An integrated polygenic score stratifies risk of peripheral artery disease and adverse limb events in ancestrally diverse cohorts

Study populations

GPS_PAD was developed using data from the UK Biobank, a longitudinal cohort study of approximately 500,000 individuals from the United Kingdom aged 40-69 years.¹⁷ Participants were followed for outcomes based on International Classification of Disease 9^th and 10^th revisions (ICD-9/ICD-10) and Office of Population Censuses and Surveys versions 3 and 4 (OPCS-3/OPCS-4). Ancestry was based on self-identified ethnicity and country of origin with African, East Asian, European, Latino, Middle Eastern/North African (MENA), and South Asian categories (Supplemental Tables 1-2). Coding of comorbidities and lifestyle factors is detailed in the Supplemental Materials (Supplemental Table 3).

GPS_PAD performance was evaluated in two external datasets: Mass General Brigham Biobank (MGBB) and All of Us (AoU). The MGBB is a New England-healthcare based cohort that includes >145,000 patients treated at seven regional hospitals and clinics, including ∼56,000 have been genotyped.¹⁸ Baseline phenotypes are linked to the electronic health record (EHR) with available data from clinical notes, ICD-9/ICD-10, and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes.

The AoU Research program is a United States-based cohort study that aims to recruit individuals who have been historically underrepresented in biomedical research.¹⁹ The program has recruited ∼400,000 individuals and includes health questionnaires, biospecimen collection, and longitudinal EHR data.

Genetic data and quality control

In the UK Biobank, individuals were genotyped using UK BiLEVE Axiom Array or UK Biobank Axiom Array and centrally imputed to the 1000 Genomes (1000G) Panel, Haplotype Reference Consortium, or UK10K Panel.^17,20 After performing quality control (Details Methods) and excluding individuals of Latino ancestry due to low population representation (N=11 PAD cases) and unreported/mixed ethnicity, 304,294 individuals were included for internal validation.

MGBB samples were genotyped on Illumina Multi-Ethnic Genotyping Array or Global Screening Array.²¹ Imputation was performed to the multi-ancestry TOPMED r2 reference panel. Given lack of detailed self-reported ethnicity or ancestry data, ancestry was genetically predicted using a K-nearest neighbor model trained with principal components (PCs) from the 1000G reference panels for European, African, Latino/Ad Mixed American, East Asian, and South Asian (Detailed Methods).¹⁸ We excluded individuals who were in prior discovery GWAS for CAD²² and did not map to a single genetic ancestry, leaving 37,017 individuals for external validation.

AoU participants were genotyped using the Illumina Global Diversity Array at AoU genome centers.²³ Similar to the MGBB, there was a lack of detailed reported ancestry data, thus ancestry was assigned based on genetic similarity. AoU assigns categorical ancestries to African, Latino/Ad Mixed American, East Asian, South Asian, European, MENA, and Other based on a random forest classifier trained using gnomAD, Human Genome Diversity Project, and 1000G reference labels (Detailed Methods).²³ After exclusion of individuals with missing/other ancestry, 237,173 individuals were included.

Clinical endpoints

In the UK Biobank, PAD was defined based on self-reported history, ICD codes, OPCS codes for lower extremity revascularization or major amputation, and cilostazol prescription (Supplemental Table 4). In AoU, PAD was defined on self-report, occurrences of >2 ICD codes, or a single procedure code for revascularization, major amputation or supervised exercise therapy for PAD (Supplemental Table 5).²⁴

In the MGBB, PAD was derived from phenotypes developed by the Mass General Brigham Research Patient Data Registry (RPDR) based on structured and unstructured clinical data from the EHR (Detailed Methods).²⁵ ABI were extracted from imaging reports retrieved from the RPDR. We selected each individual’s minimum ABI and excluded values that were >1.4 or non-compressible.

MALE was defined as a surrogate of major amputation and acute limb ischemia based on diagnosis and procedure codes (Supplemental Tables 6-8). Revascularization included thrombectomy, thrombolysis, and emergency lower extremity bypass. In the MGBB, CPT codes for catheter-directed thrombolysis/thrombectomy required concomitant coding for aortogram or lower extremity angiography to ensure arterial intervention.

