Key result
Higher polygenic risk score linked to ~13% greater ischemic stroke risk per SD in AF.
Why the study?
Current risk stratification tools for ischemic stroke in AF patients do not include family history or genetic risk, limiting prediction accuracy.
Does integrating a polygenic risk score with clinical risk factors improve ischemic stroke prediction in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=15,929)
Yes
Does integrating a polygenic risk score with clinical risk factors improve ischemic stroke prediction in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Hazard Ratio: 1.13 (95% CI 1.06–1.23)
Integrating polygenic risk scores with clinical risk factors modestly improves ischemic stroke prediction in patients with atrial fibrillation compared to CHA2DS2-VASc alone.
May refine stroke risk stratification in atrial fibrillation; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a five-fold increased risk of ischemic stroke. A portion of this risk is heritable, however current risk stratification tools (CHA2DS2-VASc) don’t include family history or genetic risk. We hypothesized that we could improve ischemic stroke prediction in patients with AF by incorporating polygenic risk scores (PRS). Objectives To construct and test a PRS to predict ischemic stroke in patients with AF, both independently and integrated with clinical risk factors. Methods Using data from the largest available GWAS in Europeans, we combined over half a million genetic variants to construct a PRS to predict ischemic stroke in patients with AF. We externally validated this PRS in independent data from the UK Biobank (UK Biobank), both independently and integrated with clinical risk factors. Results The integrated PRS and clinical risk factors risk tool had the greatest predictive ability. Compared with the currently recommended risk tool (CHA2DS2-VASc), the integrated tool significantly improved net reclassification (NRI: 2.3% (95%CI: 1.3% to 3.0%)), and fit (χ2 P =0.002). Using this improved tool, >115,000 people with AF would have improved risk classification in the US. Independently, PRS was a significant predictor of ischemic stroke in patients with AF prospectively (Hazard Ratio: 1.13 per 1 SD (95%CI: 1.06 to 1.23))). Lastly, polygenic risk scores were uncorrelated with clinical risk factors (Pearson’s correlation coefficient: −0.018). Conclusions In patients with AF, there appears to be a significant association between PRS and risk of ischemic stroke. The greatest predictive ability was found with the integration of PRS and clinical risk factors, however the prediction of stroke remains challenging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
O’Sullivan et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=15,929). Polygenic risk score (PRS) vs. Clinical risk factors alone (CHA2DS2-VASc) was evaluated on Incident ischemic stroke (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.23). In patients with atrial fibrillation, a polygenic risk score was a significant independent predictor of ischemic stroke (HR 1.13 per 1 SD), and integrating it with clinical risk factors significantly improved net reclassification by 2.3%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: