Cited by 707Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockRace, Genetics, and Society

Improving polygenic prediction in ancestrally diverse populations

Open access
Ruan, Yunfeng, Lin, Yen-Feng, Feng, Yen-Chen Anne, Chen, Chia-Yen, Lam, Max, Guo, Zhenglin, Stanley Global Asia Initiatives, Ahn, Yong Min +57 more·2022·Nature Genetics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have attenuated cross-population predictive performance. As existing genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been conducted predominantly in individuals of European descent, the limited transferability of PRS reduces their clinical value in non-European populations, and may exacerbate healthcare disparities. Recent efforts to level ancestry imbalance in genomic research have expanded the scale of non-European GWAS, although most remain underpowered. Here, we present a new PRS construction method, PRS-CSx, which improves cross-population polygenic prediction by integrating GWAS summary statistics from multiple populations. PRS-CSx couples genetic effects across populations via a shared continuous shrinkage (CS) prior, enabling more accurate effect size estimation by sharing information between summary statistics and leveraging linkage disequilibrium diversity across discovery samples, while inheriting computational efficiency and robustness from PRS-CS. We show that PRS-CSx outperforms alternative methods across traits with a wide range of genetic architectures, cross-population genetic overlaps and discovery GWAS sample sizes in simulations, and improves the prediction of quantitative traits and schizophrenia risk in non-European populations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41588-022-01054-7

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The cross-population PGS from PRS-CSx explained up to 4.0% of the phenotypic variance in EduYears in the EAS cohorts.

    “The cross-population PGS from PRS-CSx explaining up to 4.0% of the phenotypic variance in EduYears in the EAS cohorts.”

    From Shared genetic architectures of educational attainment in East Asian and European populations (2024) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Results section, “Prediction of quantitative traits in Biobanks” (page unavailable), reports that PRS-CSx improved prediction accuracy in East Asian target samples. But the traits examined were anthropometric or blood-panel traits; our copy does not report an EduYears result or the claimed 4.0% of phenotypic variance explained. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • PGS analyses indicated the advantages of ancestral diversity over a single population in PGS construction.

    “Furthermore, our PGS analyses also indicated the advantages of ancestral diversity over a single population in PGS construction36.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ruan, Y., Lin, Y.-F., Feng, Y.-C. A., Chen, C.-Y., Lam, M., Guo, Z., Initiatives, S. G. A., Ahn, Y. M., Akiyama, K., Arai, M., Baek, J. H., Chen, W. J., Chung, Y.-C., Feng, G., Fujii, K., Glatt, S. J., Ha, K., Hattori, K., Higuchi, T., Hishimoto, A., Hong, K. S., Horiuchi, Y., Hwu, H.-G., Ikeda, M., Ishiwata, S., Itokawa, M., Iwata, N., Joo, E.-J., Kahn, R. S., Kim, S.-W., Kim, S. J., Kim, S. H., Kinoshita, M., Kunugi, H., Kusumawardhani, A., Lee, J., Lee, B. D., Lee, H.-J., Liu, J., Liu, R., Ma, X., Myung, W., Numata, S., Ohmori, T., Otsuka, I., Ozeki, Y., Schwab, S. G., Shi, W., Shimoda, K., Sim, K., Sora, I., Tang, J., Toyota, T., Tsuang, M., Wildenauer, D. B., Won, H.-H., Yoshikawa, T., Zheng, A., Zhu, F., He, L., Sawa, A., Martin, A. R., Qin, S., Huang, H., & Ge, T.
Affiliations
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Biogen (United States) (US)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
  • Dokkyo University (JP)
  • Samsung Medical Center (KR)
  • National Taiwan University (TW)
  • Digital China Health (China) (CN)
  • Shiga University of Medical Science (JP)
  • National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry (JP)
  • Fujita Health University (JP)
  • Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Medical Science (JP)
  • Eulji University (KR)
  • Chonnam National University (KR)
  • University of Indonesia (ID)
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
  • Korea University (KR)
  • Agency for Science, Technology and Research (SG)
  • Seoul National University Bundang Hospital (KR)
  • Tokushima University (JP)
  • Kobe University (JP)
  • University of Wollongong (AU)
  • Institute of Mental Health (SG)
  • Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital (CN)
  • Central South University (CN)
  • RIKEN Center for Brain Science (JP)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Qin, Shengying
  • Huang, Hailiang
  • Ge, Tian
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2022-05
Volume
54
Issue
5
Pages
573-580
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W4229035861
Cited by
707
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 153 · 2025: 175 · 2024: 160 · 2023: 133 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 12
FWCI
84.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Brain and Behavior Research Foundation
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Mental Health (U01MH109539, R00MH117229)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K01DK114379)
  • the Zhengxu and Ying He Foundation and the Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research
  • Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (2017SHZDZX01)
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Institute on Aging (R00AG054573)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
Keywords
polygenic risk score, effect size estimation, schizophrenia risk, quantitative traits, non-European populations, health care disparities
MeSH terms
Genetics, Population, Humans, Risk Factors, Linkage Disequilibrium, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Multifactorial Inheritance, Genome-Wide Association Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review