Genome-wide polygenic score to predict chronic kidney disease across ancestries.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a common complex condition associated with high morbidity and mortality. Polygenic prediction could enhance CKD screening and prevention; however, this approach has not been optimized for ancestrally diverse populations. By combining APOL1 risk genotypes with genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of kidney function, we designed, optimized and validated a genome-wide polygenic score (GPS) for CKD. The new GPS was tested in 15 independent cohorts, including 3 cohorts of European ancestry (n = 97,050), 6 cohorts of African ancestry (n = 14,544), 4 cohorts of Asian ancestry (n = 8,625) and 2 admixed Latinx cohorts (n = 3,625). We demonstrated score transferability with reproducible performance across all tested cohorts. The top 2% of the GPS was associated with nearly threefold increased risk of CKD across ancestries. In African ancestry cohorts, the APOL1 risk genotype and polygenic component of the GPS had additive effects on the risk of CKD.

Genomic considerations for FHIR®; eMERGE implementation lessons.

Structured representation of clinical genetic results is necessary for advancing precision medicine. The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network's Phase III program initially used a commercially developed XML message format for standardized and structured representation of genetic results for electronic health record (EHR) integration. In a desire to move towards a standard representation, the network created a new standardized format based upon Health Level Seven Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (HL7® FHIR®), to represent clinical genomics results. These new standards improve the utility of HL7® FHIR® as an international healthcare interoperability standard for management of genetic data from patients. This work advances the establishment of standards that are being designed for broad adoption in the current health information technology landscape.

Predictive Utility of Polygenic Risk Scores for Coronary Heart Disease in Three Major Racial and Ethnic Groups.

Because polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for coronary heart disease (CHD) are derived from mainly European ancestry (EA) cohorts, their validity in African ancestry (AA) and Hispanic ethnicity (HE) individuals is unclear. We investigated associations of "restricted" and genome-wide PRSs with CHD in three major racial and ethnic groups in the U.S. The eMERGE cohort (mean age 48 ± 14 years, 58% female) included 45,645 EA, 7,597 AA, and 2,493 HE individuals. We assessed two restricted PRSs (PRSTikkanen and PRSTada; 28 and 50 variants, respectively) and two genome-wide PRSs (PRSmetaGRS and PRSLDPred; 1.7 M and 6.6 M variants, respectively) derived from EA cohorts. Over a median follow-up of 11.1 years, 2,652 incident CHD events occurred. Hazard and odds ratios for the association of PRSs with CHD were similar in EA and HE cohorts but lower in AA cohorts. Genome-wide PRSs were more strongly associated with CHD than restricted PRSs were. PRSmetaGRS, the best performing PRS, was associated with CHD in all three cohorts; hazard ratios (95% CI) per 1 SD increase were 1.53 (1.46-1.60), 1.53 (1.23-1.90), and 1.27 (1.13-1.43) for incident CHD in EA, HE, and AA individuals, respectively. The hazard ratios were comparable in the EA and HE cohorts (pinteraction = 0.77) but were significantly attenuated in AA individuals (pinteraction= 2.9 × 10-3). These results highlight the potential clinical utility of PRSs for CHD as well as the need to assemble diverse cohorts to generate ancestry- and ethnicity PRSs.

Correction: Evaluation of the cost and effectiveness of diverse recruitment methods for a genetic screening study.

The original version of this Article contained an error in the undergraduate degree awarded to the author Ian Halim, which was incorrectly given as BS. This has now been corrected to BA in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.

Evaluation of the cost and effectiveness of diverse recruitment methods for a genetic screening study.

PURPOSE: Recruitment of participants from diverse backgrounds is crucial to the generalizability of genetic research, but has proven challenging. We retrospectively evaluated recruitment methods used for a study on return of genetic results. METHODS: The costs of study design, development, and participant enrollment were calculated, and the characteristics of the participants enrolled through the seven recruitment methods were examined. RESULTS: A total of 1118 participants provided consent, a blood sample, and questionnaire data. The estimated cost across recruitment methods ranged from $579 to $1666 per participant and required a large recruitment team. Recruitment methods using flyers and staff networks were the most cost-efficient and resulted in the highest completion rate. Targeted sampling that emphasized the importance of Latino/a participation, utilization of translated materials, and in-person recruitments contributed to enrolling a demographically diverse sample. CONCLUSIONS: Although all methods were deployed in the same hospital or neighborhood and shared the same staff, each recruitment method was different in terms of cost and characteristics of the enrolled participants, suggesting the importance of carefully choosing the recruitment methods based on the desired composition of the final study sample. This analysis provides information about the effectiveness and cost of different methods to recruit adults for genetic research.

Harmonizing Outcomes for Genomic Medicine: Comparison of eMERGE Outcomes to ClinGen Outcome/Intervention Pairs.

Genomic medicine is moving from research to the clinic. There is a lack of evidence about the impact of genomic medicine interventions on health outcomes. This is due in part to a lack of standardized outcome measures that can be used across different programs to evaluate the impact of interventions targeted to specific genetic conditions. The eMERGE Outcomes working group (OWG) developed measures to collect information on outcomes following the return of genomic results to participants for several genetic disorders. These outcomes were compared to outcome intervention pairs for genetic disorders developed independently by the ClinGen Actionability working group (AWG). In general, there was concordance between the defined outcomes between the two groups. The ClinGen outcomes tended to be from a higher level and the AWG scored outcomes represented a subset of outcomes referenced in the accompanying AWG evidence review. eMERGE OWG outcomes were more detailed and discrete, facilitating a collection of relevant information from the health records. This paper demonstrates that common outcomes for genomic medicine interventions can be identified. Further work is needed to standardize outcomes across genomic medicine implementation projects and to make these publicly available to enhance dissemination and assist in making precision public health a reality.