PLoS GeneticsGenomicsPeer-reviewed journal article
Evaluation of Polygenic Prediction Methodology within a Reference-Standardized Framework
Oliver PainiD, Kylie P. GlanvilleiD, Saskia P. HagenaarsiD, Saskia SelzamiD, Anna Elisabeth FürtjesiD, Héléna A. GaspariD, Jonathan R. I. ColemaniD, Kaili RimfeldiD, Gerome D. BreeniD, Robert J. PlominiD, Lasse FolkerseniD, Cathryn M. LewisiD
Abstract
BackgroundThe predictive utility of polygenic scores is increasing, and many polygenic scoring methods are available, but it is unclear which method performs best. This study evaluates the predictive utility of polygenic scoring methods within a reference-standardized framework, which uses a common set of variants and reference-based estimates of linkage disequilibrium and allele frequencies to construct scores. MethodsEight polygenic score methods were tested: p-value thresholding and clumping (pT+clump), SBLUP, lassosum, LDPred1, LDPred2, PRScs, DBSLMM and SBayesR, evaluating their performance to predict outcomes in UK Biobank and the Twins Early Development Study (TEDS). Strategies to identify optimal p-value threshold and shrinkage parameters were compared, including 10-fold cross validation, pseudovalidation and infinitesimal models (with no validation sample), and multi-polygenic score elastic net models. ResultsLDPred2, lassosum and PRScs performed strongly using 10-fold cross-validation to identify the most predictive p-value threshold or shrinkage parameter, giving a relative improvement of 16-18% over pT+clump in the correlation between observed and predicted outcome values. Using pseudovalidation, the best methods were PRScs and DBSLMM, with a relative improvement of >10% over other pseudovalidation and infinitesimal methods (lassosum, SBLUP, SBayesR, LDPred1, LDPred2). PRScs pseudovalidation was only 3% worse than the best polygenic score identified by 10-fold cross validation. Elastic net models containing polygenic scores based on a range of parameters consistently improved prediction over any single polygenic score. ConclusionWithin a reference-standardized framework, the best polygenic prediction was achieved using LDPred2, lassosum and PRScs, modeling multiple polygenic scores derived using multiple parameters. This study will help researchers performing polygenic score studies to select the most powerful and predictive analysis methods.
- organism: human
- assay: GWAS summary statistics
- research focus: polygenic risk
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: variant effect prediction
- research focus: differential expression
- approach: statistical model
- approach: machine learning (classical)
- Citations
- 183
- FWCI
- 20.48
- Field percentile
- top 1%
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
- Evaluation of polygenic scoring methods in five biobanks reveals greater variability between biobanks than between methods and highlights benefits of ensemble learning
Remo Monti, Lisa Eick, … Christoph Lippert·medRxiv·Nov 20, 2023
- LDpred2: better, faster, stronger
Florian Privé, Julyan Arbel, Bjarni Jóhann Vilhjálmsson·BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Dec 1, 2020
- Polygenic scores via penalized regression on summary statistics
Timothy Shin Heng Mak, Robert M. Porsch, … Pak Chung Sham·Genetic EpidemiologyPeer-reviewed·May 8, 2017
- Publicly Available Privacy-preserving Benchmarks for Polygenic Prediction
Menno J. Witteveen, Emil M. Pedersen, … Bjarni Jóhann Vilhjálmsson·bioRxiv·Oct 10, 2022
- Polygenic Prediction via Bayesian Regression and Continuous Shrinkage Priors
Tian Ge, Chia‐Yen Chen, … Jordan W. Smoller·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Apr 16, 2019
- Modeling Linkage Disequilibrium Increases Accuracy of Polygenic Risk Scores
Bjarni Vilhjalmsson, Jian Yang, … Nick J Patte·The American Journal of Human GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Oct 1, 2015