Search

Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) have huge potential to contribute to biomedical research and to a future of precision medicine, but to date their calculation relies largely on Europeanancestry GWAS data. This global bias makes most PRS substantially less accurate in individuals of non-European ancestry. Here we presentBridgePRS, a novel Bayesian PRS method that leverages shared genetic effects across ancestries to increase the accuracy of PRS in non-European populations. The performance ofBridgePRSis evaluated in simulated data and real UK Biobank (UKB) data across 19 traits in African, South Asian and East Asian ancestry individuals, using both UKB and Biobank Japan GWAS summary statistics.BridgePRSis compared to the leading alternative,PRS-CSx, and two single-ancestry PRS methods adapted for trans-ancestry prediction. PRS trained in the UK Biobank are then validated out-of-cohort in the independent Mount Sinai (New York) BioMeBiobank. Simulations reveal thatBridgePRSperformance, relative toPRS-CSx, increases as uncertainty increases: with lower heritability, higher polygenicity, greater between-population genetic diversity, and when causal variants are not present in the data. Our simulation results are consistent with real data analyses in whichBridgePRShas better predictive accuracy in African ancestry samples, especially in out-of-cohort prediction (into BioMe), which shows a 60% boost in meanR2compared toPRS-CSx(P= 2×10−6).BridgePRSperforms the full PRS analysis pipeline, is computationally efficient, and is a powerful method for deriving PRS in diverse and under-represented ancestry populations.

BackgroundPolygenic risk score (PRS) analyses are now routinely applied in biomedical research, with great hope that they will aid in our understanding of disease aetiology and contribute to personalized medicine. The continued growth of multi-cohort genome-wide association studies (GWASs) and large-scale biobank projects has provided researchers with a wealth of GWAS summary statistics and individual-level data suitable for performing PRS analyses. However, as the size of these studies increase, the risk of inter-cohort sample overlap and close relatedness increases. Ideally sample overlap would be identified and removed directly, but this is typically not possible due to privacy laws or consent agreements. This sample overlap, whether known or not, is a major problem in PRS analyses because it can lead to inflation of type 1 error and, thus, erroneous conclusions in published work.ResultsHere, for the first time, we report the scale of the sample overlap problem for PRS analyses by generating known sample overlap across sub-samples of the UK Biobank data, which we then use to produce GWAS and target data to mimic the effects of inter-cohort sample overlap. We demonstrate that inter-cohort overlap results in a significant and often substantial inflation in the observed PRS-trait association, coefficient of determination (R2) and false-positive rate. This inflation can be high even when the absolute number of overlapping individuals is small if this makes up a notable fraction of the target sample. We develop and introduce EraSOR (Erase Sample Overlap and Relatedness), a software for adjusting inflation in PRS prediction and association statistics in the presence of sample overlap or close relatedness between the GWAS and target samples. A key component of the EraSOR approach is inference of the degree of sample overlap from the intercept of a bivariate LD score regression applied to the GWAS and target data, making it powered in settings where both have sample sizes over 1,000 individuals. Through extensive benchmarking using UK Biobank and HapGen2 simulated genotype-phenotype data, we demonstrate that PRSs calculated using EraSOR-adjusted GWAS summary statistics are robust to inter-cohort overlap in a wide range of realistic scenarios and are even robust to high levels of residual genetic and environmental stratification.ConclusionThe results of all PRS analyses for which sample overlap cannot be definitively ruled out should be considered with caution given high type 1 error observed in the presence of even low overlap between base and target cohorts. Given the strong performance of EraSOR in eliminating inflation caused by sample overlap in PRS studies with large (>5k) target samples, we recommend that EraSOR be used in all future such PRS studies to mitigate the potential effects of inter-cohort overlap and close relatedness.

