PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Dziopa, K AU - Chaturvedi, N AU - Vugt, M. AU - Gratton, J AU - Maclean, R AU - Hingorani, A AU - Asselbergs, F W AU - Finan, C AU - Schmidt, A F TI - Combining stacked polygenic scores with clinical risk factors improves cardiovascular risk prediction in people with type 2 diabetes AID - 10.1101/2022.09.01.22279477 DP - 2023 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2022.09.01.22279477 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/08/30/2022.09.01.22279477.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/08/30/2022.09.01.22279477.full AB - Background Recommended CVD prediction models do not perform well in people with diabetes. We aimed to determine whether models combining polygenic scores (PGS) with clinical risk factors could more accurately predict 10-year risk of six facets of CVD, including: coronary heart disease (CHD), heart failure (HF), and atrial fibrillation (AF).Methods Three groups were selected from the UK Biobank: 143,459 control participants without diabetes or a history of CVD, 5,229 with diabetes but without CVD, and 1,621 with diabetes and a history of CVD. Data from 29 phenotype-specific polygenic scores (PGS) were stacked and combined with clinical risk-factors. Performance was evaluated using a 20% independent hold-out sample, with results stratified on duration of diabetes.Results In people without diabetes combining the stacked PGS with clinical risk factor modestly outperformed models that exclusively used clinical risk factors, with the largest improvement observed for AF (c-statistic difference: 0.03). In people with diabetes, models that combined the stacked PGS with clinical risk factors showed marked improved performance compared to the risk factor only models. This difference was largest in people with newly diagnosed diabetes (without a history of CVD), with a PGS + clinical risk factor model c-statistic: 0.83 (95%CI 0.83; 0.84) for CHD and 0.84 (95%CI 0.82; 0.85) for HF, compared to a clinical risk factor model c-statistic: 0.68 (95%CI 0.68; 0.69) and 0.60 (95%CI 0.58; 0.62) for CHD and HF respectively.Conclusions Combining PGS with clinical risk factors improves CVD risk prediction in people with diabetes.Competing Interest StatementNC serves on data safety and monitoring committees of clinical trials sponsored by AstraZeneca. AFS and CF have received funding from NewAmsterdam for unrelated work. None of the other authors of this paper has a financial or personal relationship with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence or bias the content of the paper.Funding StatementKD is supported by a PhD studentship from the National Productivity Investment Fund MRC Doctoral Training Programme (grant no. MR/S502522/1). AFS is supported by BHF grants PG/18/5033837, PG/22/10989, and the UCL BHF Research Accelerator AA/18/6/34223. CF and AFS received additional support from the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. This work was supported by grant [R01 LM010098] from the National Institutes of Health (USA) and by EU/EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking BigData@Heart grant no 116074, as well as by the UKRI/NIHR Multimorbidity fund Mechanism and Therapeutics Research Collaborative MR/V033867/1 and the Rosetrees Trust. JG is supported by the BHF studentship FS/17/70/33482. This work is partially supported by Dutch Research Council (628.011.213).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors