Ozan Dikilitas1,2,3, Daniel J Schaid4, Catherine Tcheandjieu5,6, Shoa L Clarke5,6, Themistocles L Assimes5,6, Iftikhar J Kullo7,8. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 3. Mayo Clinician-Investigator Training Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 4. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 5. VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA. 6. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. 7. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. kullo.iftikhar@mayo.edu. 8. Gonda Vascular Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. kullo.iftikhar@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A polygenic risk score (PRS) is a measure of genetic liability to a disease and is typically normally distributed in a population. Individuals in the upper tail of this distribution often have relative risk equivalent to that of monogenic form of the disease. The majority of currently available PRSs for coronary heart disease (CHD) have been generated from cohorts of European ancestry (EUR) and vary in their applicability to other ancestry groups. In this report, we review the performance of PRSs for CHD across different ancestries and efforts to reduce variability in performance including novel population and statistical genetics approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: PRSs for CHD perform robustly in EUR populations but lag in performance in non-EUR groups, particularly individuals of African ancestry. Several large consortia have been established to enable genomic studies in diverse ancestry groups and develop methods to improve PRS performance in multi-ancestry contexts as well as admixed individuals. These include fine-mapping to ascertain causal variants, trans ancestry meta-analyses, and ancestry deconvolution in admixed individuals. PRSs are being used in the clinical setting but enthusiasm has been tempered by the variable performance in non-EUR ancestry groups. Increasing diversity in genomic association studies and continued innovation in methodological approaches are needed to improve PRS performance in non-EUR individuals for equitable implementation of genomic medicine.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A polygenic risk score (PRS) is a measure of genetic liability to a disease and is typically normally distributed in a population. Individuals in the upper tail of this distribution often have relative risk equivalent to that of monogenic form of the disease. The majority of currently available PRSs for coronary heart disease (CHD) have been generated from cohorts of European ancestry (EUR) and vary in their applicability to other ancestry groups. In this report, we review the performance of PRSs for CHD across different ancestries and efforts to reduce variability in performance including novel population and statistical genetics approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: PRSs for CHD perform robustly in EUR populations but lag in performance in non-EUR groups, particularly individuals of African ancestry. Several large consortia have been established to enable genomic studies in diverse ancestry groups and develop methods to improve PRS performance in multi-ancestry contexts as well as admixed individuals. These include fine-mapping to ascertain causal variants, trans ancestry meta-analyses, and ancestry deconvolution in admixed individuals. PRSs are being used in the clinical setting but enthusiasm has been tempered by the variable performance in non-EUR ancestry groups. Increasing diversity in genomic association studies and continued innovation in methodological approaches are needed to improve PRS performance in non-EUR individuals for equitable implementation of genomic medicine.
Authors: Sekar Kathiresan; Olle Melander; Dragi Anevski; Candace Guiducci; Noël P Burtt; Charlotta Roos; Joel N Hirschhorn; Göran Berglund; Bo Hedblad; Leif Groop; David M Altshuler; Christopher Newton-Cheh; Marju Orho-Melander Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Iftikhar J Kullo; Hayan Jouni; Erin E Austin; Sherry-Ann Brown; Teresa M Kruisselbrink; Iyad N Isseh; Raad A Haddad; Tariq S Marroush; Khader Shameer; Janet E Olson; Ulrich Broeckel; Robert C Green; Daniel J Schaid; Victor M Montori; Kent R Bailey Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Akl C Fahed; Minxian Wang; Julian R Homburger; Aniruddh P Patel; Alexander G Bick; Cynthia L Neben; Carmen Lai; Deanna Brockman; Anthony Philippakis; Patrick T Ellinor; Christopher A Cassa; Matthew Lebo; Kenney Ng; Eric S Lander; Alicia Y Zhou; Sekar Kathiresan; Amit V Khera Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-08-20 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Philip Joseph; Darryl Leong; Martin McKee; Sonia S Anand; Jon-David Schwalm; Koon Teo; Andrew Mente; Salim Yusuf Journal: Circ Res Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Samuli Ripatti; Emmi Tikkanen; Marju Orho-Melander; Aki S Havulinna; Kaisa Silander; Amitabh Sharma; Candace Guiducci; Markus Perola; Antti Jula; Juha Sinisalo; Marja-Liisa Lokki; Markku S Nieminen; Olle Melander; Veikko Salomaa; Leena Peltonen; Sekar Kathiresan Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-10-23 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Gad Abraham; Aki S Havulinna; Oneil G Bhalala; Sean G Byars; Alysha M De Livera; Laxman Yetukuri; Emmi Tikkanen; Markus Perola; Heribert Schunkert; Eric J Sijbrands; Aarno Palotie; Nilesh J Samani; Veikko Salomaa; Samuli Ripatti; Michael Inouye Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-09-21 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Michael Inouye; Gad Abraham; Christopher P Nelson; Angela M Wood; Michael J Sweeting; Frank Dudbridge; Florence Y Lai; Stephen Kaptoge; Marta Brozynska; Tingting Wang; Shu Ye; Thomas R Webb; Martin K Rutter; Ioanna Tzoulaki; Riyaz S Patel; Ruth J F Loos; Bernard Keavney; Harry Hemingway; John Thompson; Hugh Watkins; Panos Deloukas; Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Adam S Butterworth; John Danesh; Nilesh J Samani Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-10-16 Impact factor: 24.094