scholarly journals Polygenic risk scores in psychiatry – Large potential but still limited clinical utility

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 68-70
Author(s):  
Olav B. Smeland ◽  
Ole A. Andreassen
2021 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. e234
Author(s):  
Huyen Nguyen ◽  
Tiahna Moorthy ◽  
Jehannine Austin ◽  
Jordan Smoller ◽  
Laura Hercher ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 14
Author(s):  
Ayub Qassim ◽  
Emmanuelle Souzeau ◽  
Georgie Hollitt ◽  
Mark M. Hassall ◽  
Owen M. Siggs ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (9) ◽  
pp. 581-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Torkamani ◽  
Nathan E. Wineinger ◽  
Eric J. Topol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart G Baker

Abstract There is growing interest in the use of polygenic risk scores based on genetic variants to predict cancer incidence. The type of metric used to evaluate the predictive performance of polygenic risk scores plays a crucial role in their interpretation. I compare three metrics for this evaluation: the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUC), the probability of cancer in a high-risk subset divided by the prevalence of cancer in the population, which I call the subset relative risk (SRR), and the minimum test tradeoff (MTT), which is the minimum number of gene variant ascertainments (one per person) for each correct prediction of cancer to yield a positive expected clinical utility. I show that SRR is a relabeling of AUC. I recommend MTT for the evaluation of polygenic risk scores because, unlike AUC and SRR, it is directly related to the expected clinical utility.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (R2) ◽  
pp. R133-R142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel A Lambert ◽  
Gad Abraham ◽  
Michael Inouye

Abstract Prediction of disease risk is an essential part of preventative medicine, often guiding clinical management. Risk prediction typically includes risk factors such as age, sex, family history of disease and lifestyle (e.g. smoking status); however, in recent years, there has been increasing interest to include genomic information into risk models. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) aggregate the effects of many genetic variants across the human genome into a single score and have recently been shown to have predictive value for multiple common diseases. In this review, we summarize the potential use cases for seven common diseases (breast cancer, prostate cancer, coronary artery disease, obesity, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer’s disease) where PRS has or could have clinical utility. PRS analysis for these diseases frequently revolved around (i) risk prediction performance of a PRS alone and in combination with other non-genetic risk factors, (ii) estimation of lifetime risk trajectories, (iii) the independent information of PRS and family history of disease or monogenic mutations and (iv) estimation of the value of adding a PRS to specific clinical risk prediction scenarios. We summarize open questions regarding PRS usability, ancestry bias and transferability, emphasizing the need for the next wave of studies to focus on the implementation and health-economic value of PRS testing. In conclusion, it is becoming clear that PRS have value in disease risk prediction and there are multiple areas where this may have clinical utility.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Hübenthal ◽  
Britt-Sabina Löscher ◽  
Jeanette Erdmann ◽  
Andre Franke ◽  
Damian Gola ◽  
...  

In this mini-review, we highlight selected research by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Cluster of Excellence “Precision Medicine in Chronic Inflammation” focusing on clinical sequencing and the clinical utility of polygenic risk scores as well as its implication on precision medicine in the field of the inflammatory diseases inflammatory bowel disease, atopic dermatitis and coronary artery disease. Additionally, we highlight current developments and discuss challenges to be faced in the future. Exemplary, we point to residual challenges in detecting disease-relevant variants resulting from difficulties in the interpretation of candidate variants and their potential interactions. While polygenic risk scores represent promising tools for the stratification of patient groups, currently, polygenic risk scores are not accurate enough for clinical setting. Precision medicine, incorporating additional data from genomics, transcriptomics and proteomics experiments, may enable the identification of distinct disease pathogeneses. In the future, data-intensive biomedical innovation will hopefully lead to improved patient stratification for personalized medicine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document