Literature DB >> 33444330

Polygenic risk scores in cardiovascular risk prediction: A cohort study and modelling analyses.

Luanluan Sun1, Lisa Pennells1, Stephen Kaptoge1, Christopher P Nelson2, Scott C Ritchie1,3, Gad Abraham1,3, Matthew Arnold1, Steven Bell1, Thomas Bolton1, Stephen Burgess1, Frank Dudbridge2,4, Qi Guo1, Eleni Sofianopoulou1, David Stevens1, John R Thompson2, Adam S Butterworth1, Angela Wood1, John Danesh1,5, Nilesh J Samani2,4, Michael Inouye1,3,6, Emanuele Di Angelantonio1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can stratify populations into cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk groups. We aimed to quantify the potential advantage of adding information on PRSs to conventional risk factors in the primary prevention of CVD. METHODS AND
FINDINGS: Using data from UK Biobank on 306,654 individuals without a history of CVD and not on lipid-lowering treatments (mean age [SD]: 56.0 [8.0] years; females: 57%; median follow-up: 8.1 years), we calculated measures of risk discrimination and reclassification upon addition of PRSs to risk factors in a conventional risk prediction model (i.e., age, sex, systolic blood pressure, smoking status, history of diabetes, and total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol). We then modelled the implications of initiating guideline-recommended statin therapy in a primary care setting using incidence rates from 2.1 million individuals from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The C-index, a measure of risk discrimination, was 0.710 (95% CI 0.703-0.717) for a CVD prediction model containing conventional risk predictors alone. Addition of information on PRSs increased the C-index by 0.012 (95% CI 0.009-0.015), and resulted in continuous net reclassification improvements of about 10% and 12% in cases and non-cases, respectively. If a PRS were assessed in the entire UK primary care population aged 40-75 years, assuming that statin therapy would be initiated in accordance with the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines (i.e., for persons with a predicted risk of ≥10% and for those with certain other risk factors, such as diabetes, irrespective of their 10-year predicted risk), then it could help prevent 1 additional CVD event for approximately every 5,750 individuals screened. By contrast, targeted assessment only among people at intermediate (i.e., 5% to <10%) 10-year CVD risk could help prevent 1 additional CVD event for approximately every 340 individuals screened. Such a targeted strategy could help prevent 7% more CVD events than conventional risk prediction alone. Potential gains afforded by assessment of PRSs on top of conventional risk factors would be about 1.5-fold greater than those provided by assessment of C-reactive protein, a plasma biomarker included in some risk prediction guidelines. Potential limitations of this study include its restriction to European ancestry participants and a lack of health economic evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that addition of PRSs to conventional risk factors can modestly enhance prediction of first-onset CVD and could translate into population health benefits if used at scale.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33444330      PMCID: PMC7808664          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003498

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS Med        ISSN: 1549-1277            Impact factor:   11.069


  36 in total

1.  2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson; Harmon S Jordan; Lev Nevo; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 2.  The personal and clinical utility of polygenic risk scores.

Authors:  Ali Torkamani; Nathan E Wineinger; Eric J Topol
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 3.  Stroke genetics: discovery, biology, and clinical applications.

Authors:  Martin Dichgans; Sara L Pulit; Jonathan Rosand
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 44.182

Review 4.  2016 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidemia for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in the Adult.

Authors:  Todd J Anderson; Jean Grégoire; Glen J Pearson; Arden R Barry; Patrick Couture; Martin Dawes; Gordon A Francis; Jacques Genest; Steven Grover; Milan Gupta; Robert A Hegele; David C Lau; Lawrence A Leiter; Eva Lonn; G B John Mancini; Ruth McPherson; Daniel Ngui; Paul Poirier; John L Sievenpiper; James A Stone; George Thanassoulis; Richard Ward
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 5.223

5.  Major lipids, apolipoproteins, and risk of vascular disease.

Authors:  Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Nadeem Sarwar; Philip Perry; Stephen Kaptoge; Kausik K Ray; Alexander Thompson; Angela M Wood; Sarah Lewington; Naveed Sattar; Chris J Packard; Rory Collins; Simon G Thompson; John Danesh
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Mark Cobain; Joseph M Massaro; William B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 7.  Net reclassification indices for evaluating risk prediction instruments: a critical review.

