Abstract
Aims/Hypothesis Individuals with T2D are at an increased risk of developing cardiovascular complications; early identification of individuals can lead to an alteration of the natural history of the disease. Current approaches to risk prediction tailored to individuals with T2D are exemplified by the RECODe algorithms which predict CVD outcomes among individuals with T2D. Recent efforts to improve CVD risk prediction among the general population have included the incorporation of polygenic risk scores (PRS). This paper aims to investigate the utility of the addition of a coronary artery disease (CAD), stroke and heart failure risk score to the current RECODe model for disease stratification.
Methods We derived PRS using summary statistics for ischemic stroke (IS) from the coronary artery disease (CAD) and heart failure (HF) and tested prediction accuracy in the Penn Medicine Biobank (PMBB). A Cox proportional hazards model was used for time-to-event analyses within our cohort, and we compared model discrimination for the RECODe model with and without a PRS using AUC.
Results The RECODe model alone demonstrated an AUC [95% CI] of 0.67 [0.62-0.72] for ASCVD; the addition of the three PRS to the model demonstrated an AUC [95% CI] of 0.66 [0.63-0.70]. A z-test to compare the AUCs of the two models did not demonstrate a detectable difference between the two models (p=0.97)
Conclusions/Interpretation In the present study, we demonstrate that although PRS associate with CVD outcomes independent of traditional risk factors among individuals with T2D, the addition of PRS to contemporary clinical risk models does not specifically improve the predictive performance as compared to the baseline model.
Research in Context
Early identification of individuals with T2D who are at greatest risk of cardiovascular complications can lead to targeted intensive risk-factor modification with the aim of altering the natural history of the disease.
Current approaches to risk prediction tailored to individuals with diabetes are exemplified by the RECODe algorithms which predict both individual and composite CVD outcomes among individuals with T2D.
We sought to determine if the addition of a polygenic risk score to current clinical risk models improve predictive modeling of adverse cardiovascular events in individuals with type II diabetes.
We demonstrate that although PRS associate with CVD outcomes independent of traditional risk factors among individuals with T2D, the addition of PRS to traditional, validated models does not specifically improve the predictive performance as compared to the base model.
RECODe demonstrated modest discrimination potential at baseline (AUC = 0.66). As such, the lack of improved risk prediction may reflect the performance of the RECODe equation in our cohort as opposed to lack of PRS utility.
Current performance of clinical risk models appears modest. Although PRS doesn’t meaningfully improve performance, there is still substantial opportunity to improve risk prediction.
Competing Interest Statement
S.M.D. receives research support to his institution from RenalytixAI and in-kind support from Novo Nordisk, both outside the scope of the current work. SMD is named as a co-inventor on a Government-owned US Patent application related to the use of genetic risk prediction for venous thromboembolic disease filed by the US Department of Veterans Affairs in accordance with Federal regulatory requirements.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the US Department of Veterans Affairs Clinical Research and Development award IK2-CX001780 to S.M.D. This publication does not represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government. B.F.V. is grateful for support from the NIH/NIDDK (DK126194) J.C. is grateful for support from R01-HL138306 and R01-CA236468.
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:
IRB of University of Pennsylvania gave ethical approval for this work.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Raw data for the analysis dataset are not publicly available to preserve individuals privacy per the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Privacy Rule.