多基因风险评分在筛查、预测和风险分层中的表现:多基因评分目录中数据的二次分析。

BMJ medicine Pub Date : 2023-10-17 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554
Aroon D Hingorani, Jasmine Gratton, Chris Finan, A Floriaan Schmidt, Riyaz Patel, Reecha Sofat, Valerie Kuan, Claudia Langenberg, Harry Hemingway, Joan K Morris, Nicholas J Wald
{"title":"多基因风险评分在筛查、预测和风险分层中的表现:多基因评分目录中数据的二次分析。","authors":"Aroon D Hingorani, Jasmine Gratton, Chris Finan, A Floriaan Schmidt, Riyaz Patel, Reecha Sofat, Valerie Kuan, Claudia Langenberg, Harry Hemingway, Joan K Morris, Nicholas J Wald","doi":"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To clarify the performance of polygenic risk scores in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Polygenic Score Catalog, April 2022. Secondary analysis of 3915 performance metric estimates for 926 polygenic risk scores for 310 diseases to generate estimates of performance in population screening, individual risk, and population risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Individuals contributing to the published studies in the Polygenic Score Catalog.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Detection rate for a 5% false positive rate (DR<sub>5</sub>) and the population odds of becoming affected given a positive result; individual odds of becoming affected for a person with a particular polygenic score; and odds of becoming affected for groups of individuals in different portions of a polygenic risk score distribution. Coronary artery disease and breast cancer were used as illustrative examples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For performance in population screening, median DR<sub>5</sub> for all polygenic risk scores and all diseases studied was 11% (interquartile range 8-18%). Median DR<sub>5</sub> was 12% (9-19%) for polygenic risk scores for coronary artery disease and 10% (9-12%) for breast cancer. The population odds of becoming affected given a positive results were 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:21 for breast cancer, with background 10 year odds of 1:19 and 1:41, respectively, which are typical for these diseases at age 50. For individual risk prediction, the corresponding 10 year odds of becoming affected for individuals aged 50 with a polygenic risk score at the 2.5th, 25th, 75th, and 97.5th centiles were 1:54, 1:29, 1:15, and 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:91, 1:56, 1:34, and 1:21 for breast cancer. In terms of population risk stratification, at age 50, the risk of coronary artery disease was divided into five groups, with 10 year odds of 1:41 and 1:11 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, respectively. The 10 year odds was 1:7 for the upper 2.5% of the polygenic risk score distribution for coronary artery disease, a group that contributed 7% of cases. The corresponding estimates for breast cancer were 1:72 and 1:26 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, and 1:19 for the upper 2.5% of the distribution, which contributed 6% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Polygenic risk scores performed poorly in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification. Strong claims about the effect of polygenic risk scores on healthcare seem to be disproportionate to their performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":72433,"journal":{"name":"BMJ medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":"e000554"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10582890/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of polygenic risk scores in screening, prediction, and risk stratification: secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.\",\"authors\":\"Aroon D Hingorani, Jasmine Gratton, Chris Finan, A Floriaan Schmidt, Riyaz Patel, Reecha Sofat, Valerie Kuan, Claudia Langenberg, Harry Hemingway, Joan K Morris, Nicholas J Wald\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To clarify the performance of polygenic risk scores in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Polygenic Score Catalog, April 2022. Secondary analysis of 3915 performance metric estimates for 926 polygenic risk scores for 310 diseases to generate estimates of performance in population screening, individual risk, and population risk stratification.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Individuals contributing to the published studies in the Polygenic Score Catalog.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Detection rate for a 5% false positive rate (DR<sub>5</sub>) and the population odds of becoming affected given a positive result; individual odds of becoming affected for a person with a particular polygenic score; and odds of becoming affected for groups of individuals in different portions of a polygenic risk score distribution. Coronary artery disease and breast cancer were used as illustrative examples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For performance in population screening, median DR<sub>5</sub> for all polygenic risk scores and all diseases studied was 11% (interquartile range 8-18%). Median DR<sub>5</sub> was 12% (9-19%) for polygenic risk scores for coronary artery disease and 10% (9-12%) for breast cancer. The population odds of becoming affected given a positive results were 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:21 for breast cancer, with background 10 year odds of 1:19 and 1:41, respectively, which are typical for these diseases at age 50. For individual risk prediction, the corresponding 10 year odds of becoming affected for individuals aged 50 with a polygenic risk score at the 2.5th, 25th, 75th, and 97.5th centiles were 1:54, 1:29, 1:15, and 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:91, 1:56, 1:34, and 1:21 for breast cancer. In terms of population risk stratification, at age 50, the risk of coronary artery disease was divided into five groups, with 10 year odds of 1:41 and 1:11 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, respectively. The 10 year odds was 1:7 for the upper 2.5% of the polygenic risk score distribution for coronary artery disease, a group that contributed 7% of cases. The corresponding estimates for breast cancer were 1:72 and 1:26 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, and 1:19 for the upper 2.5% of the distribution, which contributed 6% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Polygenic risk scores performed poorly in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification. Strong claims about the effect of polygenic risk scores on healthcare seem to be disproportionate to their performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ medicine\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"e000554\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10582890/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjmed-2023-000554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:阐明多基因风险评分在人群筛查、个体风险预测和人群风险分层中的表现。设计:对多基因评分目录中的数据进行二次分析。设置:多基因成绩目录,2022年4月。对310种疾病的926个多基因风险评分的3915个绩效指标估计值进行二次分析,以生成对人群筛查、个体风险和人群风险分层绩效的估计值。参与者:对多基因评分目录中已发表的研究做出贡献的个人。主要结果指标:5%假阳性率(DR5)的检测率和阳性结果下受影响的人群几率;具有特定多基因评分的人受影响的个体几率;以及在多基因风险评分分布的不同部分中的个体组受到影响的几率。冠状动脉疾病和乳腺癌症被用作说明性例子。结果:在人群筛查中,所有多基因风险评分和研究的所有疾病的DR5中位数为11%(四分位间距8-18%)。冠状动脉疾病多基因风险评分的中位DR5为12%(9-19%),癌症为10%(9-12%)。在阳性结果的情况下,受影响的人群冠状动脉疾病的几率为1:8,癌症的几率为1:21,背景为10 年发病率分别为1:19和1:41,这是50岁时这些疾病的典型发病率。对于个人风险预测,对应的10 对于50岁的多基因风险评分为2.5、25、75和97.5百分位数的个体,冠状动脉疾病的患病年数分别为1∶54、1∶29、1∶15和1∶8,乳腺癌症的患病年率分别为1分91、1∶56、1∶34和1∶21。在人群风险分层方面,50岁时患冠状动脉疾病的风险被分为五组,其中10组 最低和最高五分之一组的年赔率分别为1:41和1:11。10 冠状动脉疾病多基因风险评分分布中较高2.5%的患者的年发病率为1:7,该组占7%的病例。癌症的相应估计值为:最低和最高五分之一组为1:72和1:26,高2.5%的分布为1:19,占6%的病例。结论:多基因风险评分在人群筛查、个体风险预测和人群风险分层方面表现不佳。关于多基因风险评分对医疗保健影响的有力说法似乎与他们的表现不成比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Performance of polygenic risk scores in screening, prediction, and risk stratification: secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.

