Beyond event-rate enrichment: proteomic risk scores for mechanism-aware prevention trial design

Background. Blood-based biomarkers are increasingly proposed for identifying high-risk individuals before clinical disease and for making prevention-oriented trials more efficient. Prognostic enrichment can increase event rates, but trial efficiency also depends on whether the intervention effect is preserved in the enriched population. Methods. Using the UK Biobank Pharma Proteomics Project, we trained disease-specific proteomic risk scores (ProRS) from 2,916 plasma proteins with elastic-net Cox models. We compared ProRS, polygenic risk scores (PRS), and combined PRS--ProRS scores across ten incident diseases. We estimated cumulative incidence and theoretical two-arm time-to-event trial sample sizes across risk strata. To evaluate effect preservation, we examined six intervention-analogue exposure--outcome pairs spanning genetic (PCSK9/coronary artery disease, APOE/Alzheimer's disease, PPARG/type 2 diabetes, IL23R/Crohn's disease), behavioural (physical activity/all-cause mortality), and pharmacological (RAAS inhibitors versus calcium channel blockers/coronary artery disease) examples. Results. ProRS outperformed PRS for 9 of 10 diseases (median C-index 0.75 versus 0.61). ProRS and PRS were weakly correlated (median Pearson |r| = 0.04), and joint PRS--ProRS stratification identified groups with higher observed incidence than either score alone for several endpoints. In the top risk quartile, combined-score enrichment reduced theoretical required sample sizes by 32--74\% under a fixed 20\% relative hazard reduction. These gains were not always preserved when stratum-specific intervention-analogue effects were used. Effects were broadly preserved for APOE/Alzheimer's disease and physical activity/mortality. The PPARG/type 2 diabetes effect attenuated toward the null under all three score types, showing that event-rate enrichment does not guarantee effect preservation. For IL23R/Crohn's disease and the antihypertensive comparison, point estimates differed across score types -- preserved under polygenic but attenuated under proteomic enrichment -- but confidence intervals were wide and overlapping. Conclusions. Proteomic risk scores can identify high-event-rate populations for prevention-oriented trials, but event-rate enrichment alone is insufficient for trial design. Biomarker-guided enrichment should evaluate mechanism-specific effect preservation and may be preferable as a stratification or adaptive-design variable rather than as a restrictive eligibility criterion.