GPS_PAD construction

PRS predictive performance is improved by the incorporation of data from increasingly diverse genetic ancestries and consideration of genetically correlated traits.^26-28 To leverage the common mechanistic pathways of PAD, other atherosclerotic conditions, and PAD risk factors, GWAS results of PAD and 14 candidate traits were considered in GPS_PAD construction: PAD, CAD, ischemic stroke, glomerular filtration rate, diabetes mellitus, smoking, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, BMI, carotid plaque burden, and carotid intima-media thickness (Supplemental Table 9). After collection of GWAS summary statistics, GPS_PAD was trained using target data from 96,239 European individuals in the UK Biobank. GWAS results from the UK Biobank were not used to construct GPS_PAD such that data for score development and training were non-overlapping.

GPS_PAD was developed in a two-layer process (Figure 1).²⁶ Layer 1 involved using ancestry-stratified GWAS data for each trait to calculate multi-ancestry polygenic scores that were optimized according to their PAD predictive performance. Separate scores were constructed using LDpred2, a widely used method that adjusts marginal single nucleotide polymorphism effect sizes for linkage disequilibrium (LD) patterns and selects a subset of variants with non-zero effects to calculate the polygenic score.²⁹ Using LDpred2-auto, scores were calculated using GWAS results stratified by African, East Asian, European, Latino, and South Asian ancestry (R bigsnpr v.11.4). This resulted in 100 scores across all ancestries and traits. For each trait, the ancestry-specific scores were combined into the best-performing multi-ancestry score per trait using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression in models predicting PAD (R glmnet v4.0-2). Feature selection was performed iteratively for all 15 traits in layer 1, yielding 15 multi-ancestry trait-specific scores with mixing weights detailed in Supplemental Table 9.

Layer 2 involved combining trait-specific scores from layer 1 to derive the integrated, multi-trait GPS_PAD. Trait scores from Layer 1 were input into a LASSO regression model predicting PAD to construct the final GPS_PAD. The final weight in GPS_PAD was derived by calculating the proportional weight from layer 1 in layer 2, normalized to 100%. Of the 15 candidate trait scores, 11 traits contributed to GPS_PAD with mixing weights in Supplemental Table 10. GPS_PAD was then calculated in the validation UK Biobank dataset. See Detailed Methods for details on GPS_PAD construction.

GPS_PAD validation and benchmarking

GPS_PAD was calculated in the MGBB and AoU for external validation. GPS_PAD performance was compared with previously published PRS in the Polygenic Score Catalog³⁰ and a recently reported multi-ancestry polygenic score for CAD (GPS_CAD).²⁶ We previously developed GPS_CAD utilizing a similar two-layer framework for CAD as in the present study with slight modifications including stepwise regression for feature selection.²⁶ From the Polygenic Score Catalog, PRS_PLR is a single-trait score for PAD developed using LASSO regression and individual-level European data from the UK Biobank.¹⁵ PRS_LDpred2 is another single-trait score for PAD trained using UK Biobank data, but was calculated with LDpred2-auto.¹⁵

We also calculated the lifetime risk of PAD in individuals in the UK Biobank based on clinical variables using the Johns Hopkins University PAD risk tool (http://ckdpcrisk.org/padrisk, Detailed Methods).³¹

Statistical analysis

The unadjusted rate of PAD was calculated across percentiles of GPS_PAD. Model calibration was assessed with the Hosmer–Lemeshow test (R ResourceSelection v0.3-6) and by comparing the observed and predicted prevalence across percentiles calculated using a logistic regression model with only GPS_PAD as a predictor. We estimated PAD risk in the extremes of the GPS_PAD distribution using logistic regression models. We also derived the proportion of the population with a given magnitude of risk by calculating the odds ratio (OR) of varying extremes of GPS_PAD percentiles compared to the middle quintile group (40-59%).

The association of GPS_PAD and other scores with all PAD (incident and prevalent cases) were assessed using logistic regression. Performance metrics included OR, area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC, R pROC v1.17.0.1), and phenotypic variance explained (Nagelkerke-R²). Incident event analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards models with metrics including hazard ratio (HR) and C-statistic (R survival v3.5-7). MALE analyses were restricted to individuals with prevalent PAD diagnoses. Time-to-MALE curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, standardized to mean age and gender (R survminer v0.4.9). Linear regression was used to evaluate the relationship between polygenic scores and minimum ABI.

