Abstract
Background 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.
Objective To develop, validate, and compare 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.
Methods We identified 60782 individuals in the UK Biobank study with available follow-up data. Three decision rules models were developed and tested for an association with incident disease. Hazard ratios (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).
Results We ascertained 500 incident CAD cases, 1005 incident T2D cases, and 2379 incident cases of hypertension. 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). 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 (only 1.3% incident disease across all models), as well as a high-risk group where at least 72% of those developing 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.
Conclusion We found that decision rule models comprising blood biomarkers, physical measurements, and polygenic risk scores are 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. Their utility as part of digital data or digital therapeutics platforms to support the implementation of lifestyle interventions in preventive and primary care should be further validated.
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 Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) 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
Added 2 references
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.
