Benchmarking Alzheimer’s disease prediction: personalised risk assessment using polygenic risk scores across various methodologies and genome-wide studies
Rattachement africain : gb, us, se. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: The success of selecting high risk or early-stage Alzheimer's disease individuals for the delivery of clinical trials depends on the design and the appropriate recruitment of participants. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) show potential for identifying individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Our study comprehensively examines AD PRS utility using various methods and models. METHODS: We compared the PRS prediction accuracy in ADNI (N = 568) and BioFINDER (N = 766) cohorts using five disease risk modelling approaches, three PRS derivation methods, two AD genome-wide association study (GWAS) statistics and two sets of SNPs: the whole genome and microglia-selective regions only. RESULTS: The best prediction accuracy was achieved when modelling genetic risk by using two predictors: APOE and remaining PRS (AUC = 0.72-0.76). Microglial PRS showed comparable accuracy to the whole genome (AUC = 0.71-0.74). The individuals' risk scores differed substantially, with the largest discrepancies (up to 70%) attributable to the GWAS statistics used. CONCLUSIONS: Our work benchmarks the best PRS derivation and modelling strategies for AD genetic prediction.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Benchmarking Alzheimer’s disease prediction: personalised risk assessment using polygenic risk scores across various methodologies and genome-wide studies
- Date Crossref
- 06/01/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.