Despite the considerable progress in unraveling the genetic causes of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), we do not fully understand the molecular mechanisms underlying the disease. We analyzed genome-wide data involving 78,500 individuals using a polygenic risk score approach to identify the biological pathways and cell types involved in ALS. This data-driven approach identified multiple aspects of the biology underlying the disease that resolved into broader themes, namely neuron projection morphogenesis, membrane trafficking, and signal transduction mediated by ribonucleotides. We also found that genomic risk in ALS maps consistently to GABAergic cortical interneurons and oligodendrocytes, as confirmed in human single-nucleus RNA-seq data. Using two-sample Mendelian randomization, we nominated five differentially expressed genes (ATG16L2, ACSL5, MAP1LC3A, PLXNB2, and SCFD1) within the significant pathways as relevant to ALS. We conclude that the disparate genetic etiologies of this fatal neurological disease converge on a smaller number of final common pathways and cell types.

BackgroundMultiple individual vulnerabilities and traits are phenotypically associated with suicidal and non-suicidal self-harm. However, associations between these risk factors and self-harm are subject to confounding. We implemented genetically informed methods to better identify individual risk factors for self-harm.MethodsUsing genotype data and online Mental Health Questionnaire responses in the UK Biobank sample (N = 125,925), polygenic risk scores (PRS) were generated to index 24 plausible individual risk factors for self-harm in the following domains: mental health vulnerabilities, substance use phenotypes, cognitive traits, personality traits and physical traits. PRS were entered as predictors in binomial regression models to predict self-harm. Multinomial regressions were used to model suicidal and non-suicidal self-harm. To further probe the causal nature of these relationships, two-sample Mendelian Randomisation (MR) analyses were conducted for significant risk factors identified in PRS analyses.OutcomesSelf-harm was predicted by PRS indexing six individual risk factors, which are major depressive disorder (MDD), attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, alcohol dependence disorder (ALC) and lifetime cannabis use. Effect sizes ranged from β = 0.044 (95% CI: 0.016 to 0.152) for PRS for lifetime cannabis use, to β = 0.179 (95% CI: 0.152 to 0.207) for PRS for MDD. No systematic distinctions emerged between suicidal and non-suicidal self-harm. In follow-up MR analyses, MDD, ADHD and schizophrenia emerged as plausible causal risk factors for self-harm.InterpretationAmong a range of potential risk factors leading to self-harm, core predictors were found among psychiatric disorders. In addition to MDD, liabilities for schizophrenia and ADHD increased the risk for self-harm. Detection and treatment of core symptoms of these conditions, such as psychotic or impulsivity symptoms, may benefit self-harming patients.FundingLim is funded by King’s International Postgraduate Research Scholarship. Dr Pingault is funded by grant MQ16IP16 from MQ: Transforming Mental Health. Dr Coleman is supported by the UK National Institute of Health Research Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre. MRC grant MR/N015746/1 to CML and PFO’R. Dr Hagenaars is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/S0151132). Kylie P. Glanville is funded by the UK Medical Research Council (PhD studentship; grant MR/N015746/1). This paper represents independent research part-funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.Research in ContextEvidence before this studyA search was conducted on PubMed for literature from inception until 1st May 2019 using terms related to suicidal self-harm (SSH) and non-suicidal self-harm (NSSH), as well as polygenic risk scores (PRS), (“self-harm”[All Fields] OR “self-injurious”[All Fields] OR “self-mutilation”[All Fields] OR “suicide”[All Fields]) AND (“polygenic”[All Fields] OR “multifactorial inheritance”[All Fields]). Similar search was done for Mendelian Randomisation (MR), replacing “multifactorial inheritance” and “polygenic” with “Mendelian Randomisation/Randomization”. Evidence was included only if the study had used PRS or MR method to predict self-harm phenotypes using risk factors of self-harm. Ten papers for PRS and no paper for MR were identified.There were mixed results for PRS studies. PRS for MDD predicted SSH in two studies but not in another two studies. PRS for depressive symptoms predicted SSH but not NSSH. PRS for schizophrenia predicted SSH in one but not in another two studies. PRS for bipolar disorder predicted SSH in one study but did not predict SSH nor NSSH in another two studies.Added value of this studyBy using a large population-based sample, we systematically studied individual vulnerabilities and traits that can potentially lead to self-harm, including mental health vulnerabilities, substance use phenotypes, cognitive traits, personality traits and physical traits, summing up to 24 PRS as genetic proxies for 24 risk factors. We conducted MR to strengthen causal inference. We further distinguished non-suicidal self-harm (NSSH) and suicidal self-harm (SSH).Apart from PRS for schizophrenia, MDD and bipolar disorder, novel PRS were also identified to be associated with self-harm, which are PRS for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), cannabis use and alcohol dependence. A larger sample size allowed us to confirm positive findings from the previously mixed literature regarding the associations between PRS for MDD, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia with self-harm. Multivariate analyses and MR analyses strengthened the evidence implicating MDD, ADHD and schizophrenia as plausible causal risk factors for self-harm.Implications of all the available evidenceAmong the 24 risk factors considered, plausible causal risk factors for self-harm were identified among psychiatric conditions. Using PRS and MR methods and a number of complementary analyses provided higher confidence to infer causality and nuanced insights into the aetiology of self-harm. From a clinical perspective, detection and treatment of core symptoms of these conditions, such as psychotic or impulsivity symptoms, may prevent individuals from self-harming.

