News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel

News, Analysis, Trends, Management Innovations for
Clinical Laboratories and Pathology Groups

Hosted by Robert Michel
Sign In

Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard Studies Use of Polygenic Risk Scores to Evaluate Genetic Risk for 10 Diseases

Though not biomarkers per se, these scores for certain genetic traits may someday be used by clinical laboratories to identify individuals’ risk for specific diseases

Can polygenic risk scores (a number that denotes a person’s genetic predisposition for certain traits) do a better job at predicting the likelihood of developing specific diseases, perhaps even before the onset of symptoms? Researchers at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard (Broad Institute) believe so, and their study could have implications for clinical laboratories nationwide.

In cooperation with medical centers across the US, the scientists “optimized 10 polygenic scores for use in clinical research as part of a study on how to implement genetic risk prediction for patients,” according to a Broad Institute news release.

The research team “selected, optimized, and validated the tests for 10 common diseases [selected from a total of 23 conditions], including heart disease, breast cancer, and type 2 diabetes. They also calibrated the tests for use in people with non-European ancestries,” the news release notes.

As these markers for genetic risk become better understood they may work their way into clinical practice. This could mean clinical laboratories will have a role in sequencing patients’ DNA to provide physicians with information about the probability of a patient’s elevated genetic risk for certain conditions.

However, the effectiveness of polygenic risk scores has faced challenges among diverse populations, according to the news release, which also noted a need to appropriately guide clinicians in use of the scores.

The researchers published their study, “Selection, Optimization and Validation of 10 Chronic Disease Polygenic Risk Scores for Clinical Implementation in Diverse US Populations,” in Nature Medicine.

“With this work, we’ve taken the first steps toward showing the potential strength and power of these scores across a diverse population,” said Niall Lennon, PhD (above), Chief Scientific Officer of Broad Clinical Labs.  “We hope in the future this kind of information can be used in preventive medicine to help people take actions that lower their risk of disease.” Clinical laboratories may eventually be tasked with performing DNA sequencing to determine potential genetic risk for certain diseases. (Photo copyright: Broad Institute.)

Polygenic Scores Need to Reflect Diversity

“There have been a lot of ongoing conversations and debates about polygenic risk scores and their utility and applicability in the clinical setting,” said Niall Lennon, PhD, Chair and Chief Scientific Officer of Broad Clinical Labs and first author of the study, in the news release. However, he added, “It was important that we weren’t giving people results that they couldn’t do anything about.”

In the paper, Lennon and colleagues explained polygenic risk scores “aggregate the effects of many genetic risk variants” to identify a person’s genetic predisposition for a certain disease or phenotype.

“But their development and application to clinical care, particularly among ancestrally diverse individuals, present substantial challenges,” they noted. “Clinical use of polygenic risk scores may ultimately prevent disease or enable its detection at earlier, more treatable stages.” 

The scientists set a research goal to “optimize polygenic risk scores for a diversity of people.”

They collaborated with the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics network (eMERGE) and 10 academic medical centers that enrolled 25,000 participants in the eMERGE study. Funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the eMERGE network conducts genetic research in support of genetic medicine. 

While performing the polygenic risk score testing on participants, Broad Clinical Labs focused on 10 conditions—including cardiometabolic diseases and cancer—selected by the research team based on “polygenic risk score performance, medical actionability, and clinical utility,” the Nature Medicine paper explained. 

For each condition, the researchers:

  • Identified “exact spots in the genome that they would analyze to calculate the risk score.”
  • Verified accurate genotyping of the spots by comparing results of tests with whole genome sequences from patient blood samples.
  • Used information from the NIH’s All of Us Research Program to “create a model to calibrate a person’s polygenic risk score according to that individual’s genetic ancestry.”

The All of Us program, which aims to collect health information from one million US residents, has three times more people of non-European ancestry than other data sources developing genetic risk scores, HealthDay News reported.

20% of Study Participants Showed High Risk for Disease

To complete their studies, Broad Institute researchers processed a diverse group of eMERGE participants to determine their clinical polygenic risk scores for each of the 10 diseases between July 2022 and August 2023.

