Plasma proteomics for risk prediction of Alzheimer's disease in the general population

IF 8 1区 医学 Q1 CELL BIOLOGY
Aging Cell Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1111/acel.14330
Sisi Yang, Ziliang Ye, Panpan He, Yuanyuan Zhang, Mengyi Liu, Chun Zhou, Yanjun Zhang, Xiaoqin Gan, Yu Huang, Hao Xiang, Xianhui Qin
{"title":"Plasma proteomics for risk prediction of Alzheimer's disease in the general population","authors":"Sisi Yang, Ziliang Ye, Panpan He, Yuanyuan Zhang, Mengyi Liu, Chun Zhou, Yanjun Zhang, Xiaoqin Gan, Yu Huang, Hao Xiang, Xianhui Qin","doi":"10.1111/acel.14330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We aimed to develop and validate a protein risk score for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) and compare its performance with a validated clinical risk model (Cognitive Health and Dementia Risk Index for AD [CogDrisk‐AD]) and apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotypes. The development cohort, consisting of 35,547 participants from England in the UK Biobank, was randomly divided into a 7:3 training–testing ratio. The validation cohort included 4667 participants from Scotland and Wales in the UK Biobank. In the training set, an AD protein risk score was constructed using 31 proteins out of 2911 proteins. In the testing set, the AD protein risk score had a C‐index of 0.867 (95% CI, 0.828, 0.906) for AD prediction, followed by CogDrisk‐AD risk factors (C‐index, 0.856; 95% CI, 0.823, 0.889), and APOE genotypes (C‐index, 0.705; 95% CI, 0.660, 0.750). Adding the AD protein risk score to CogDrisk‐AD risk factors (C‐index increase, 0.050; 95% CI, 0.008, 0.093) significantly improved the predictive performance for AD. However, adding CogDrisk‐AD risk factors (C‐index increase, 0.040; 95% CI, −0.007, 0.086) or APOE genotypes (C‐index increase, 0.000; 95% CI, −0.054, 0.055) to the AD protein risk score did not significantly improve the predictive performance for AD. The top 10 proteins with the highest coefficients in the AD protein risk score contributed most of the predictive power for AD risk. These results were verified in the external validation cohort. EGFR, GFAP, and CHGA were identified as key proteins within the protein network. Our result suggests that the AD protein risk score demonstrated a good predictive performance for AD risk.","PeriodicalId":119,"journal":{"name":"Aging Cell","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging Cell","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acel.14330","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to develop and validate a protein risk score for predicting Alzheimer's disease (AD) and compare its performance with a validated clinical risk model (Cognitive Health and Dementia Risk Index for AD [CogDrisk‐AD]) and apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotypes. The development cohort, consisting of 35,547 participants from England in the UK Biobank, was randomly divided into a 7:3 training–testing ratio. The validation cohort included 4667 participants from Scotland and Wales in the UK Biobank. In the training set, an AD protein risk score was constructed using 31 proteins out of 2911 proteins. In the testing set, the AD protein risk score had a C‐index of 0.867 (95% CI, 0.828, 0.906) for AD prediction, followed by CogDrisk‐AD risk factors (C‐index, 0.856; 95% CI, 0.823, 0.889), and APOE genotypes (C‐index, 0.705; 95% CI, 0.660, 0.750). Adding the AD protein risk score to CogDrisk‐AD risk factors (C‐index increase, 0.050; 95% CI, 0.008, 0.093) significantly improved the predictive performance for AD. However, adding CogDrisk‐AD risk factors (C‐index increase, 0.040; 95% CI, −0.007, 0.086) or APOE genotypes (C‐index increase, 0.000; 95% CI, −0.054, 0.055) to the AD protein risk score did not significantly improve the predictive performance for AD. The top 10 proteins with the highest coefficients in the AD protein risk score contributed most of the predictive power for AD risk. These results were verified in the external validation cohort. EGFR, GFAP, and CHGA were identified as key proteins within the protein network. Our result suggests that the AD protein risk score demonstrated a good predictive performance for AD risk.

Abstract Image

血浆蛋白质组学用于普通人群阿尔茨海默病的风险预测
我们的目的是开发并验证一种用于预测阿尔茨海默病(AD)的蛋白质风险评分,并将其性能与经过验证的临床风险模型(AD 认知健康与痴呆风险指数 [CogDrisk-AD])和载脂蛋白 E(APOE)基因型进行比较。开发队列由英国生物库中来自英格兰的 35,547 名参与者组成,按 7:3 的训练-测试比例随机划分。验证队列包括英国生物库中来自苏格兰和威尔士的 4667 名参与者。在训练集中,使用 2911 个蛋白质中的 31 个蛋白质构建了 AD 蛋白质风险评分。在测试集中,AD蛋白风险评分对AD预测的C指数为0.867(95% CI,0.828,0.906),其次是CogDrisk-AD风险因素(C指数,0.856;95% CI,0.823,0.889)和APOE基因型(C指数,0.705;95% CI,0.660,0.750)。在CogDrisk-AD风险因素中加入AD蛋白风险评分(C指数增加,0.050;95% CI,0.008,0.093)可显著提高AD的预测性能。然而,将 CogDrisk-AD 风险因素(C-指数增加 0.040;95% CI,-0.007,0.086)或 APOE 基因型(C-指数增加 0.000;95% CI,-0.054,0.055)添加到 AD 蛋白质风险评分中并不能明显提高对 AD 的预测能力。AD蛋白风险评分中系数最高的前10个蛋白对AD风险的预测能力贡献最大。这些结果在外部验证队列中得到了验证。表皮生长因子受体、GFAP和CHGA被确定为蛋白质网络中的关键蛋白质。我们的研究结果表明,AD 蛋白质风险评分具有良好的AD 风险预测性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Aging Cell
Aging Cell Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cell Biology
自引率
2.60%
发文量
212
期刊介绍: Aging Cell is an Open Access journal that focuses on the core aspects of the biology of aging, encompassing the entire spectrum of geroscience. The journal's content is dedicated to publishing research that uncovers the mechanisms behind the aging process and explores the connections between aging and various age-related diseases. This journal aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the biological underpinnings of aging and its implications for human health. The journal is widely recognized and its content is abstracted and indexed by numerous databases and services, which facilitates its accessibility and impact in the scientific community. These include: Academic Search (EBSCO Publishing) Academic Search Alumni Edition (EBSCO Publishing) Academic Search Premier (EBSCO Publishing) Biological Science Database (ProQuest) CAS: Chemical Abstracts Service (ACS) Embase (Elsevier) InfoTrac (GALE Cengage) Ingenta Select ISI Alerting Services Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition (Clarivate Analytics) MEDLINE/PubMed (NLM) Natural Science Collection (ProQuest) PubMed Dietary Supplement Subset (NLM) Science Citation Index Expanded (Clarivate Analytics) SciTech Premium Collection (ProQuest) Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) Being indexed in these databases ensures that the research published in Aging Cell is discoverable by researchers, clinicians, and other professionals interested in the field of aging and its associated health issues. This broad coverage helps to disseminate the journal's findings and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in geroscience.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信