Search

Summary: Polygenic scores (PGSs) are a promising tool for estimating individual-level genetic risk of disease based on the results of genome-wide association studies (GWASs). However, their promise has yet to be fully realized because most currently available PGSs were built with genetic data from predominantly European-ancestry populations, and PGS performance declines when scores are applied to target populations different from the populations from which they were derived. Thus, there is a great need to improve PGS performance in currently under-studied populations. In this work we leverage data from two large and diverse cohorts the Million Veterans Program (MVP) and All of Us (AoU), providing us the unique opportunity to compare methods for building PGSs for multi-ancestry populations across multiple traits. We build PGSs for five continuous traits and five binary traits using both multi-ancestry and single-ancestry approaches with popular Bayesian PGS methods and both MVP META GWAS results and population-specific GWAS results from the respective African, European, and Hispanic MVP populations. We evaluate these scores in three AoU populations genetically similar to the respective African, Admixed American, and European 1000 Genomes Project superpopulations. Using correlation-based tests, we make formal comparisons of the PGS performance across the multiple AoU populations. We conclude that approaches that combine GWAS data from multiple populations produce PGSs that perform better than approaches that utilize smaller single-population GWAS results matched to the target population, and specifically that multi-ancestry scores built with PRS-CSx outperform the other approaches in the three AoU populations.

Abstract We conduct a large-scale meta-analysis of heart failure genome-wide association studies (GWAS) consisting of over 90,000 heart failure cases and more than 1 million control individuals of European ancestry to uncover novel genetic determinants for heart failure. Using the GWAS results and blood protein quantitative loci, we perform Mendelian randomization and colocalization analyses on human proteins to provide putative causal evidence for the role of druggable proteins in the genesis of heart failure. We identify 39 genome-wide significant heart failure risk variants, of which 18 are previously unreported. Using a combination of Mendelian randomization proteomics and genetic cis-only colocalization analyses, we identify 10 additional putatively causal genes for heart failure. Findings from GWAS and Mendelian randomization-proteomics identify seven (CAMK2D, PRKD1, PRKD3, MAPK3, TNFSF12, APOC3 and NAE1) proteins as potential targets for interventions to be used in primary prevention of heart failure.

SARS-CoV-2 has caused symptomatic COVID-19 and widespread death across the globe. We sought to determine genetic variants contributing to COVID-19 susceptibility and hospitalization in a large biobank linked to a national United States health system. We identified 19,168 (3.7%) lab-confirmed COVID-19 cases among Million Veteran Program participants between March 1, 2020, and February 2, 2021, including 11,778 Whites, 4,893 Blacks, and 2,497 Hispanics. A multi-population genome-wide association study (GWAS) for COVID-19 outcomes identified four independent genetic variants (rs8176719, rs73062389, rs60870724, and rs73910904) contributing to COVID-19 positivity, including one novel locus found exclusively among Hispanics. We replicated eight of nine previously reported genetic associations at an alpha of 0.05 in at least one population-specific or the multi-population meta-analysis for one of the four MVP COVID-19 outcomes. We used rs8176719 and three additional variants to accurately infer ABO blood types. We found that A, AB, and B blood types were associated with testing positive for COVID-19 compared with O blood type with the highest risk for the A blood group. We did not observe any genome-wide significant associations for COVID-19 severity outcomes among those testing positive. Our study replicates prior GWAS findings associated with testing positive for COVID-19 among mostly White samples and extends findings at three loci to Black and Hispanic individuals. We also report a new locus among Hispanics requiring further investigation. These findings may aid in the identification of novel therapeutic agents to decrease the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 across all major ancestral populations.

