Analysis of Polygenic Score Usage and Performance in Diverse Human Populations
Laramie E. DuncaniD, Hanyang SheniD, Bizu GelayeiD, Joeri J. MeijseniD, Kerry James RessleriD, Marcus William FeldmaniD, Roseann Elizabeth PetersoniD, Benjamin W. DomingueiD
Abstract
Studies examining relationships between genotypic and phenotypic variation have historically been carried out on people of European ancestry. Efforts are underway to address this limitation, but until they succeed, the legacy of a Euro-centric bias will continue to hinder research, including the use of polygenic scores, which are individual-level metrics of genetic risk. Ongoing debate surrounds the generalizability of polygenic scores based on genome-wide association studies (GWAS) conducted in European ancestry samples, to non-European ancestry samples. We analyzed the first decade of polygenic scoring studies (2008-2017, inclusive), and found that 67% of studies included exclusively European ancestry participants and another 19% included only East Asian ancestry participants. Only 3.8% of studies were carried out on samples of African, Hispanic, or Indigenous peoples. We find that effect sizes for European ancestry-derived polygenic scores are only 36% as large in African ancestry samples, as in European ancestry samples (t=-10.056, df=22, p=5.5x10-10). Analyzing global populations, we show that relationships between height polygenic scores and height are highly dependent on methodological choices in polygenic score construction, highlighting the need for caution in interpreting population level differences in distributions of polygenic scores, as currently calculated. These findings bolster the rationale for large-scale GWAS in diverse human populations and highlight the need for better handling of linkage disequilibrium and variant frequencies when applying scores to non-European samples.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 1,038
- FWCI
- 77.23
- Field percentile
- top 1%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- How robust are cross-population signatures of polygenic adaptation in humans?
Alba Refoyo-Martínez, SiYang Maggie Liu, … Fernando Racimo·Peer Community JournalPeer-reviewed·Nov 25, 2021
- Polygenic scores for height in admixed populations
Bárbara Domingues Bitarello, Iain Mathieson·G3 Genes Genomes GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Sep 2, 2020
- Theoretical and empirical quantification of the accuracy of polygenic scores in ancestry divergent populations
Ying Wang, Jing Guo, … Loïc Yengo·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Jul 31, 2020
- Optimal strategies for learning multi-ancestry polygenic scores vary across traits
Brieuc Lehmann, Maxine E. Mackintosh, … Chris C. Holmes·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Jul 7, 2023
- Human demographic history impacts genetic risk prediction across diverse populations
Alicia R. Martin, Christopher R. Gignoux, … Eimear E. Kenny·The American Journal of Human GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Mar 30, 2017
- Testing for differences in polygenic scores in the presence of confounding
Jennifer Blanc, Jeremy J. Berg·GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Apr 15, 2025