Using Polygenic Risk Scores for Prioritizing Individuals at Greatest Need of a Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment

Ryan Chung,Zhe Xu,Matthew Arnold,Samantha Ip,Hannah Harrison,Jessica Barrett,Lisa Pennells,Lois G. Kim,Emanuele Di Angelantonio,Ellie Paige,Scott C. Ritchie,Michael Inouye,Juliet A. Usher‐Smith,and Angela M. Wood1British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit,Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom2Heart and Lung Research InstituteUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom3Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology,Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom4Medical Research Council Biostatistics UnitUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom5National Institute for Health and Care Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and BehaviourUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom6British Heart Foundation Centre of Research ExcellenceUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom7Health Data Research UK CambridgeWellcome Genome Campus and University of CambridgeUnited Kingdom8Health Data Science Research CentreHuman TechnopoleMilan Italy9National Centre for Epidemiology and Population HealthAustralian National UniversityCanberra Australia10The George Institute for Global HealthUNSW SydneyAustralia11Cambridge Baker Systems Genomics Initiative,Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom12Cambridge Baker Systems Genomics InitiativeBaker Heart and Diabetes InstituteMelbourne Victoria Australia13Primary Care Unit,Department of Public Health and Primary CareUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom14Cambridge Centre of Artificial Intelligence in MedicineUniversity of CambridgeUnited Kingdom
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.029296
2023-07-26
JAHA - Journal of the American Heart Association
Abstract:Journal of the American Heart Association, Ahead of Print. BackgroundThe aim of this study was to provide quantitative evidence of the use of polygenic risk scores for systematically identifying individuals for invitation for full formal cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment.Methods and ResultsA total of 108 685 participants aged 40 to 69 years, with measured biomarkers, linked primary care records, and genetic data in UK Biobank were used for model derivation and population health modeling. Prioritization tools using age, polygenic risk scores for coronary artery disease and stroke, and conventional risk factors for CVD available within longitudinal primary care records were derived using sex‐specific Cox models. We modeled the implications of initiating guideline‐recommended statin therapy after prioritizing individuals for invitation to a formal CVD risk assessment. If primary care records were used to prioritize individuals for formal risk assessment using age‐ and sex‐specific thresholds corresponding to 5% false‐negative rates, then the numbers of men and women needed to be screened to prevent 1 CVD event are 149 and 280, respectively. In contrast, adding polygenic risk scores to both prioritization and formal assessments, and selecting thresholds to capture the same number of events, resulted in a number needed to screen of 116 for men and 180 for women.ConclusionsUsing both polygenic risk scores and primary care records to prioritize individuals at highest risk of a CVD event for a formal CVD risk assessment can efficiently prioritize those who need interventions the most than using primary care records alone. This could lead to better allocation of resources by reducing the number of risk assessments in primary care while still preventing the same number of CVD events.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?