IntroductionIt’s imperative to understand the specific and shared aetiologies of major depression and cardio-metabolic disease, as both traits are frequently comorbid and each represents a major burden to society. This study examined whether there is a genetic association between major depression and cardio-metabolic traits and if this association is stratified by age at onset for major depression.MethodsPolygenic risk scores analysis and linkage disequilibrium score regression was performed to examine whether differences in shared genetic aetiology exist between depression case control status (N cases = 40,940, N controls = 67,532), earlier (N = 15,844), and later onset depression (N = 15,800) with body mass index, coronary artery disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes in eleven data sets from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Generation Scotland, and UK Biobank.ResultsAll cardio-metabolic polygenic risk scores were associated with depression status. Significant genetic correlations were found between depression and body mass index, coronary artery disease, and type 2 diabetes. Higher polygenic risk for body mass index, coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes was associated with both early and later onset depression, while higher polygenic risk for stroke was associated with later onset depression only. Significant genetic correlations were found between body mass index and later onset depression, and between coronary artery disease and both early and late onset depression.ConclusionsThe phenotypic associations between major depression and cardio-metabolic traits may partly reflect their overlapping genetic aetiology irrespective of the age depression first presents.

Genome-wide studies often exclude family members, even though they are a valuable source of information. We identified parent–offspring pairs, siblings and couples in the UK Biobank and implemented a family-based DNA-derived heritability method to capture additional genetic effects and multiple sources of environmental influence on neuroticism and years of education. Compared to estimates from unrelated individuals, total heritability increased from 10 to 27% and from 17 to 56% for neuroticism and education respectively by including family-based genetic effects. We detected no family environmental influences on neuroticism. The couple similarity variance component explained 35% of the variation in years of education, probably reflecting assortative mating. Overall, our genetic and environmental estimates closely replicate previous findings from an independent sample. However, more research is required to dissect contributions to the additional heritability by rare and structural genetic effects, assortative mating, and residual environmental confounding. The latter is especially relevant for years of education, a highly socially contingent variable, for which our heritability estimate is at the upper end of twin estimates in the literature. Family-based genetic effects could be harnessed to improve polygenic prediction. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10519-019-09984-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundThe prevalence of depression is higher in individuals suffering from autoimmune diseases, but the mechanisms underlying the observed comorbidities are unknown. Epidemiological findings point to a bi-directional relationship - that depression increases the risk of developing an autoimmune disease, and vice-versa. Shared genetic etiology is a plausible explanation for the overlap between depression and autoimmune diseases. In this study we tested whether genetic variation in the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC), which is associated with risk for autoimmune diseases, is also associated with risk for depression.MethodWe fine-mapped the classical MHC (chr6: 29.6-33.1 Mb), imputing 216 Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) alleles and four Complement Component 4 (C4) haplotypes in studies from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) working group and the UK Biobank (UKB). In the 26 PGC-MDD studies, cases met a lifetime diagnosis of MDD, determined by a structured diagnostic interview. In the UKB, cases and controls were identified from an online mental health questionnaire. The total sample size was 45,149 depression cases and 86,698 controls. We tested for association between depression status and imputed MHC variants in each study and performed an inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis across the PGC-MDD and UKB samples, applying both a conservative region-wide significance threshold (3.9-e6) and a candidate threshold (1.6e-4).ResultsNo HLA alleles or C4 haplotypes were associated with depression at the conservative threshold in the PGC, UKB or meta-analysis. HLA-B*08:01 was associated with modest protection for depression at the candidate threshold in the meta-analysis. Under the conservative threshold, 70 SNPs were detected in the UKB and 143 SNPs were detected in the meta-analysis, mirroring previous findings from highly powered GWAS of depression.DiscussionWe found no evidence that HLA alleles, which play a major role in the genetic susceptibility to autoimmune diseases, or C4 haplotypes, which are strongly associated with schizophrenia, confer risk for depression. These results indicate that autoimmune diseases and depression do not share common risk loci of moderate or large effect in the MHC.

