Back

Polygenic Risk and Genetic Predisposition in Post-Traumatic Epilepsy: A Framework for Risk Estimation

Chen, J. W.; Le, C.; Cui, K.; Alexeeva, O. M.; Joo, J.; Bailey, J.

2026-09-12 genetic and genomic medicine
10.64898/2026.09.10.26362755 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE) can be a lifelong complication of traumatic brain injury (TBI). We hypothesize that PTE develops according to a Two-Hit Hypothesis, in which the first hit is a genetic predisposition and the second hit is the TBI. Using two independent datasets, we provide the first evidence that PTE is a polygenic disorder, and we propose a whole-exome sequencing (WES) based framework to estimate the risk of developing PTE. Methods From a pool of thousands of screened veterans, we recruited a cohort of PTE subjects (n=28) and a control cohort of TBI subjects without PTE (n=22) and then performed WES. Approximately 375000 variants identified in each subject were compared to approximately 15000 verified epilepsy-associated variants from ClinVar. Fisher's exact test was used to identify variants associated with PTE, which were subsequently classified as either PTE-prone or PTE-protective. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated at both the variant and subject levels. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the predictive model. A second dataset was used to validate the model, and logistic calibration was performed to estimate the probability of developing PTE. Results Thirty PTE-prone and 56 PTE-protective variants were identified, with corresponding large-effect ORs. ROC analysis demonstrated excellent discrimination (AUC=0.97). Polygenic variant patterns differed between cohorts, with a predominance of PTE-prone variants in affected individuals and PTE-protective variants in controls. Conclusion Our findings support a polygenic framework consistent with the Two-Hit Hypothesis. In addition, we developed a framework to estimate individual polygenic risk for PTE.

Matching journals

The top 3 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.