Back

Contextualizing the Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores using Absolute Risk Models in Diverse Ancestry Populations

Chatterjee, N.; Martina, F.; Kachuri, L.; Natarajan, P.; Witte, J.; Huo, D.

2026-06-04 genetic and genomic medicine
10.64898/2026.06.03.26354842 medRxiv
Show abstract

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are emerging as powerful tools for quantifying inherited risk for common diseases and, in some cases, are approaching clinical implementation. A major concern for PRS implementation is their limited accuracy in non-European populations, particularly in those of African ancestry. However, past evaluations have focused on metrics such as relative risk or AUC, which do not capture background risk arising from contextual factors. We introduce a novel measure of variable importance, the conditional average derivative estimator (CADE), to evaluate PRS utility across diverse contexts and populations within absolute risk models that integrate PRSs with other relevant risk factors. We illustrate this framework by integrating PRSs for breast and prostate cancer within age-specific absolute risk models for incidence and mortality fit using individual-level data from the All of Us Research Program with inputs from the National Cancer Institute SEER cancer registry. Our projections show that although the PRSs are known to have the lowest discriminatory accuracy in African Americans (AA), there are contexts in which they provide greater utility, such as for the stratification of prostate cancer risk and mortality, where the CADE values for AA were 2- and 7-fold higher than for European Americans. These findings suggest that conclusions about the limited clinical utility of PRS in non-European populations may be premature and underscore the need to quantify PRS risk-stratification utility at the absolute-risk level, while accounting for disease onset, survival, and broader health and economic factors.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
14.1%
2
The American Journal of Human Genetics
206 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
12.3%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
4
Genetics in Medicine
69 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 36%
4.2%
6
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.1%
7
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
8
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 10%
3.5%
9
Human Genetics and Genomics Advances
70 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
10
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.0%
11
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 43%
2.8%
12
European Journal of Human Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
13
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
14
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
15
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
16
Journal of Medical Genetics
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
Human Molecular Genetics
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
18
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.3%
19
Genetic Epidemiology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
20
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
21
BioData Mining
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
22
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 19%
0.9%
23
npj Genomic Medicine
33 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
25
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
26
Breast Cancer Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
27
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%