Authors:  Kathleen F Kerr; Zheyu Wang; Holly Janes; Robyn L McClelland; Bruce M Psaty; Margaret S Pepe
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.822

8.  2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Donna K Arnett; Roger S Blumenthal; Michelle A Albert; Andrew B Buroker; Zachary D Goldberger; Ellen J Hahn; Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb; Amit Khera; Donald Lloyd-Jones; J William McEvoy; Erin D Michos; Michael D Miedema; Daniel Muñoz; Sidney C Smith; Salim S Virani; Kim A Williams; Joseph Yeboah; Boback Ziaeian
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2019-03-17       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 9.  A brief history of human disease genetics.

Authors:  Melina Claussnitzer; Judy H Cho; Rory Collins; Nancy J Cox; Emmanouil T Dermitzakis; Matthew E Hurles; Sekar Kathiresan; Eimear E Kenny; Cecilia M Lindgren; Daniel G MacArthur; Kathryn N North; Sharon E Plon; Heidi L Rehm; Neil Risch; Charles N Rotimi; Jay Shendure; Nicole Soranzo; Mark I McCarthy
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Cardiovascular disease: The rise of the genetic risk score.

Authors:  Joshua W Knowles; Euan A Ashley
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  19 in total

1.  Ranking the risk of heart disease.

Authors:  Michael Eisenstein
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Risk Prediction Using Polygenic Risk Scores for Prevention of Stroke and Other Cardiovascular Diseases.

Authors:  Gad Abraham; Loes Rutten-Jacobs; Michael Inouye
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 3.  Use of Polygenic Risk Scores for Coronary Heart Disease in Ancestrally Diverse Populations.

Authors:  Ozan Dikilitas; Daniel J Schaid; Catherine Tcheandjieu; Shoa L Clarke; Themistocles L Assimes; Iftikhar J Kullo
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 3.955

4.  Genetic and modifiable risk factors combine multiplicatively in common disease.

Authors:  Shichao Pang; Loic Yengo; Peter M Visscher; Heribert Schunkert; Christopher P Nelson; Felix Bourier; Lingyao Zeng; Ling Li; Thorsten Kessler; Jeanette Erdmann; Reedik Mägi; Kristi Läll; Andres Metspalu; Bertram Mueller-Myhsok; Nilesh J Samani
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 6.138

5.  Polygenic Risk Score to Identify Subclinical Coronary Heart Disease Risk in Young Adults.

Authors:  Quinn S Wells; Minoo Bagheri; Aaron W Aday; Deepak K Gupta; Christian M Shaffer; Wei-Qi Wei; Nataraja Sarna Vaitinadin; Sadiya S Khan; Philip Greenland; Thomas J Wang; C Michael Stein; Dan M Roden; Jonathan D Mosley
Journal:  Circ Genom Precis Med       Date:  2021-08-31

Review 6.  Stroke Genetics: Turning Discoveries into Clinical Applications.

Authors:  Martin Dichgans; Nathalie Beaufort; Stephanie Debette; Christopher D Anderson
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 10.170

Review 7.  Responsible use of polygenic risk scores in the clinic: potential benefits, risks and gaps.

Authors: 
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 87.241

8.  Toward Precision Medicine-Is Genetic Risk Prediction Ready for Prime Time in Osteoarthritis?

Authors:  Michelle S Yau; John Loughlin
Journal:  Arthritis Rheumatol       Date:  2022-07-25       Impact factor: 15.483

9.  Body Mass Index and Birth Weight Improve Polygenic Risk Score for Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Avigail Moldovan; Yedael Y Waldman; Nadav Brandes; Michal Linial
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-06-21

10.  Stroke risk prediction using machine learning: a prospective cohort study of 0.5 million Chinese adults.

Authors:  Matthew Chun; Robert Clarke; Benjamin J Cairns; David Clifton; Derrick Bennett; Yiping Chen; Yu Guo; Pei Pei; Jun Lv; Canqing Yu; Ling Yang; Liming Li; Zhengming Chen; Tingting Zhu
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2021-07-30       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.