Background Genetic studies may help identify causal pathways; therefore, we sought to identify genetic determinants of ideal CVH and their association with CVD outcomes in the multi-population Veteran Administration Million Veteran Program. Methods An ideal health score (IHS) was calculated from 3 clinical factors (blood pressure, total cholesterol, and blood glucose levels) and 3 behavioral factors (smoking status, physical activity, and BMI), ascertained at baseline. Multi-population genome-wide association study (GWAS) was performed on IHS and binary ideal health using linear and logistic regression, respectively. Using the genome-wide significant SNPs from the IHS GWAS, we created a weighted IHS polygenic risk score (PRSIHS) which was used (i) to conduct a phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) of associations between PRSIHS and ICD-9 phenotypes and (ii) to further test for associations with mortality and selected CVD outcomes using logistic and Cox regression and, as an instrumental variable, in Mendelian Randomization. Results The discovery and replication cohorts consisted of 142,404 (119,129 European American (EUR); 16,495 African American (AFR)), and 45,766 (37,646 EUR; 5,366 AFR) participants, respectively. The mean age was 65.8 years (SD = 11.2) and 92.7% were male. Overall, 4.2% exhibited ideal CVH based on the clinical and behavioral factors. In the multi-population meta-analysis, variants at 17 loci were associated with IHS and each had known GWAS associations with multiple components of the IHS. PheWAS analysis in 456,026 participants showed that increased PRSIHS was associated with a lower odds ratio for many CVD outcomes and risk factors. Both IHS and PRSIHS measures of ideal CVH were associated with significantly less CVD outcomes and CVD mortality. Conclusion A set of high interest genetic variants contribute to the presence of ideal CVH in a multi-ethnic cohort of US Veterans. Genetically influenced ideal CVH is associated with lower odds of CVD outcomes and mortality.

BackgroundGenetic studies may help identify causal pathways; therefore, we sought to identify genetic determinants of ideal CVH and their association with CVD outcomes in the multi-population Veteran Administration Million Veteran Program.MethodsAn ideal health score (IHS) was calculated from 3 clinical factors (blood pressure, total cholesterol, and blood glucose levels) and 3 behavioral factors (smoking status, physical activity, and BMI), ascertained at baseline. Multi-population genome-wide association study (GWAS) was performed on IHS and binary ideal health using linear and logistic regression, respectively. Using the genome-wide significant SNPs from the IHS GWAS, we created a weighted IHS polygenic risk score (PRSIHS) which was used (i) to conduct a phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) of associations between PRSIHS and ICD-9 phenotypes and (ii) to further test for associations with mortality and selected CVD outcomes using logistic and Cox regression and, as an instrumental variable, in Mendelian Randomization.ResultsThe discovery and replication cohorts consisted of 142,404 (119,129 European American (EUR); 16,495 African American (AFR)), and 45,766 (37,646 EUR; 5,366 AFR) participants, respectively. The mean age was 65.8 years (SD = 11.2) and 92.7% were male. Overall, 4.2% exhibited ideal CVH based on the clinical and behavioral factors. In the multi-population meta-analysis, variants at 17 loci were associated with IHS and each had known GWAS associations with multiple components of the IHS. PheWAS analysis in 456,026 participants showed that increased PRSIHS was associated with a lower odds ratio for many CVD outcomes and risk factors. Both IHS and PRSIHS measures of ideal CVH were associated with significantly less CVD outcomes and CVD mortality.ConclusionA set of high interest genetic variants contribute to the presence of ideal CVH in a multi-ethnic cohort of US Veterans. Genetically influenced ideal CVH is associated with lower odds of CVD outcomes and mortality.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant global threat. However, despite urgent need, there remains uncertainty surrounding best practices for pharmaceutical interventions to treat COVID-19. In particular, conflicting evidence has emerged surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, alone or in combination, for COVID-19. The COVID-19 Evidence Accelerator convened by the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, in collaboration with Friends of Cancer Research, assembled experts from the health systems research, regulatory science, data science, and epidemiology to participate in a large parallel analysis of different data sets to further explore the effectiveness of these treatments.MethodsElectronic health record (EHR) and claims data were extracted from seven separate databases. Parallel analyses were undertaken on data extracted from each source. Each analysis examined time to mortality in hospitalized patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and the two in combination as compared to patients not treated with either drug. Cox proportional hazards models were used, and propensity score methods were undertaken to adjust for confounding. Frequencies of adverse events in each treatment group were also examined.ResultsNeither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin, alone or in combination, were significantly associated with time to mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. No treatment groups appeared to have an elevated risk of adverse events.ConclusionAdministration of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and their combination appeared to have no effect on time to mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Continued research is needed to clarify best practices surrounding treatment of COVID-19.