Logistic, linear, and Cox models including polygenic scores were adjusted for age, sex, genotyping array, and the first ten PCs. Cox models were used to estimate the 10-year incidence of PAD across lifestyle and genetic risk groups, standardized to the mean of covariates in each group. In the UK Biobank, we performed sensitivity analyses to test the strength of GPS_PAD associations with PAD and incident MALE after additionally accounting for clinical variables (current smoking, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and chronic kidney disease); and continuous variables for individuals with available physical and laboratory data (SBP, DBP, hemoglobin A1c, HDL-C, estimated untreated LDL-C³², GFR, and anti-hypertensive use).

GPS_PAD and other continuous variables were scaled to a mean of zero and one standard deviation (SD) such that effect sizes indicate OR- or HR-per SD. Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05 or 95% confidence interval (CI) that excluded the null value. Statistical analyses were performed using R-4.1.0.

Association of GPS_PAD with PAD risk

Within the UK Biobank, GPS_PAD was associated with a OR 1.77 (95% CI: 1.70-1.86) for PAD in the European training sample (Supplemental Table 12). The effect size was mildly attenuated in the multiethnic validation cohort including 304,294 individuals, but remained strongly associated with PAD (OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.60-1.68). The holdout validation cohort included 164,108 females (53.9%) and 286,356 participants of European (94%), 7,680 South Asian (2.5%), 6,939 African (2.3%), 1,761 East Asian (0.6%), and 1,558 (0.51%) MENA ancestry. There was a decrement, yet persistently significant association with adjustment for clinical risk factors (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.31-1.39) and in a model adjusted for continuous covariates (OR 1.37; 95% CI: 1.33-1.41).

We found significant differences in PAD rates across the GPS_PAD percentile distribution, ranging from 0.78% in the bottom percentile to 7.91% in the top percentile (Figure 2A, Supplemental Table 13). Predicted PAD prevalence was overall consistent with observed prevalence, excluding the >98% percentile where there was slight risk underestimation by GPS_PAD alone driven by a sharp increase in the observed PAD prevalence (Supplemental Figure 1). GPS_PAD stratified individuals in low and high-risk groups with up to 4.71-fold increased PAD risk in the top 1% of GPS_PAD (OR 4.71, 95% CI 4.07-5.42) compared to the middle quintile (Figure 2B).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2: GPS_PAD is an integrated polygenic score that stratifies PAD risk in diverse ancestries

2A. Prevalence of PAD across GPS_PAD percentiles in the UK Biobank validation dataset (N = 304,294). 2B. Estimated PAD risk in the top and bottom of GPS_PAD percentile distributions relative to the middle quintile (40-59%), as assessed in logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, genotyping array, and ten principal components of ancestry. Results are shown on log-axis. 2C. Risk of PAD associated with GPS_PAD in ancestral subgroups in the UK Biobank. Results were calculated from a logistic regression model with age, sex, genotyping array, and ten principal components as covariates.

Compared to previously published scores, GPS_PAD resulted in an improvement in effect estimate, discrimination, and proportion of phenotypic variance explained compared to PRS_{PLR .} In a model adjusted for age, sex, genotyping array, and the first ten PCs of ancestry, GPS_PAD had an OR of 1.63, AUC of 0.74, and Nagelkerke-R² of 0.087, while PRS_PLR had an OR of 1.20, AUC 0.71, and Nagelkerke-R² of 0.064. PRS_LDpred2 achieved greater performance in the UK Biobank than GPS_PAD with OR 2.46 and nearly equivalent discriminative ability with AUC 0.75, however Nagelkerke-R² and effect sizes in the extremes of PRS_LDpred2 percentiles strongly suggested overfitting. For example, PRS_LDpred2 Nagelkerke-R² was 0.17 in the UK Biobank validation cohort and OR for the top 1% PRS_LDpred2 was 71.9 (95% CI 64.9-79.7).

