Deep neural network improves the estimation of polygenic risk scores for breast cancer

TL;DR

This study demonstrates that a deep neural network significantly improves breast cancer polygenic risk score estimation over traditional methods, effectively identifying high-risk individuals and revealing non-linear genetic relationships.

Contribution

The paper introduces a deep neural network model that outperforms existing statistical and machine learning methods in estimating breast cancer PRS, capturing non-linear genetic effects.

Findings

DNN achieved higher AUC (67.4%) than other models.

DNN's PRS distribution was bi-modal, indicating better risk stratification.

DNN identified variants with non-linear effects not detected by association studies.

Abstract

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) estimate the genetic risk of an individual for a complex disease based on many genetic variants across the whole genome. In this study, we compared a series of computational models for estimation of breast cancer PRS. A deep neural network (DNN) was found to outperform alternative machine learning techniques and established statistical algorithms, including BLUP, BayesA and LDpred. In the test cohort with 50% prevalence, the Area Under the receiver operating characteristic Curve (AUC) were 67.4% for DNN, 64.2% for BLUP, 64.5% for BayesA, and 62.4% for LDpred. BLUP, BayesA, and LPpred all generated PRS that followed a normal distribution in the case population. However, the PRS generated by DNN in the case population followed a bi-modal distribution composed of two normal distributions with distinctly different means. This suggests that DNN was able to separate the case population into a high-genetic-risk case sub-population with an average PRS significantly higher than the control population and a normal-genetic-risk case sub-population with an average PRS similar to the control population. This allowed DNN to achieve 18.8% recall at 90% precision in the test cohort with 50% prevalence, which can be extrapolated to 65.4% recall at 20% precision in a general population with 12% prevalence. Interpretation of the DNN model identified salient variants that were assigned insignificant p-values by association studies, but were important for DNN prediction. These variants may be associated with the phenotype through non-linear relationships.