ArticleResearch square2023
Tuning Parameters for Polygenic Risk Score Methods Using GWAS Summary Statistics from Training Data.
Article in Research square, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Predicting genetic risks for common diseases may improve their prevention and early treatment. In recent years, various additive-model-based polygenic risk scores (PRS) methods have been proposed to combine the estimated effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) using data collected from genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Some of these methods require access to another external individual-level GWAS dataset to tune the hyperparameters, which can be difficult because of privacy and security-related concerns. Additionally, leaving out partial data for hyperparameter tuning can reduce the predictive accuracy of the constructed PRS model. In this article, we propose a novel method, called PRStuning, to automatically tune hyperparameters for different PRS methods using only GWAS summary statistics from the training data. The core idea is to first predict the performance of the PRS method with different parameter values, and then select the parameters with the best prediction performance. Because directly using the effects observed from the training data tends to overestimate the performance in the testing data (a phenomenon known as overfitting), we adopt an empirical Bayes approach to shrinking the predicted performance in accordance with the estimated genetic architecture of the disease. Results from extensive simulations and real data applications demonstrate that PRStuning can accurately predict the PRS performance across PRS methods and parameters, and it can help select the best-performing parameters.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.