Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Over 75 Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and dementia-associated variants have been identified through genome-wide association studies, but the utility of polygenic risk scores (PRS) for predicting AD and dementia in diverse and admixed populations remains unclear. We compared how PRS approaches differing in p -value thresholds, variant weights, and source ancestry perform in predicting dementia in 6,338 African American, Chinese, Hispanic, and White individuals from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. We tested clumping and thresholding (C+T) methods with varying parameters against Bayesian approaches (PRS-CS, PRS-CSx). We compared the ability of each method to predict incident dementia in all participants and in groups stratified by self-reported race/ethnicity. We additionally analyzed performance across groups stratified by estimated proportion of non-Finnish European (NFE)-like ancestry. Including more variants does not improve performance. The PRS based on C+T method with only 15 SNPs is more strongly associated with dementia (HR 5e-08 = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.11-1.31) than PRS derived from Bayesian models that include >800,000 SNPs (HR CSx = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04-1.23), even in populations genetically dissimilar from the source data (HR lowNFE _ 5e-08 = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.08-1.47; HR lowNFE _ CSx = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.96-1.32). More selective PRS models using fewer SNPs may offer better AD prediction across diverse populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xue et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: