Cargando…
Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction
The accuracy of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) to predict complex diseases increases with the training sample size. PRSs are generally derived based on summary statistics from large meta-analyses of multiple genome-wide association studies (GWASs). However, it is now common for researchers to have acc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8206385/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33964208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.04.014 |
_version_ | 1783708623856205824 |
---|---|
author | Albiñana, Clara Grove, Jakob McGrath, John J. Agerbo, Esben Wray, Naomi R. Bulik, Cynthia M. Nordentoft, Merete Hougaard, David M. Werge, Thomas Børglum, Anders D. Mortensen, Preben Bo Privé, Florian Vilhjálmsson, Bjarni J. |
author_facet | Albiñana, Clara Grove, Jakob McGrath, John J. Agerbo, Esben Wray, Naomi R. Bulik, Cynthia M. Nordentoft, Merete Hougaard, David M. Werge, Thomas Børglum, Anders D. Mortensen, Preben Bo Privé, Florian Vilhjálmsson, Bjarni J. |
author_sort | Albiñana, Clara |
collection | PubMed |
description | The accuracy of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) to predict complex diseases increases with the training sample size. PRSs are generally derived based on summary statistics from large meta-analyses of multiple genome-wide association studies (GWASs). However, it is now common for researchers to have access to large individual-level data as well, such as the UK Biobank data. To the best of our knowledge, it has not yet been explored how best to combine both types of data (summary statistics and individual-level data) to optimize polygenic prediction. The most widely used approach to combine data is the meta-analysis of GWAS summary statistics (meta-GWAS), but we show that it does not always provide the most accurate PRS. Through simulations and using 12 real case-control and quantitative traits from both iPSYCH and UK Biobank along with external GWAS summary statistics, we compare meta-GWAS with two alternative data-combining approaches, stacked clumping and thresholding (SCT) and meta-PRS. We find that, when large individual-level data are available, the linear combination of PRSs (meta-PRS) is both a simple alternative to meta-GWAS and often more accurate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8206385 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82063852021-06-23 Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction Albiñana, Clara Grove, Jakob McGrath, John J. Agerbo, Esben Wray, Naomi R. Bulik, Cynthia M. Nordentoft, Merete Hougaard, David M. Werge, Thomas Børglum, Anders D. Mortensen, Preben Bo Privé, Florian Vilhjálmsson, Bjarni J. Am J Hum Genet Article The accuracy of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) to predict complex diseases increases with the training sample size. PRSs are generally derived based on summary statistics from large meta-analyses of multiple genome-wide association studies (GWASs). However, it is now common for researchers to have access to large individual-level data as well, such as the UK Biobank data. To the best of our knowledge, it has not yet been explored how best to combine both types of data (summary statistics and individual-level data) to optimize polygenic prediction. The most widely used approach to combine data is the meta-analysis of GWAS summary statistics (meta-GWAS), but we show that it does not always provide the most accurate PRS. Through simulations and using 12 real case-control and quantitative traits from both iPSYCH and UK Biobank along with external GWAS summary statistics, we compare meta-GWAS with two alternative data-combining approaches, stacked clumping and thresholding (SCT) and meta-PRS. We find that, when large individual-level data are available, the linear combination of PRSs (meta-PRS) is both a simple alternative to meta-GWAS and often more accurate. Elsevier 2021-06-03 2021-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8206385/ /pubmed/33964208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.04.014 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Albiñana, Clara Grove, Jakob McGrath, John J. Agerbo, Esben Wray, Naomi R. Bulik, Cynthia M. Nordentoft, Merete Hougaard, David M. Werge, Thomas Børglum, Anders D. Mortensen, Preben Bo Privé, Florian Vilhjálmsson, Bjarni J. Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
title | Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
title_full | Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
title_fullStr | Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
title_full_unstemmed | Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
title_short | Leveraging both individual-level genetic data and GWAS summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
title_sort | leveraging both individual-level genetic data and gwas summary statistics increases polygenic prediction |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8206385/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33964208 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.04.014 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT albinanaclara leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT grovejakob leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT mcgrathjohnj leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT agerboesben leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT wraynaomir leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT bulikcynthiam leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT nordentoftmerete leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT hougaarddavidm leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT wergethomas leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT børglumandersd leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT mortensenprebenbo leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT priveflorian leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction AT vilhjalmssonbjarnij leveragingbothindividuallevelgeneticdataandgwassummarystatisticsincreasespolygenicprediction |