Predictive accuracy of a polygenic risk score-enhanced prediction model vs a clinical risk score for coronary artery disease
OA Location
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Importance The incremental value of polygenic risk scores in addition to well-established risk prediction models for coronary artery disease (CAD) is uncertain.
Objective To examine whether a polygenic risk score for CAD improves risk prediction beyond pooled cohort equations.
Design, Setting, and Participants Observational study of UK Biobank participants enrolled from 2006 to 2010. A case-control sample of 15 947 prevalent CAD cases and equal number of age and sex frequency–matched controls was used to optimize the predictive performance of a polygenic risk score for CAD based on summary statistics from published genome-wide association studies. A separate cohort of 352 660 individuals (with follow-up to 2017) was used to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the polygenic risk score, pooled cohort equations, and both combined for incident CAD.
Exposures Polygenic risk score for CAD, pooled cohort equations, and both combined.
Main Outcomes and Measures CAD (myocardial infarction and its related sequelae). Discrimination, calibration, and reclassification using a risk threshold of 7.5% were assessed.
Results In the cohort of 352 660 participants (mean age, 55.9 years; 205 297 women [58.2%]) used to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the examined models, there were 6272 incident CAD events over a median of 8 years of follow-up. CAD discrimination for polygenic risk score, pooled cohort equations, and both combined resulted in C statistics of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.62), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.77), and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.79), respectively. The change in C statistic between the latter 2 models was 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.03). Calibration of the models showed overestimation of risk by pooled cohort equations, which was corrected after recalibration. Using a risk threshold of 7.5%, addition of the polygenic risk score to pooled cohort equations resulted in a net reclassification improvement of 4.4% (95% CI, 3.5% to 5.3%) for cases and −0.4% (95% CI, −0.5% to −0.4%) for noncases (overall net reclassification improvement, 4.0% [95% CI, 3.1% to 4.9%]).
Conclusions and Relevance The addition of a polygenic risk score for CAD to pooled cohort equations was associated with a statistically significant, yet modest, improvement in the predictive accuracy for incident CAD and improved risk stratification for only a small proportion of individuals. The use of genetic information over the pooled cohort equations model warrants further investigation before clinical implementation.
Objective To examine whether a polygenic risk score for CAD improves risk prediction beyond pooled cohort equations.
Design, Setting, and Participants Observational study of UK Biobank participants enrolled from 2006 to 2010. A case-control sample of 15 947 prevalent CAD cases and equal number of age and sex frequency–matched controls was used to optimize the predictive performance of a polygenic risk score for CAD based on summary statistics from published genome-wide association studies. A separate cohort of 352 660 individuals (with follow-up to 2017) was used to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the polygenic risk score, pooled cohort equations, and both combined for incident CAD.
Exposures Polygenic risk score for CAD, pooled cohort equations, and both combined.
Main Outcomes and Measures CAD (myocardial infarction and its related sequelae). Discrimination, calibration, and reclassification using a risk threshold of 7.5% were assessed.
Results In the cohort of 352 660 participants (mean age, 55.9 years; 205 297 women [58.2%]) used to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the examined models, there were 6272 incident CAD events over a median of 8 years of follow-up. CAD discrimination for polygenic risk score, pooled cohort equations, and both combined resulted in C statistics of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.62), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.77), and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.79), respectively. The change in C statistic between the latter 2 models was 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.03). Calibration of the models showed overestimation of risk by pooled cohort equations, which was corrected after recalibration. Using a risk threshold of 7.5%, addition of the polygenic risk score to pooled cohort equations resulted in a net reclassification improvement of 4.4% (95% CI, 3.5% to 5.3%) for cases and −0.4% (95% CI, −0.5% to −0.4%) for noncases (overall net reclassification improvement, 4.0% [95% CI, 3.1% to 4.9%]).
Conclusions and Relevance The addition of a polygenic risk score for CAD to pooled cohort equations was associated with a statistically significant, yet modest, improvement in the predictive accuracy for incident CAD and improved risk stratification for only a small proportion of individuals. The use of genetic information over the pooled cohort equations model warrants further investigation before clinical implementation.
Date Issued
2020-02-18
Date Acceptance
2019-12-20
Citation
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 2020, 323 (7), pp.636-645
ISSN
0098-7484
Publisher
American Medical Association
Start Page
636
End Page
645
Journal / Book Title
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
Volume
323
Issue
7
Copyright Statement
© 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
Sponsor
Health Data Research Uk
Cancer Research UK
Cancer Research UK
Cancer Research UK
Medical Research Council (MRC)
Identifier
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000517319500018&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=1ba7043ffcc86c417c072aa74d649202
Grant Number
Health Data Research UK
‘Mechanomics’ PRC project grant 22184
C57955/A24390
24390
MR/L01341X/1
Subjects
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Medicine, General & Internal
General & Internal Medicine
HEART-DISEASE
ASSOCIATION
VALIDATION
Publication Status
Published
Date Publish Online
2020-02-18