Polygenic scores (PGS) are estimated scores representing the genetic tendency of an individual for a disease or trait and have become an indispensible tool in a variety of analyses. Typically they are linear combination of the genotypes of a large number of SNPs, with the weights calculated from an external source, such as summary statistics from large meta-analyses. Recently cohorts with genetic data have become very large, rendering external summary statistics superfluous. Making use of raw data in calculating PGS, however, presents us with problems of overfitting. Here we discuss the essence of overfitting as applied to PGS calculations, with one of the consequences being the conflation of genetic correlation with environmental correlation. Our simulations show that the impact of overfitting due to the overlap between the Target and the Validation data (OTV) is much less than overfitting due to the overlap between the Target and the Discovery data (OTD), and that a large sample size can vastly reduce OTD in terms of correlation. However, tests of genetic correlations will still be affected by OTD due to increased power. A proposal called cross prediction is offered whereby both OTD and OTV can be avoided when calculating PGS without external summary statistics. Software is made available for implementation of the methods.

Depression is more frequent among individuals exposed to traumatic events. Both trauma exposure and depression are heritable. However, the relationship between these traits, including the role of genetic risk factors, is complex and poorly understood. When modelling trauma exposure as an environmental influence on depression, both gene-environment correlations and gene-environment interactions have been observed. The UK Biobank concurrently assessed Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and self-reported lifetime exposure to traumatic events in 126,522 genotyped individuals of European ancestry. We contrasted genetic influences on MDD between individuals reporting and not reporting trauma exposure (final sample size range: 24,094-92,957). The SNP-based heritability of MDD was greater in participants reporting trauma exposure (24%) than in individuals not reporting trauma exposure (12%), taking into account the strong, positive genetic correlation observed between MDD and reported trauma exposure. The genetic correlation between MDD and waist circumference was only significant in individuals reporting trauma exposure (rg = 0.24, p = 1.8×10-7 versus rg = −0.05, p = 0.39 in individuals not reporting trauma exposure, difference p = 2.3×10-4). Our results suggest that the genetic contribution to MDD is greater when additional risk factors are present, and that a complex relationship exists between reported trauma exposure, body composition, and MDD.

Polygenic scores (PGS) summarize the genetic contribution of a person’s genotype to a disease or phenotype. They can be used to group participants into different risk categories for diseases, and are also used as covariates in epidemiological analyses. A number of possible ways of calculating polygenic scores have been proposed, and recently there is much interest in methods that incorporate information available in published summary statistics. As there is no inherent information on linkage disequilibrium (LD) in summary statistics, a pertinent question is how we can make use of LD information available elsewhere to supplement such analyses. To answer this question we propose a method for constructing PGS using summary statistics and a reference panel in a penalized regression framework, which we call lassosum. We also propose a general method for choosing the value of the tuning parameter in the absence of validation data. In our simulations, we showed that pseudovalidation often resulted in prediction accuracy that is comparable to using a dataset with validation phenotype and was clearly superior to the conservative option of setting the tuning parameter of lassosum to its lowest value. We also showed that lassosum achieved better prediction accuracy than simple clumping and p-value thresholding in almost all scenarios. It was also substantially faster and more accurate than the recently proposed LDpred.