GPS_PAD identified individuals with distinct risk compared to an integrated polygenic score for CAD (GPS_CAD).²⁶ In the UK Biobank, GPS_PAD was more strongly associated with PAD (OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.60-1.68) than GPS_CAD (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.44-1.52) and identified a greater number of high-risk individuals (Supplemental Table 13). For example, the proportion of the UK Biobank population at 3-fold and 4-fold greater odds for PAD was 5.7% (N=17,345) and 1.90% (N=5,782) when classified by GPS_PAD, respectively. There was a comparatively small fraction of individuals at similar PAD risk according to GPS_CAD with only 1.90% (N=5,782) at 3-fold greater risk and 0.20% (N=609) at 4-fold greater risk.

We then compared polygenic score performance in ancestral subgroups in the UK Biobank (Figure 2C). Across each ancestral population, GPS_PAD predicted disease risk in African, European, East Asian, MENA, and South Asian subgroups with effect estimates of 1.26, 1.66, 1.60, 1.64, and 1.25 respectively. While PRS_LDpred2 and PRS_PLR predicted PAD risk in European individuals, both were not associated with PAD in non-European subgroups (Supplemental Table 14). In clinical subgroups, GPS_PAD performance was fairly stable, with OR ranges of 1.33-1.72 depending on demographics and the presence of risk factors (Supplemental Figure 2).

Validation of GPS_PAD in distinct external cohorts

GPS_PAD was externally validated in two independent multi-ancestry cohorts and showed improved cross-population predictive performance relative to previously published scores. GPS_PAD was significantly associated with an increased risk for PAD (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.18-1.37, Figure 3A) in the MGBB, which included 5.3% African (N=1,945), 87% European (N=32,139), and 7.9% Latino individuals (N=2,933). GPS_PAD performed similarly in AoU (OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.19-1.23), which embodied 22% African (N=51,691), 2.2% East Asian (N=5,268), 50% European (N=119,167), 17% Latino (N=39,576), 0.21% MENA (N=509), and 0.97% South Asian individuals (N=2,289). Of note, while PRS_LDpred2 outperformed GPS_PAD in the UK Biobank where it was derived, PRS_LDpred2 was not significantly associated with PAD risk in the MGBB (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.95-1.08; P=0.06) and was more weakly associated with PAD than GPS_PAD in AoU (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.08-1.12). GPS_PAD consistently had stronger effect sizes than PRS_PLR in each external cohort (Figure 3A).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3. GPS_PAD shows improved transferability to external cohorts.

4A. OR per-SD change of polygenic scores in external validation cohorts, AoU (N = 237,173) and MGBB (N = 37,017). 4B. Predictive performance for each score is also shown in ancestry subgroups: African individuals in AoU (N = 51,691) and MGBB (N = 1,945); East Asians in AoU (N = 5,268), European individuals in AoU (N = 119,167) and MGBB (N = 32,139); Latino individuals in AoU (N = 39,576) and MGBB (N = 2,933); and South Asian individuals in AoU (N = 2,289). OR were calculated from a logistic regression model adjusted for age, sex, genotyping array, and the first ten principal components. Asterisks represent P-value for associations, *=P<0.05. **=P<0.01. ***P<0.0001. EAS, East Asian. EUR, European. LAT, Latino. SAS, South Asian.

When stratifying by ancestry, GPS_PAD demonstrated improved transferability in most subgroups (Supplemental Table 14). Among African (N=51,691), European (N=119,167), Latino (N=39,576), and South Asian (N=2,289) individuals in AoU, GPS_PAD was the most strongly predictive of PAD compared to previously published scores (Figure 3B). GPS_PAD was also transferable to Europeans in the MGBB with a larger effect size (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.17-1.34) than PRS_PLR (OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.02-1.16) and PRS_LDpred2, which was not associated with disease risk (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.94-1.08). No polygenic scores were associated with PAD in AoU East Asians, AoU MENA, and non-European subgroups in the MGBB (Supplemental Figure 3).

