ArticlePloS one2026
Improving performance of polygenic risk scores for hypertension across two ancestry groups.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polygenic risk score (PRS) methods are evolving, and the benefit of adding functional annotations to the variant weights has been especially promising. However, less attention has been given to how the linkage disequilibrium (LD) reference panel used affects the score performance. In the current study, we compared two Bayesian approaches, one that incorporates functional annotations (LDpred-funct) and one that does not (PRS-CS), extending these applications to the hypertension (HTN) trait across two ancestry groups (European Americans EA, and African Americans, AA). In PRS-CS we used the standard HapMap 3 LD (HM3) reference panel, as well as a modified multi-ancestry reference panel (TagIt) with better coverage of variants from multiple ancestries. Individual-level data in 1,533 EA (58% with HTN) and 8,603 AA (71% with HTN) participants from the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke Study (REGARDS) was used to optimize scores across the two approaches. PRS performance metrics including R2 and odds ratios (OR) per standard deviation (SD) were then used to assess PRS performance in 1,270 EA (55% with HTN) and 1,896 AA (69% with HTN) participants from the Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network Study (HyperGEN). Among EAs in HyperGEN we observed an R2 of 6.0% for LDpred-funct and R2 of 7.3% for PRS-CS-TagIt versus R2 of 1.4% for PRS-CS-HM3. The magnitude of the OR per SD for HTN was also higher for PRS-CS-TagIt OR=2.17 (95% CI 1.65-2.85, p = 3.0*10-8) and LDpred-funct OR=2.14 (95% CI 1.61-2.85, p = 1.46*10-7) versus PRS-CS-HM3 (OR=1.40; 95% CI 1.07-1.82, p = 1.19*10-2). Among AAs in HyperGEN, the improvements were more modest, where we observed R2 of 1.9% for LDpred-funct and R2 of 2.9% for PRS-CS-TagIt versus 0.7% for PRS-CS-HM3. We found that both annotations and the updated LD panel improved the scores in both ancestry groups, but did not make the scores more equitable across the groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.