Listed below are all conditions studied, as well as the number of participants involved in each study and the number of people with scores indicating high risk of the disease, according to their published paper:

Over 500 people (about 20%) of the 2,500 participants, had high risk for at least one of the 10 targeted diseases, the study found. 

Participants in the study self-reported their race/ancestry as follows, according to the paper:

  • White: 32.8%
  • Black: 32.8%
  • Hispanic: 25.4%
  • Asian: 5%
  • American Indian: 1.5%
  • Middle Eastern: 0.9%
  • No selection: 0.8%

“We can’t fix all biases in the risk scores, but we can make sure that if a person is in a high-risk group for a disease, they’ll get identified as high risk regardless of what their genetic ancestry is,” Lennon said.

Further Studies, Scoring Implications

With 10 tests in hand, Broad Clinical Labs plans to calculate risk scores for all 25,000 people in the eMERGE network. The researchers also aim to conduct follow-up studies to discover what role polygenic risk scores may play in patients’ overall healthcare.

“Ultimately, the network wants to know what it means for a person to receive information that says they’re at high risk for one of these diseases,” Lennon said.

The researchers’ findings about disease risk are likely also relevant to healthcare systems, which want care teams to make earlier, pre-symptomatic diagnosis to keep patients healthy.

Clinical laboratory leaders may want to follow Broad Clinical Labs’ studies as they perform the 10 genetic tests and capture information about what participants may be willing to do—based on risk scores—to lower their risk for deadly diseases.

—Donna Marie Pocius

Related Information:

Genetic Risk Prediction for 10 Chronic Diseases Moves Closer to the Clinic

Selection, Optimization, and Validation of 10 Chronic Disease Polygenic Risk Scores for Clinical Implementation in Diverse US Populations

Gene-Based Tests Could Predict Your Odds for Common Illnesses

Consumers Increasingly Purchase Medical Laboratory Self-Test Kits for Blood Glucose, Cholesterol, and Colon Cancer Screening, according to Consumer Reports

The self-monitoring/self-test market is expected to swell to $19 billion by 2019, offering opportunities for pathologists and clinical laboratories to advise patients and ensure the proper use of home tests

Might the future of clinical laboratory tests be sitting on the shelf at your corner pharmacy right now? Patient self-testing and screening kits continue to garner the approvals of Consumer Reports’ medical advisors.

That’s happening because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to clear many do-it-yourself tests that traditionally were performed in medical laboratories by qualified personnel, much to the chagrin of some doctors.

Empowered healthcare consumers are checking their cholesterol, monitoring their diabetes, and more, using health screening kits that range from $8 to $175, according to a Consumer Reports on Health article, which advised consumers to use self-tests judiciously and share the results with their physicians. (more…)

New Miniature Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices from DexCom and Verily (Google Life Sciences) Promise to Make Glucose Monitoring Wearable and Affordable

Such a small, non-invasive glucose monitor would capture and transmit data to the Cloud, making it feasible for clinical laboratories to collect those tests results, and keep a record of each patient’s glucose results

Probably no single area of medical laboratory testing has the greatest potential to help the largest number of patients with a chronic disease—and make a lot of money for the in vitro (IVD) manufacturer who is first to market with the right diagnostic product—than glucose testing and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Pathologists and clinical laboratory managers know why this is true.

Reports from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American Diabetes Association, state that more than 29 million Americans (about 9% of the U.S. population) have diabetes. Nearly 28% of these (about eight million) are undiagnosed. The reports also stipulate that fasting glucose or A1C levels have shown that more than 80 million people over the age of 20 were prediabetic in 2012. Based on trends since then, we can safely assume that the number of prediabetics in America has grown. And what is true in the United States is general true in most developed nations throughout the world. (more…)

Nanotechnology-Based Medical Laboratory Test Chip Developed at Stanford University Detects Type-1 Diabetes in Minutes and Can Be Used in Doctors’ Offices

Developers seeking FDA Approval for microchip-based nanotechnology type-1 diabetes test, which has been performed on people with accurate results

New nanotechnology has made it possible for a team at Stanford University School of Medicine to develop a medical laboratory test for type-1 diabetes that can be performed in a physician’s office and does not require a specimen collected by venipuncture.

This microchip requires just minutes to diagnose type-1 diabetes in near-patient settings, according to a Stanford University news release. (more…)

;