Modeling incident PAD according to polygenic risk and clinical risk factors

We then analyzed 301,932 participants of the UK Biobank who were free of PAD at study enrollment. Over a median 12.1 years follow-up (interquartile range (IQR) 10.6-13.5 years), incident PAD was observed in 4,202 individuals (1.39%). Within the UK Biobank, the baseline model of age, sex, and ten PCs of ancestry had a C-statistic of 0.731 (Figure 4A). The addition of GPS_PAD resulted in improvement in discrimination to 0.761, which was greater than the improvement of most risk factors also in isolation, and was approximately equivalent to the additive benefit of diabetes (C-statistic 0.760) and smoking (C-statistic 0.765). The greatest improvement in discrimination was observed with the baseline model, clinical variables, and GPS_PAD (C-statistic 0.087).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4. Performance of GPS_PAD in predicting incident PAD in the UK Biobank.

4A. Changes in C-statistic of GPS_PAD (red point) and clinical risk factors (blue points) relative to the baseline model including age, sex, and the first ten principal components of ancestry (gray point), as calculated from Cox proportional hazards models in the UK Biobank holdout validation dataset. Lines represent confidence intervals of the C-statistic change. 4B-C. 10-year rates of PAD according to lifestyle and genetic categories, showing the influence of smoking (4B) and dietary patterns (4C). Shown are standardized cumulative rates of incident PAD standardized to the population averages for each covariate in the Cox models.

Compared to the individual performance of other scores, GPS_PAD resulted in greater benefit in discrimination of incident PAD than PRS_PLR (C-statistic 0.735) and the lifetime PAD risk score³¹ (C-statistic 0.675). PRS_LDpred2 achieved a larger improvement in C-statistic (C-statistic 0.774) from the baseline model compared to GPS_PAD, but the HR was drastically large in the UK Biobank where it was wholly derived, and consistent with overfitting (HR 199; 95% CI 172-231), as observed in cross-sectional analyses.

In the baseline model, GPS_PAD HR for incident PAD was 1.66 (95% CI 1.61-1.71) and HR 1.37 (95% CI 1.30-1.46) in a multivariable model adjusted for clinical risk factors. When examining the interaction between GPS_PAD and clinical variables, we observed a weak interaction with levels of LDL-C (GPS_PAD*LDL-C HR 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.08; P_interaction=0.005) and hemoglobin A1c (GPS_PAD*hemoglobin A1c HR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00-1.03; P_interaction=0.01). Lifestyle factors influenced PAD risk across each stratum of genetic risk (Supplemental Table 15). For the high genetic risk group, the standardized 10-year incidence of PAD of 3.17% for smokers and decreased to 1.05% for those who refrained from smoking (Figure 4A). There were similar patterns of an offset of genetic risk by modifiable lifestyle factors according to dietary patterns (Figure 4B).

Integration of polygenic risk with clinical guidelines

We then assessed whether GPS_PAD could identify individuals at equivalent risk for incident disease as the high-risk groups that current guidelines recommend screening for PAD.⁸ We first quantified the 10-year incidence of PAD among subgroups of individuals proposed to be candidates for ABI screening according to the AHA/ACC Guidelines.⁸ Individuals above 65y had a 10-year incidence of 2.28% (95% CI 2.16-2.41), individuals who were age 50-64y with one risk factor for atherosclerosis had an incidence of 1.23% (95% CI 1.17-1.30%), individuals <50y with diabetes and 1 additional risk factor had an incidence of 2.90% (95% CI 1.62-3.21%), and those with known atherosclerosis in another vascular bed had the greatest incidence of 5.95% (95% CI 5.48-6.42). As a comparison, incidence rates ranged from 2.81-4.40% in the top 1-5% GPS_PAD compared to the middle quintile distribution (Supplemental Table 16). We also looked at age-based combinations of each individual risk factor and compared event rates to subgroups with the combination of risk factors and high polygenic risk.

This analysis revealed that the combination of high GPS_PAD with one atherosclerosis risk factor identified more individuals who subsequently developed PAD than many of the subgroups defined by the combination of similar risk factors with age (Figure 5A). For example, 7.96% of individuals in the top 5% GPS_PAD and diabetes developed PAD, as compared to a 4.02% incident rate among individuals aged 50-64y with diabetes.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 5. Incorporation of GPS_PAD into screening criteria and PAD diagnosis.

