4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The utility of a type 2 diabetes polygenic score in addition to clinical variables for prediction of type 2 diabetes incidence in birth, youth and adult cohorts in an Indigenous study population

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims/hypothesis

          There is limited information on how polygenic scores (PSs), based on variants from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of type 2 diabetes, add to clinical variables in predicting type 2 diabetes incidence, particularly in non-European-ancestry populations.

          Methods

          For participants in a longitudinal study in an Indigenous population from the Southwestern USA with high type 2 diabetes prevalence, we analysed ten constructions of PS using publicly available GWAS summary statistics. Type 2 diabetes incidence was examined in three cohorts of individuals without diabetes at baseline. The adult cohort, 2333 participants followed from age ≥20 years, had 640 type 2 diabetes cases. The youth cohort included 2229 participants followed from age 5–19 years (228 cases). The birth cohort included 2894 participants followed from birth (438 cases). We assessed contributions of PSs and clinical variables in predicting type 2 diabetes incidence.

          Results

          Of the ten PS constructions, a PS using 293 genome-wide significant variants from a large type 2 diabetes GWAS meta-analysis in European-ancestry populations performed best. In the adult cohort, the AUC of the receiver operating characteristic curve for clinical variables for prediction of incident type 2 diabetes was 0.728; with the PS, 0.735. The PS’s HR was 1.27 per SD ( p=1.6 × 10 −8; 95% CI 1.17, 1.38). In youth, corresponding AUCs were 0.805 and 0.812, with HR 1.49 ( p=4.3 × 10 −8; 95% CI 1.29, 1.72). In the birth cohort, AUCs were 0.614 and 0.685, with HR 1.48 ( p=2.8 × 10 −16; 95% CI 1.35, 1.63). To further assess the potential impact of including PS for assessing individual risk, net reclassification improvement (NRI) was calculated: NRI for the PS was 0.270, 0.268 and 0.362 for adult, youth and birth cohorts, respectively. For comparison, NRI for HbA 1c was 0.267 and 0.173 for adult and youth cohorts, respectively. In decision curve analyses across all cohorts, the net benefit of including the PS in addition to clinical variables was most pronounced at moderately stringent threshold probability values for instituting a preventive intervention.

          Conclusions/interpretation

          This study demonstrates that a European-derived PS contributes significantly to prediction of type 2 diabetes incidence in addition to information provided by clinical variables in this Indigenous study population. Discriminatory power of the PS was similar to that of other commonly measured clinical variables (e.g. HbA 1c). Including type 2 diabetes PS in addition to clinical variables may be clinically beneficial for identifying individuals at higher risk for the disease, especially at younger ages.

          Graphical abstract

          Supplementary Information

          The online version of this article (10.1007/s00125-023-05870-2) contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models.

          Diagnostic and prognostic models are typically evaluated with measures of accuracy that do not address clinical consequences. Decision-analytic techniques allow assessment of clinical outcomes but often require collection of additional information and may be cumbersome to apply to models that yield a continuous result. The authors sought a method for evaluating and comparing prediction models that incorporates clinical consequences,requires only the data set on which the models are tested,and can be applied to models that have either continuous or dichotomous results. The authors describe decision curve analysis, a simple, novel method of evaluating predictive models. They start by assuming that the threshold probability of a disease or event at which a patient would opt for treatment is informative of how the patient weighs the relative harms of a false-positive and a false-negative prediction. This theoretical relationship is then used to derive the net benefit of the model across different threshold probabilities. Plotting net benefit against threshold probability yields the "decision curve." The authors apply the method to models for the prediction of seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer patients. Decision curve analysis identified the range of threshold probabilities in which a model was of value, the magnitude of benefit, and which of several models was optimal. Decision curve analysis is a suitable method for evaluating alternative diagnostic and prognostic strategies that has advantages over other commonly used measures and techniques.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacerbate health disparities

            Polygenic risk scores (PRS) are poised to improve biomedical outcomes via precision medicine. However, the major ethical and scientific challenge surrounding clinical implementation of PRS is that those available today are several times more accurate in individuals of European ancestry than other ancestries. This disparity is an inescapable consequence of Eurocentric biases in genome-wide association studies, thus highlighting that-unlike clinical biomarkers and prescription drugs, which may individually work better in some populations but do not ubiquitously perform far better in European populations-clinical uses of PRS today would systematically afford greater improvement for European-descent populations. Early diversifying efforts show promise in leveling this vast imbalance, even when non-European sample sizes are considerably smaller than the largest studies to date. To realize the full and equitable potential of PRS, greater diversity must be prioritized in genetic studies, and summary statistics must be publically disseminated to ensure that health disparities are not increased for those individuals already most underserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond.

              Identification of key factors associated with the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and quantification of this risk using multivariable prediction algorithms are among the major advances made in preventive cardiology and cardiovascular epidemiology in the 20th century. The ongoing discovery of new risk markers by scientists presents opportunities and challenges for statisticians and clinicians to evaluate these biomarkers and to develop new risk formulations that incorporate them. One of the key questions is how best to assess and quantify the improvement in risk prediction offered by these new models. Demonstration of a statistically significant association of a new biomarker with cardiovascular risk is not enough. Some researchers have advanced that the improvement in the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) should be the main criterion, whereas others argue that better measures of performance of prediction models are needed. In this paper, we address this question by introducing two new measures, one based on integrated sensitivity and specificity and the other on reclassification tables. These new measures offer incremental information over the AUC. We discuss the properties of these new measures and contrast them with the AUC. We also develop simple asymptotic tests of significance. We illustrate the use of these measures with an example from the Framingham Heart Study. We propose that scientists consider these types of measures in addition to the AUC when assessing the performance of newer biomarkers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Lauren.Wedekind@linacre.ox.ac.uk , wedekindle@nih.gov
                Journal
                Diabetologia
                Diabetologia
                Diabetologia
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0012-186X
                1432-0428
                2 March 2023
                2 March 2023
                2023
                : 66
                : 5
                : 847-860
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.419635.c, ISNI 0000 0001 2203 7304, Phoenix Epidemiology and Clinical Research Branch, , National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, ; Phoenix, AZ USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.4991.5, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, Nuffield Department of Medicine, , University of Oxford, ; Oxford, UK
                [3 ]GRID grid.4991.5, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics, , University of Oxford, ; Oxford, UK
                [4 ]GRID grid.418158.1, ISNI 0000 0004 0534 4718, Present Address: Genentech, ; San Francisco, CA USA
                [5 ]GRID grid.64924.3d, ISNI 0000 0004 1760 5735, College of Basic Medical Sciences, , Jilin University, ; Changchun, China
                [6 ]GRID grid.1002.3, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7857, School of Clinical Sciences, , Monash University, ; Clayton, VIC Australia
                [7 ]GRID grid.4991.5, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, , University of Oxford, ; Headington, UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2154-9647
                Article
                5870
                10.1007/s00125-023-05870-2
                10036431
                36862161
                ca0c25ab-7ce0-40bd-918f-534571b42b12
                © This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 8 August 2022
                : 29 November 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000062, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004440, Wellcome Trust;
                Award ID: 203141
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Award ID: NF-SI-0617-10090
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                clinical prediction,decision curve analysis,incidence analysis,polygenic score,type 2 diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article