Post-GWAS Polygenic Risk Score: Utility and Challenges

Genetic Evaluation for Monogenic Disorders of Low Bone Mass and Increased Bone Fragility: What Clinicians Need to Know

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to outline the principles of clinical genetic testing and to provide practical guidance to clinicians in navigating genetic testing for patients with suspected monogenic forms of osteoporosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Heritability assessments and genome-wide association studies have clearly shown the significant contributions of genetic variations to the pathogenesis of osteoporosis. Currently, over 50 monogenic disorders that present primarily with low bone mass and increased risk of fractures have been described. The widespread availability of clinical genetic testing offers a valuable opportunity to correctly diagnose individuals with monogenic forms of osteoporosis, thus instituting appropriate surveillance and treatment. Clinical genetic testing may identify the appropriate diagnosis in a subset of patients with low bone mass, multiple or unusual fractures, and severe or early-onset osteoporosis, and thus clinicians should be aware of how to incorporate such testing into their clinical practices.

Using a Polygenic Score to Predict the Risk of Developing Primary Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis (OP) is a multifactorial bone disease belonging to the metabolic osteopathies group. Using the polygenic score (PGS) approach, we combined the effects of bone mineral density (BMD) DNA loci, affecting osteoporosis pathogenesis, based on GEFOS/GENOMOS consortium GWAS meta-analysis. We developed models to predict the risk of low fractures in women from the Volga-Ural region of Russia with efficacy of 74% (AUC = 0.740; OR (95% CI) = 2.9 (2.353–3.536)), as well as the formation of low BMD with efficacy of 79% (AUC = 0.790; OR (95% CI) = 3.94 (2.993–5.337)). In addition, we propose a model that predicts fracture risk and low BMD in a comorbid condition with 85% accuracy (AUC = 0.850; OR (95% CI) = 6.6 (4.411–10.608)) in postmenopausal women.

Risk assessment tools for osteoporosis and fractures in 2022

Osteoporosis is one of the frequently encountered non-communicable diseases in the world today. Several hundred million people have osteoporosis, with many more at risk. The clinical feature is a fragility fracture (FF), which results in major reductions in the quality and quantity of life, coupled with a huge financial burden. In recognition of the growing importance, the World Health Organisation established a working group 30 years ago tasked with providing a comprehensive report to understand and assess the risk of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most widely endorsed technology for assessing the risk of fracture or diagnosing osteoporosis before a fracture occurs, but others are available. In clinical practice, important distinctions are essential to optimise the use of risk assessments. Traditional tools lack specificity and were designed for populations to identify groups at higher risk using a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. Much has changed, though the purpose of risk assessment tools remains the same. In 2022, many tools are available to aid the identification of those most at risk, either likely to have osteoporosis or suffer the clinical consequence. Modern technology, enhanced imaging, proteomics, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and big data science will greatly advance a more personalised risk assessment into the future. Clinicians today need to understand not only which tool is most effective and efficient for use in their practice, but also which tool to use for which patient and for what purpose. A greater understanding of the process of risk assessment, deciding who should be screened, and how to assess fracture risk and prognosis in older men and women more comprehensively will greatly reduce the burden of osteoporosis for patients, society, and healthcare systems worldwide. In this paper, we review the current status of risk assessment, screening and best practice for osteoporosis, summarise areas of uncertainty, and make some suggestions for future developments, including a more personalised approach for individuals.

Dissecting Meta-Analysis in GWAS Era: Bayesian Framework for Gene/Subnetwork-Specific Meta-Analysis

Over the past decades, advanced high-throughput technologies have continuously contributed to genome-wide association studies (GWASs). GWAS meta-analysis has been increasingly adopted, has cross-ancestry replicability, and has power to illuminate the genetic architecture of complex traits, informing about the reliability of estimation effects and their variability across human ancestries. However, detecting genetic variants that have low disease risk still poses a challenge. Designing a meta-analysis approach that combines the effect of various SNPs within genes or genes within pathways from multiple independent population GWASs may be helpful in identifying associations with small effect sizes and increasing the association power. Here, we proposed ancMETA, a Bayesian graph-based framework, to perform the gene/pathway-specific meta-analysis by combining the effect size of multiple SNPs within genes, and genes within subnetwork/pathways across multiple independent population GWASs to deconvolute the interactions between genes underlying the pathogenesis of complex diseases across human populations. We assessed the proposed framework on simulated datasets, and the results show that the proposed model holds promise for increasing statistical power for meta-analysis of genetic variants underlying the pathogenesis of complex diseases. To illustrate the proposed meta-analysis framework, we leverage seven different European bipolar disorder (BD) cohorts, and we identify variants in the angiotensinogen (AGT) gene to be significantly associated with BD across all 7 studies. We detect a commonly significant BD-specific subnetwork with the ESR1 gene as the main hub of a subnetwork, associated with neurotrophin signaling (p = 4e⁻¹⁴) and myometrial relaxation and contraction (p = 3e⁻⁰⁸) pathways. ancMETA provides a new contribution to post-GWAS methodologies and holds promise for comprehensively examining interactions between genes underlying the pathogenesis of genetic diseases and also underlying ethnic differences.

