Abstract
A wide range of predictive models exist that predict risk of common lifestyle conditions. However, these have not focused on identifying pre-clinical higher risk groups that would benefit from lifestyle interventions and do not include genetic risk scores. In this study, we developed, validated, and compared the performance of three decision rule algorithms including biomarkers, physical measurements and genetic risk scores for incident coronary artery disease (CAD), diabetes (T2D), and hypertension in the general population against commonly used clinical risk scoring tools.
Of all individuals recruited between 2006 and 2010 from the UK Biobank study for whom re-measurement data were available, 60782 were included in the analyses (mean age 56.3 (7.59), 51.2% female). Follow-up data were available until 2016. Three decision rules models with three risk strata were developed and tested for an association with incident disease. Hazard ratios (HR with 95% confidence interval) for incident CAD, T2D, and hypertension were calculated from survival models. Model performance in discriminating between higher risk individuals suitable for lifestyle intervention and individuals at low risk was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
From the initial baseline measurement until the follow-up re-measurements, 500 incident CAD cases, 1005 incident T2D cases, and 2379 incident hypertension cases were ascertained. The higher risk group in the decision rules model had a 40-, 40.9-, and 21.6-fold increase in risk of CAD, T2D, and hypertension, respectively (P < 0.001 for all), and the risk increased significantly between the three strata for all three conditions (P < 0.05). Risk stratification based on decision rules identified both a low risk group which would not have benefited from lifestyle intervention (only 1.3% incident disease across all models), as well as a high risk group where 72%, 81.5%, and 74% of those who developed disease within 8 years would have been recommended lifestyle intervention. Based on genetic risk alone, we identified not only a high risk group, but also a group at elevated risk for all health conditions.
In conclusion, in this analysis of returning UK Biobank participants, we found that decision rule models comprising blood biomarkers, physical measurements, and polygenic risk scores were superior at identifying individuals likely to benefit from lifestyle intervention for three of the most common lifestyle-related chronic health conditions compared to commonly used clinical risk scores.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors except Tom J. de Koning and Bruce Wolffenbuttel are employed by Ancora Health B.V.. Tom J. de Koning and Bruce Wolffenbuttel sit on the medical advisory board of Ancora Health B.V. Additionally, Jose Castela Forte, Rahul Gannamani, Sridhar Kumaraswamy, and Sipko van Dam own shares of Ancora Health B.V.. The funder provided support in the form of salaries for all employees but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Funding Statement
Tom J. de Koning, Bruce Wolffenbuttel, Sipko van Dam and Pytrik Folkertsma were funded for this Dutch Top Sector Life Sciences and Health Public-Private Partnership Allowance. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
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 study is reported in accordance with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline and was conducted under UK Biobank application 55495. Local Institutional Review Board ethics approval was not necessary for this study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the UK Biobank project site, subject to registration and application process. Further details can be found at https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk.