Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?

Polygenic risk scores (PRS), commonly referred to as genetic or genomic risk scores, aggregate the effects of multiple genetic variants into a single composite estimate of genetic risk. PRS scores are typically used to predict the risk of developing a disease or to explain the phenotypic variation,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Loh, Marie, Chambers, John Campbell
Other Authors: Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKCMedicine)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/169414
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
id sg-ntu-dr.10356-169414
record_format dspace
spelling sg-ntu-dr.10356-1694142023-07-23T15:37:59Z Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now? Loh, Marie Chambers, John Campbell Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKCMedicine) National Skin Centre, Singapore Science::Medicine Polygenic Risk Scores Complex Diseases Polygenic risk scores (PRS), commonly referred to as genetic or genomic risk scores, aggregate the effects of multiple genetic variants into a single composite estimate of genetic risk. PRS scores are typically used to predict the risk of developing a disease or to explain the phenotypic variation, and are derived from the effect sizes observed in large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Unlike rare monogenic diseases such as cystic fibrosis, which are attributable to genetic variants in single genes, with large effects on disease status, common complex diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are polygenic, with risk contributed by a panel of genetic variants present throughout the genome. The concept of integrating information from these multiple genetic variants into a single metric of genetic risk was initially proposed in the shape of genetic risk scores, which generally limited the score to include single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that were common and reached genome-wide significance in the initial GWASs. In contrast, PRS incorporates information from a much larger set of genetic variants, typically hundreds of thousands, including SNPs below the threshold for genome-wide statistical significance, and often with much more modest effect sizes. Indeed, recent findings have pointed to how polygenic background could also increase the accuracy of risk estimation for individuals with monogenic risk variant in conditions such as familial hypercholesterolaemia, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and Lynch syndrome. Published version 2023-07-18T02:29:31Z 2023-07-18T02:29:31Z 2023 Journal Article Loh, M. & Chambers, J. C. (2023). Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?. Singapore Medical Journal, 64(1), 88-89. https://dx.doi.org/10.4103/singaporemedj.SMJ-2021-388 0037-5675 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/169414 10.4103/singaporemedj.SMJ-2021-388 36722522 2-s2.0-85147186530 1 64 88 89 en Singapore Medical Journal © 2023 Singapore Medical Journal. Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow. This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‑NonCommercial‑ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non‑commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. application/pdf
institution Nanyang Technological University
building NTU Library
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider NTU Library
collection DR-NTU
language English
topic Science::Medicine
Polygenic Risk Scores
Complex Diseases
spellingShingle Science::Medicine
Polygenic Risk Scores
Complex Diseases
Loh, Marie
Chambers, John Campbell
Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
description Polygenic risk scores (PRS), commonly referred to as genetic or genomic risk scores, aggregate the effects of multiple genetic variants into a single composite estimate of genetic risk. PRS scores are typically used to predict the risk of developing a disease or to explain the phenotypic variation, and are derived from the effect sizes observed in large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Unlike rare monogenic diseases such as cystic fibrosis, which are attributable to genetic variants in single genes, with large effects on disease status, common complex diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are polygenic, with risk contributed by a panel of genetic variants present throughout the genome. The concept of integrating information from these multiple genetic variants into a single metric of genetic risk was initially proposed in the shape of genetic risk scores, which generally limited the score to include single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that were common and reached genome-wide significance in the initial GWASs. In contrast, PRS incorporates information from a much larger set of genetic variants, typically hundreds of thousands, including SNPs below the threshold for genome-wide statistical significance, and often with much more modest effect sizes. Indeed, recent findings have pointed to how polygenic background could also increase the accuracy of risk estimation for individuals with monogenic risk variant in conditions such as familial hypercholesterolaemia, hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, and Lynch syndrome.
author2 Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKCMedicine)
author_facet Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine (LKCMedicine)
Loh, Marie
Chambers, John Campbell
format Article
author Loh, Marie
Chambers, John Campbell
author_sort Loh, Marie
title Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
title_short Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
title_full Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
title_fullStr Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
title_full_unstemmed Polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
title_sort polygenic risk scores for complex diseases: where are we now?
publishDate 2023
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/169414
_version_ 1773551283167297536