Biobank data for studying the genetic architecture of osteoporosis and developing genetic risk scores

Osteoporosis is a chronic systemic disease of the skeleton, characterized by a decrease in bone mass and an impairment of bone microarchitecture, which can lead to a decrease in bone strength and an increase in the risk of minor trauma fractures. Osteoporosis is diagnosed on the basis of bone mineral density (BMD). BMD is characterized by high heritability that ranges according to various sources from 50 to 85%. As in the case of other complex traits, the most common approach to searching for genetic variants that affect BMD is a genome-wide association study. The lower effect size or frequency of a variant is, the larger the sample size is required to achieve statistically significant data on associations. Therefore, the studies involving hundreds of thousands of participants based on biobank data can identify the largest number of variants associated with BMD. In addition, biobank data are used in the development of genetic risk scores for osteoporosis that can be used both in combination with existing prognosis algorithms and independently of them. The aim of this review was to present the most significant studies of osteoporosis genetics, including those based on biobank data and genome-wide association studies, as well as studies on the genetic risk scores and the contribution of rare variants.

Polygenic Risk Scores in Alzheimer's Disease Genetics: Methodology, Applications, Inclusion, and Diversity

The success of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) completed in the last 15 years has reinforced a key fact: polygenic architecture makes a substantial contribution to variation of susceptibility to complex disease, including Alzheimer's disease. One straight-forward way to capture this architecture and predict which individuals in a population are most at risk is to calculate a polygenic risk score (PRS). This score aggregates the risk conferred across multiple genetic variants, ultimately representing an individual's predicted genetic susceptibility for a disease. PRS have received increasing attention after having been successfully used in complex traits. This has brought with it renewed attention on new methods which improve the accuracy of risk prediction. While these applications are initially informative, their utility is far from equitable: the majority of PRS models use samples heavily if not entirely of individuals of European descent. This basic approach opens concerns of health equity if applied inaccurately to other population groups, or health disparity if we fail to use them at all. In this review we will examine the methods of calculating PRS and some of their previous uses in disease prediction. We also advocate for, with supporting scientific evidence, inclusion of data from diverse populations in these existing and future studies of population risk via PRS.

Recent innovations and in-depth aspects of post-genome wide association study (Post-GWAS) to understand the genetic basis of complex phenotypes

In the past decade, the high throughput and low cost of sequencing/genotyping approaches have led to the accumulation of a large amount of data from genome-wide association studies (GWASs). The first aim of this review is to highlight how post-GWAS analysis can be used make sense of the obtained associations. Novel directions for integrating GWAS results with other resources, such as somatic mutation, metabolite-transcript, and transcriptomic data, are also discussed; these approaches can help us move beyond each individual data point and provide valuable information about complex trait genetics. In addition, cross-phenotype association tests, when the loci detected by GWASs have significant associations with multiple traits, are reviewed to provide biologically informative results for use in real-time applications. This review also discusses the challenges of identifying interactions between genetic mutations (epistasis) and mutations of loci affecting more than one trait (pleiotropy) as underlying causes of cross-phenotype associations; these challenges can be overcome using post-GWAS analysis. Genetic similarities between phenotypes that can be revealed using post-GWAS analysis are also discussed. In summary, different methodologies of post-GWAS analysis are now available, enhancing the value of information obtained from GWAS results, and facilitating application in both humans and nonhuman species. However, precise methods still need to be developed to overcome challenges in the field and uncover the genetic underpinnings of complex traits.

Personalized fracture risk assessment: where are we at?

Introduction: Osteoporotic fracture imposes a significant health care burden globally. Personalized assessment of fracture risk can potentially guide treatment decisions. Over the past decade, a number of risk prediction models, including the Garvan Fracture Risk Calculator (Garvan) and FRAX®, have been developed and implemented in clinical practice. Areas covered: This article reviews recent development and validation results concerning the prognostic performance of the two tools. The main areas of review are the need for personalized fracture risk prediction, purposes of risk prediction, predictive performance in terms of discrimination and calibration, concordance between the Garvan and FRAX tools, genetic profiling for improving predictive performance, and treatment thresholds. In some validation studies, FRAX tended to underestimate fracture by as high as 50%. Studies have shown that the predicted risk from the Garvan tool is highly concordant with clinical decision. Expert opinion: Although there are some discrepancy in fracture risk prediction between Garvan and FRAX, both tools are valid and can aid patients and doctors communicate about risk and make informed decision. The ideal of personalized risk assessment for osteoporosis patients will be realized through the incorporation of genetic profiling into existing fracture risk assessment tools.