Abstract:Abstract The use electronic health record (EHR)-linked biobanks, including All of Us (AOU), the Michigan Genomics Initiative (MGI), and the UK Biobank (UKB), has become increasingly common in cancer research. However, each has a different participant recruitment strategy resulting in non-probability samples, which can lead to selection bias. An unanswered question is whether researchers should use selections weights when analyzing these data. Using colorectal cancer as the test case, we investigate the impact of using such weights on descriptive and analytic tasks in these three biobanks. We curated sociodemographic and clinical diagnosis data for 726,841 individuals (n = 244,071, 81,243, and 401,167, in AOU, MGI, and UKB, respectively). EHR ICD (diagnosis) code data were mapped to broader 2,042 codes, called phecodes, using the new phecode X mapping table developed by researchers at Vanderbilt University. Selection weights were constructed in AOU and MGI to make them more representative of the US adult population, using data from the 2019 National Health Interview Survey; previously described weights for the UKB were used. We estimated phenomewide prevalences, pairwise correlations, and phenome dimensionality (via principal components analysis). To investigate the role of weighting on conclusions from hypothesis testing and association estimation, we conducted a colorectal cancer phenomewide association study and estimated the sex-colorectal cancer log-odds ratio, respectively. We found that phecode prevalences in AOU and MGI decreased following weighting (median prevalence ratio [MPR]: 0.82 and 0.61, respectively) while those in UKB increased (MPR: 1.06). MGI is enriched for phecodes compared to AOU (MPR: 1.15) and UKB (MPR: 6.28). Weighting PCA had minimal impact on phenome dimensionality (e.g., 732 PCs explaining 95% of cumulative variation in AOU vs. 711 after weighting). Weighted PheWAS for colorectal cancer identified 21 hits not identified in unweighted PheWAS, but only one was from a new disease category. Weighted estimates of the female-colorectal cancer log-odds ratio overlapped with the benchmark range in MGI and UKB though resulted in a null association in AOU. Weighting had limited impact on dimensionality estimation and hypothesis testing but were important to consider for prevalence and association estimation. Results from untargeted analyses should be followed up with targeted analyses using curated weights. The importance of weights depends on the estimates obtained and inference goals and can improve the representativeness of results for cancer-related outcomes based on EHR-linked biobank data. Importantly, EHR-linked biobanks should be explicit in reporting recruitment and selection mechanisms and when possible, supply selection weights to researchers for population-based inference along with a clear definition of the target population. Citation Format: Maxwell Salvatore, Ritoban Kundu, Xu Shi, Christopher R. Friese, Seunggeun Lee, Lars G. Fritsche, Alison M. Mondul, David Hanauer, Celeste L. Pearce, Bhramar Mukherjee. To weight or not to weight? Studying the effect of selection bias in three EHR-linked biobanks with applications to colorectal cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 4866.

Using Family History Data to Improve the Power of Association Studies: Application to Cancer in UK Biobank

European American Stratification in Ovarian Cancer Case Control Data: the Utility of Genome-Wide Data for Inferring Ancestry

Combining Genome-Wide Studies of Breast, Prostate, Ovarian and Endometrial Cancers Maps Cross-Cancer Susceptibility Loci and Identifies New Genetic Associations

Interpreting disease genome‐wide association studies and polygenetic risk scores given eligibility and study design considerations

Impact of genotyping errors on statistical power of association tests in genomic analyses: A case study.

Family Study Designs Informed by Tumor Heterogeneity and Multi-Cancer Pleiotropies: The Power of the Utah Population Database

Bayesian analysis of genetic association across tree-structured routine healthcare data in the UK Biobank

Family history and genetic risk score combined to guide cancer risk stratification: A prospective cohort study

Using Genetics to Investigate Relationships between Phenotypes: Application to Endometrial Cancer

Statistical power and significance testing in large-scale genetic studies

Gene-Based Association Analysis for Censored Traits Via Fixed Effect Functional Regressions

Abstract 4866: To weight or not to weight? Studying the effect of selection bias in three EHR-linked biobanks with applications to colorectal cancer

Adjustment of Familial Relatedness in Association Test for Rare Variants

Yield of genetic association signals from genomes, exomes and imputation in the UK Biobank

Extracting and calibrating population evidence of variant pathogenicity using biobank data

Association of Pathogenic Variants in Hereditary Cancer Genes With Multiple Diseases

Adjusting for Participation Bias in Case-Control Genetic Association Studies for Rare Diseases

Using Pre-training and Interaction Modeling for ancestry-specific disease prediction in UK Biobank

Identifying proteomic risk factors for cancer using prospective and exome analyses of 1463 circulating proteins and risk of 19 cancers in the UK Biobank

Variance‐components tests for genetic association with multiple interval‐censored outcomes

Genetic association studies using disease liabilities from deep neural networks