Squires Steven, Katte Jean Claude, Dabelea Dana, Pihoker Catherine, Divers Jasmin, Sobngwi Eugene, Nyirenda Moffat J, Kreienkamp Raymond J, Liese Angela D, Shah Amy S, Dolan Lawrence, Reynolds Kristi, Redondo Maria J, Hagopian William, Fatumo Segun, Dehayem Mesmin Y, Hattersley Andrew, Weedon Michael N, Jones Angus, Oram Richard A
Clinical and Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter.
Lifecourse Epidemiology of Adiposity and Diabetes (LEAD) Center Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.
medRxiv. 2025 Jul 17:2025.07.17.25330632. doi: 10.1101/2025.07.17.25330632.
Genetic risk scores (GRSs) for type 1 diabetes (T1D) may assist T1D classification and prediction but are often developed from European populations. To improve health outcomes, it is important to understand the performance and utility of GRSs in diverse ancestry populations.
We assessed performance of three previously published T1D GRSs in differentiating people with and without Type 1 diabetes in African (with/without T1D=194/235), European (n=1109/125), and Hispanic (266/170) ancestry populations in the USA, and from Cameroon and Uganda (n=144/5001). The assessed GRSs were developed from European ancestry populations (GRS1, GRS2) and from an African ancestry population (AAGRS).
The discriminative power, as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), for GRS2 and AAGRS were equivalent on the African ancestry populations, and both outperformed the GRS1: the AUCs produced by the GRS2, AAGRS and GRS1 on Uganda/Cameroon data were 0.882 (0.845-0.914), 0.874 (0.838-0.907) and 0.816 (0.772-0.857) respectively. GRS2 outperformed the AAGRS and GRS1 on Hispanic and European populations. The GRS2 distributions varied by population, with lower average scores for African populations. If the same GRS2 risk thresholds of 11.5 were set for European and African populations, the sensitivities were 0.91 and 0.53, respectively.
The GRS2 produced similar or improved discriminative power across the populations but the AAGRS matched performance on African ancestry participants with fewer single nucleotide polymorphisms. Varying GRS2 risk thresholds may be required for different populations due to the divergent distributions.
1型糖尿病(T1D)的遗传风险评分(GRSs)可能有助于T1D的分类和预测,但通常是基于欧洲人群开发的。为改善健康状况,了解GRSs在不同血统人群中的表现和效用很重要。
我们评估了三个先前发表的T1D GRSs在美国非洲裔(患/未患T1D = 194/235)、欧洲裔(n = 1109/125)和西班牙裔(266/170)血统人群以及喀麦隆和乌干达(n = 144/5001)人群中区分有无1型糖尿病患者的表现。评估的GRSs是基于欧洲血统人群(GRS1、GRS2)和非洲血统人群(AAGRS)开发的。
通过受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)衡量判别力,GRSs2和AAGRS在非洲血统人群上相当,且均优于GRS1:GRS2、AAGRS和GRS1在乌干达/喀麦隆数据上产生的AUC分别为0.882(0.845 - 0.914)、0.874(0.838 - 0.907)和0.816(0.772 - 0.857)。GRS2在西班牙裔和欧洲人群上优于AAGRS和GRS1。GRS2分布因人群而异,非洲人群的平均得分较低。如果为欧洲和非洲人群设定相同的GRS2风险阈值11.5,敏感性分别为0.91和0.53。
GRS2在各人群中产生了相似或更好的判别力,但AAGRS在非洲血统参与者中以较少的单核苷酸多态性达到了相同表现。由于分布不同,不同人群可能需要不同的GRS2风险阈值。