Published in

Oxford University Press, Genetics, 4(222), 2022

DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyac158

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Genetic determinants of polygenic prediction accuracy within a population

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Genomic risk prediction is on the emerging path toward personalized medicine. However, the accuracy of polygenic prediction varies strongly in different individuals. Based on up to 352,277 European ancestry participants in the UK Biobank, we constructed polygenic risk scores for 15 physiological and biochemical quantitative traits. We identified a total of 185 polygenic prediction variability quantitative trait loci for 11 traits by Levene’s test among 254,376 unrelated individuals. We validated the effects of prediction variability quantitative trait loci using an independent test set of 58,927 individuals. For instance, a score aggregating 51 prediction variability quantitative trait locus variants for triglycerides had the strongest Spearman correlation of 0.185 (P-value <1.0 × 10−300) with the squared prediction errors. We found a strong enrichment of complex genetic effects conferred by prediction variability quantitative trait loci compared to risk loci identified in genome-wide association studies, including 89 prediction variability quantitative trait loci exhibiting dominance effects. Incorporation of dominance effects into polygenic risk scores significantly improved polygenic prediction for triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, vitamin D, and platelet. In conclusion, we have discovered and profiled genetic determinants of polygenic prediction variability for 11 quantitative biomarkers. These findings may assist interpretation of genomic risk prediction in various contexts and encourage novel approaches for constructing polygenic risk scores with complex genetic effects.