Performance of polygenic risk scores in screening, prediction, and risk stratification: secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.

Performance of polygenic risk scores in screening, prediction, and risk stratification: secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.

Performance of polygenic risk scores in screening, prediction, and risk stratification: secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.

Objective: To clarify the performance of polygenic risk scores in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification.

Design: Secondary analysis of data in the Polygenic Score Catalog.

Setting: Polygenic Score Catalog, April 2022. Secondary analysis of 3915 performance metric estimates for 926 polygenic risk scores for 310 diseases to generate estimates of performance in population screening, individual risk, and population risk stratification.

Participants: Individuals contributing to the published studies in the Polygenic Score Catalog.

Main outcome measures: Detection rate for a 5% false positive rate (DR5) and the population odds of becoming affected given a positive result; individual odds of becoming affected for a person with a particular polygenic score; and odds of becoming affected for groups of individuals in different portions of a polygenic risk score distribution. Coronary artery disease and breast cancer were used as illustrative examples.

Results: For performance in population screening, median DR5 for all polygenic risk scores and all diseases studied was 11% (interquartile range 8-18%). Median DR5 was 12% (9-19%) for polygenic risk scores for coronary artery disease and 10% (9-12%) for breast cancer. The population odds of becoming affected given a positive results were 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:21 for breast cancer, with background 10 year odds of 1:19 and 1:41, respectively, which are typical for these diseases at age 50. For individual risk prediction, the corresponding 10 year odds of becoming affected for individuals aged 50 with a polygenic risk score at the 2.5th, 25th, 75th, and 97.5th centiles were 1:54, 1:29, 1:15, and 1:8 for coronary artery disease and 1:91, 1:56, 1:34, and 1:21 for breast cancer. In terms of population risk stratification, at age 50, the risk of coronary artery disease was divided into five groups, with 10 year odds of 1:41 and 1:11 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, respectively. The 10 year odds was 1:7 for the upper 2.5% of the polygenic risk score distribution for coronary artery disease, a group that contributed 7% of cases. The corresponding estimates for breast cancer were 1:72 and 1:26 for the lowest and highest quintile groups, and 1:19 for the upper 2.5% of the distribution, which contributed 6% of cases.

Conclusion: Polygenic risk scores performed poorly in population screening, individual risk prediction, and population risk stratification. Strong claims about the effect of polygenic risk scores on healthcare seem to be disproportionate to their performance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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