Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2025 preprint

Polygenic Risk Scores Across Genomic Platforms for Reliable Breast Cancer Risk Stratification

0Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
0Institutions déclarées
0Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Le résumé fourni par la source

ABSTRACT Purpose We evaluated differences in a 313-variant breast cancer polygenic risk score (PRS 313 ) across genomic platforms and their impact on risk stratification. Methods We compared PRS 313 derived from genotyping arrays (Global Screening Array [GSA], OncoArray-500K [OncoArray], Global Diversity Array [GDA], custom Axiom_PrecipV1 array [ThermoFisher]) and low-coverage genome sequencing (lc-WGS) in 2 cell lines and 92 individuals. Probes were designed for all variants on ThermoFisher (success rate: 259/313). Sanger sequencing was performed to profile indels. Concordance of high-risk classification (PRSscore>0.6) across platforms was assessed using Kappa statistics. Results PRS 313-lc-WGS was identical in the 4 cell line repeats. In saliva samples, indel concordance with Sanger sequencing varied widely (Kappa: 0.007–1.000). PRS313-ThermoFisher was predictable from other platforms using linear models, despite systematic differences. Greater agreement was observed between arrays with high imputation overlap (e.g., GDA∼GSA slope=0.986). Pre-calibration agreement in high-risk classification was moderate (Fleiss Kappa=0.552) and improved post-calibration (Kappa=0.650). Arrays with similar designs showed higher pre-calibration agreement (Kappa=0.745). Calibration narrowed high-risk proportions from 4–45% to 15–21% −28% were high-risk by any platform, while 8% were high-risk across all five. Conclusion Platform-specific biases affect PRS interpretation. Calibration enhances consistency in identifying high-risk individuals. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE This study compares the performance of a validated 313-variant breast cancer polygenic risk score across platforms, revealing systematic biases in risk stratification and raising concerns about including inconsistent indels in the model.

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
Polygenic Risk Scores Across Genomic Platforms for Reliable Breast Cancer Risk Stratification
Date Crossref
16/04/2025
Éditeur
openRxiv
Type
posted-content

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 sujets associés

BRCA gene mutations in cancerGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyGene expression and cancer classification

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.