. MethodsWe analysed data from 23,325 UK Biobank participants without diagnosed diabetes at baseline. Data for a PRS for type 2 diabetes, 11 metabolites, and 15 proteins were added to the CDRS to develop multi-omics prediction models. Model performance was evaluated using Harrells C-index and the net reclassification index (NRI). ResultsDuring 10 years of follow-up, 719 participants developed incident type 2 diabetes. Among individual omics layers, proteomics contributed the greatest improvement in predictive performance, increasing the C-index from 0.857 (clinical CDRS) to 0.880 ({Delta}C-index; +0.023; P < 0.001), with an NRI of 30.0%. The full multi-omics model, further significantly increased the C- index compared to a model combining the clinical CDRS with proteomics data (C-index, 0.886; {Delta}C-index; +0.006; P < 0.033). ConclusionIntegrating proteomics, metabolomics, and a diabetes-PRS into a clinical model substantially improves type 2 diabetes risk prediction beyond single-omics extensions. However, the C-index difference between the proteomics extended and full multi-omics extended models is small, and the clinical models extended with proteomics data would be easier to translate into routine care because it needs only the measurement of 15 proteins.

Published in Cardiovascular Diabetology · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.