5A. 10-year incidence of first-occurring PAD events from prospective analyses of individuals without prior PAD in the UK Biobank. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate the 10-year event risk among groups for which current clinical guidelines recommend ABI screening⁸ (blue) and individuals in the top 5% GPS_PAD with individual risk factors (red). Error bars represent 95% CI and are not completely shown for groups in the age<50y with diabetes + CKD or top 5% GPS_PAD + CKD, but can be found in Supplemental Table 16. 5B. Loess regression plot of GPS_PAD and minimum ABI among a subset of individuals in the Mass General Brigham Biobank (N = 763). 5C. Mean ABI for individuals in the top percentiles of GPS_PAD. * indicates percentile group with mean ABI<0.9. AAA, abdominal aortic aneurysm. CKD, chronic kidney disease.

Similarly, there was a relative increase in PAD cases among individuals in the top 5% GPS_PAD with dyslipidemia (5.63%; 95% CI 4.88-6.36) compared to individuals 50-64y with dyslipidemia (1.97%; 95% CI 1.80-2.15). The addition of the top 5% GPS_PAD also increased the proportion of additional cases of PAD when combined with other atherosclerotic conditions such as CAD and carotid stenosis compared to consideration of the conditions alone (Supplemental Table 16).

Predicting ankle-brachial indices based on polygenic risk

In addition to predicting binary PAD presence, we evaluated whether GPS_PAD was associated with minimum ABI for a subset of individuals in the MGBB (N=883, Supplemental Figure 4). The minimum ABI was first used to validate the PAD phenotype in the MGBB. PAD cases indeed had a lower mean ABI compared to controls (0.78 vs. 1.10; P<2x10^-16, Supplemental Figure 5). After adjusting for age, sex, and the first ten PCs, GPS_PAD was significantly associated with lower ABI (Figure 5B), while previously published scores were not (all P>0.1, Supplemental Table 17). Each SD increase in GPS_PAD was associated with an -0.088 reduction in ABI (95% CI -0.161 to -0.015; P=0.019). Based on the percentile distribution in the MGBB, the group in the top 8% GPS_PAD had a mean ABI<0.90 diagnostic for PAD (95% CI 0.83-0.97, Figure 5C).³⁵

Association of GPS_PAD with incident major adverse limb events

Lastly, we assessed whether polygenic background could identify individuals at increased risk for MALE after PAD diagnosis. In external validation cohorts, GPS_PAD was significantly associated with incident MALE and provided improved risk stratification than previously published scores. Individuals with high polygenic risk (top 20% of GPS_PAD) in the UK Biobank had a 75% higher relative risk of incident MALE (HR 1.75; 95% CI 1.18-2.57; P=0.005) over a median of 12.9 years (IQR 11.7-14.1) compared to the remainder of the PAD population. The top 20% GPS_PAD also had an increased risk of MALE in the MGBB (HR 1.56; 95% CI 1.06-2.30; P=0.02) during 5.19 years of follow-up (IQR 2.63-7.75) and AoU cohort (HR 1.51; 95% CI 1.03-2.24; P=0.03) over 2.32 years of follow-up (IQR 0.35-4.29, Figure 6A).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 6. GPS_PAD stratifies risk for incident major adverse limb events among individuals with PAD.

6A. Kaplan-Meier curves of MALE according to high GPS_PAD compared to the remainder of the PAD population, standardized to the mean age and sex of each cohort. 6B. Risk associated with polygenic scores for incident MALE among individuals with diagnosed PAD in the UK Biobank (N = 2,094), Mass General Brigham Biobank (N = 867), and All of Us (N = 8,022). HRs were calculated from adjusted Cox regression models including age, sex, genotyping array, the first ten principal components of ancestry as covariates.

In the overall PAD cohort in the UK Biobank, GPS_PAD was significantly associated with MALE (HR 1.48; 95% CI 1.24-1.77; Figure 6B), which was diminished but remained associated after multivariable adjustment (HR 1.30; 95% CI 1.07-1.59; P=0.009).

Associations of GPS_PAD with incident MALE remained significant in the prevalent PAD cohorts of the MGBB (HR 1.34; 95% CI 1.12-1.60) and AoU (HR 1.33; 95% CI 1.11-1.58; Figure 6B), while other scores demonstrated weaker or non-significant risk estimates.