A new explained-variance based genetic risk score for predictive modeling of disease risk.

Pub Date : 2012-09-25 DOI:10.1515/1544-6115.1796
Ronglin Che, Alison A Motsinger-Reif
{"title":"A new explained-variance based genetic risk score for predictive modeling of disease risk.","authors":"Ronglin Che,&nbsp;Alison A Motsinger-Reif","doi":"10.1515/1544-6115.1796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The goal of association mapping is to identify genetic variants that predict disease, and as the field of human genetics matures, the number of successful association studies is increasing. Many such studies have shown that for many diseases, risk is explained by a reasonably large number of variants that each explains a very small amount of disease risk. This is prompting the use of genetic risk scores in building predictive models, where information across several variants is combined for predictive modeling. In the current study, we compare the performance of four previously proposed genetic risk score methods and present a new method for constructing genetic risk score that incorporates explained variance information. The methods compared include: a simple count Genetic Risk Score, an odds ratio weighted Genetic Risk Score, a direct logistic regression Genetic Risk Score, a polygenic Genetic Risk Score, and the new explained variance weighted Genetic Risk Score. We compare the methods using a wide range of simulations in two steps, with a range of the number of deleterious single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) explaining disease risk, genetic modes, baseline penetrances, sample sizes, relative risks (RR) and minor allele frequencies (MAF). Several measures of model performance were compared including overall power, C-statistic and Akaike's Information Criterion. Our results show the relative performance of methods differs significantly, with the new explained variance weighted GRS (EV-GRS) generally performing favorably to the other methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/1544-6115.1796","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/1544-6115.1796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

The goal of association mapping is to identify genetic variants that predict disease, and as the field of human genetics matures, the number of successful association studies is increasing. Many such studies have shown that for many diseases, risk is explained by a reasonably large number of variants that each explains a very small amount of disease risk. This is prompting the use of genetic risk scores in building predictive models, where information across several variants is combined for predictive modeling. In the current study, we compare the performance of four previously proposed genetic risk score methods and present a new method for constructing genetic risk score that incorporates explained variance information. The methods compared include: a simple count Genetic Risk Score, an odds ratio weighted Genetic Risk Score, a direct logistic regression Genetic Risk Score, a polygenic Genetic Risk Score, and the new explained variance weighted Genetic Risk Score. We compare the methods using a wide range of simulations in two steps, with a range of the number of deleterious single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) explaining disease risk, genetic modes, baseline penetrances, sample sizes, relative risks (RR) and minor allele frequencies (MAF). Several measures of model performance were compared including overall power, C-statistic and Akaike's Information Criterion. Our results show the relative performance of methods differs significantly, with the new explained variance weighted GRS (EV-GRS) generally performing favorably to the other methods.

分享
查看原文
一种新的基于解释方差的遗传风险评分,用于疾病风险的预测建模。
关联图谱的目标是识别预测疾病的遗传变异,随着人类遗传学领域的成熟,成功的关联研究的数量正在增加。许多这样的研究表明,对于许多疾病,风险是由相当多的变异来解释的,每个变异解释了非常少的疾病风险。这促使人们在建立预测模型时使用遗传风险评分,在这种模型中,跨几个变体的信息被结合起来进行预测建模。在本研究中,我们比较了先前提出的四种遗传风险评分方法的性能,并提出了一种包含解释方差信息的遗传风险评分的新方法。比较的方法包括:简单计数遗传风险评分法、优势比加权遗传风险评分法、直接逻辑回归遗传风险评分法、多基因遗传风险评分法和新解释方差加权遗传风险评分法。我们通过两步模拟比较了两种方法,其中有害单核苷酸多态性(snp)的数量范围可以解释疾病风险、遗传模式、基线外显率、样本量、相对风险(RR)和次要等位基因频率(MAF)。比较了模型性能的几个指标,包括总功率、c统计量和赤池信息标准。我们的研究结果表明,方法的相对性能差异很大,新的解释方差加权GRS (EV-GRS)总体上优于其他方法。
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
×
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