Cited by 414Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Common polygenic variation enhances risk prediction for Alzheimer’s disease

Open access
Escott-Price, Valentina, Sims, Rebecca, Bannister, Christian, Harold, Denise, Vronskaya, Maria, Majounie, Elisa, Badarinarayan, Nandini, GERAD/PERADES +21 more·2015·Brain

Abstract

The identification of subjects at high risk for Alzheimer's disease is important for prognosis and early intervention. We investigated the polygenic architecture of Alzheimer's disease and the accuracy of Alzheimer's disease prediction models, including and excluding the polygenic component in the model. This study used genotype data from the powerful dataset comprising 17 008 cases and 37 154 controls obtained from the International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project (IGAP). Polygenic score analysis tested whether the alleles identified to associate with disease in one sample set were significantly enriched in the cases relative to the controls in an independent sample. The disease prediction accuracy was investigated in a subset of the IGAP data, a sample of 3049 cases and 1554 controls (for whom APOE genotype data were available) by means of sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and positive and negative predictive values. We observed significant evidence for a polygenic component enriched in Alzheimer's disease (P = 4.9 × 10(-26)). This enrichment remained significant after APOE and other genome-wide associated regions were excluded (P = 3.4 × 10(-19)). The best prediction accuracy AUC = 78.2% (95% confidence interval 77-80%) was achieved by a logistic regression model with APOE, the polygenic score, sex and age as predictors. In conclusion, Alzheimer's disease has a significant polygenic component, which has predictive utility for Alzheimer's disease risk and could be a valuable research tool complementing experimental designs, including preventative clinical trials, stem cell selection and high/low risk clinical studies. In modelling a range of sample disease prevalences, we found that polygenic scores almost doubles case prediction from chance with increased prediction at polygenic extremes.

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 · 10.1093/brain/awv268

Cites

28 of 28 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?

  • Expanding PRS to include variants below the genome-wide statistical cutoff allows for a more complete view of the genetic contribution to disease risk and seems to provide an improved method for risk prediction over more selective PRS or standard predictors such as APOEε4 alleles, age, and sex.

    “risk and seems to provide an improved method for risk prediction over more selective PRS or standard predictors such as APOEε4 alleles, age, and sex [118, 122, 123].”

    From Genetic architecture of Alzheimer's disease (2020) · cites this paper as [122]

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

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Escott-Price, V., Sims, R., Bannister, C., Harold, D., Vronskaya, M., Majounie, E., Badarinarayan, N., GERAD/PERADES, consortia, I., Morgan, K., Passmore, P., Holmes, C., Powell, J., Brayne, C., Gill, M., Mead, S., Goate, A., Cruchaga, C., Lambert, J.-C., van Duijn, C., Maier, W., Ramirez, A., Holmans, P., Jones, L., Hardy, J., Seshadri, S., Schellenberg, G. D., Amouyel, P., & Williams, J.
Affiliations
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
  • Boston University (US)
Venue
Brain
Published
2015-10-21
Volume
138
Issue
12
Pages
3673-3684
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2193207784
Cited by
414
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 2
FWCI
19.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • DZNE Pub (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Social Care and Health Research
  • Health and Care Research Wales
  • EU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research
  • Alzheimer's Society
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0611-10084)
  • Cardiff University
  • Dementias Platform UK
  • Medical Research Council (MR/L023784/2, MR/L023784/1, MR/L501517/1, MR/K013041/1, MR/L501529/1, MR/L010305/1, MR/M009076/1)
  • National Institute on Aging (U01AG049505, P30AG010124, U01AG032984, R01AG033193, R01AG008122, U24AG021886)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, polygenic risk score, polygenic architecture, risk prediction, apolipoprotein E, genome-wide association study, prediction accuracy
MeSH terms
Alleles, Alzheimer Disease, Apolipoproteins E, Genetic Testing, Genotype, Humans, Risk, ROC Curve, Genetic Variation, Logistic Models, Case-Control Studies, 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