ArticleGenetic epidemiology2025
Comparing Ancestry Standardization Approaches for a Transancestry Colorectal Cancer Polygenic Risk Score.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-Parametric Ancestry Adjustment for Polygenic Scores.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Immune and inflammatory radiogenomics of radiotherapy-induced normal-tissue toxicity: genetic susceptibility, mechanisms, risk prediction, and clinical translation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Genetic ancestry influences body shape and obesity risk in Latin American populations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Ancestry Calibration of Polygenic Risk Scores Improves Risk Stratification and Effect Estimation in African American Adults.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a complex disease with monogenic, polygenic and environmental risk factors. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) aim to identify high polygenic risk individuals. Due to differences in genetic background, PRS distributions vary by ancestry, necessitating standardization. We compared four post-hoc methods using the All of Us Research Program Whole Genome Sequence data for a transancestry CRC PRS. We contrasted results from linear models trained on A. the entire data or an ancestrally diverse subset AND B. covariates including principal components of ancestry or admixture. Standardization with the training subset also adjusted the variance. All methods performed similarly within ancestry, OR (95% C.I.) per s.d. change in PRS: African 1.5 (1.02, 2.08), Admixed American 2.2 (1.27, 3.85), European 1.6 (1.43, 1.89), and Middle Eastern 1.1 (0.71, 1.63). Using admixture and an ancestrally diverse training set provided distributions closest to standard Normal. Training a model on ancestrally diverse participants, adjusting both the mean and variance using admixture as covariates, created standard Normal z-scores, which can be used to identify patients at high polygenic risk. These scores can be incorporated into comprehensive risk calculation including other known risk factors, allowing for more precise risk estimates.
Indexed as
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.