Abstract
Purpose This study sought to construct genome-wide polygenic scores for femoral neck and total body BMD and to estimate their potential in identifying individuals with a high risk of osteoporotic fractures.
Methods Genome-wide polygenic scores were developed and validated for femoral neck and total body BMD. We externally tested the PGSs, both by themselves and in combination with available clinical risk factors, in 455,663 European ancestry individuals from the UK Biobank. The predictive accuracy of the developed genome-wide PGS was also compared with previously published restricted PGS employed in fracture risk assessment.
Results For each unit decrease in PGSs, the genome-wide PGSs were associated with up to a 1.17-fold increased fracture risk. Out of four studied PGSs, PGS_TBBMD81 (HR: 1.03; 95%CI 1.01-1.05, p=0.001) had the weakest and the PGS_TBBMDldpred (HR: 1.17; 95%CI 1.15-1.19, p<0.0001) had the strongest association with an incident fracture. In the reclassification analysis, compared to the FRAX base model, the models with, PGS_FNBMD63, PGS_TBBMD81, PGS_FNBMDldpred, and PGS_TBBMDldpred improved the reclassification of fracture by 2% (95% CI, 1.5% to 2.4%), 0.2% (95% CI, 0.1% to 0.3%), 1.4% (95% CI, 1.3% to 1.5%), and 2.2% (95% CI, 2.1% to 2.4%), respectively.
Conclusions Our findings suggested that an efficient PGS estimate enables the identification of strata with up to 1.5-fold difference in fracture incidence. Incorporating PGS information into clinical diagnosis is anticipated to increase the benefits of screening programs in the population level.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences under Award Number P20GM121325, and by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number 1R21MD013681.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This research work was approved by the UK Biobank and the institutional review board at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. This study has been conducted using the UK Biobank Data Resource under application number 58122.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Disclosure: Qing Wu and Xiangxue Xiao declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Data Availability: Data sharing does not apply to this article as no datasets were generated during the current study.
Ethics approval: This research work was approved by the UK Biobank and the institutional review board at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. This study has been conducted using the UK Biobank Data Resource under application number 58122.
Data Availability
Data sharing does not apply to this article as no datasets were generated during the current study.