Paper detail

Accurate and robust genomic prediction of celiac disease using statistical learning

Practical application of genomic-based risk stratification to clinical diagnosis is appealing yet performance varies widely depending on the disease and genomic risk score (GRS) method. Celiac disease (CD), a common immune-mediated illness, is strongly genetically determined and requires specific HLA haplotypes. HLA testing can exclude diagnosis but has low specificity, providing little information suitable for clinical risk stratification. Using six European CD cohorts, we provide a proof-of-concept that statistical learning approaches which simultaneously model all SNPs can generate robust and highly accurate predictive models based on genome-wide SNP profiles. The high predictive capacity replicated both in cross-validation within each cohort (AUC of 0.87-0.89) and in independent replication across cohorts (AUC of 0.86-0.9), despite differences in ethnicity. The models explained 30-35% of disease variance and up to $\sim43\%$ of heritability. The GRS's utility was assessed in different clinically relevant settings. Comparable to HLA typing, the GRS can be used to identify individuals without CD with $\geq99.6\%$ negative predictive value however, unlike HLA typing, patients can also be stratified into categories of higher-risk for CD who would benefit from more invasive and costly definitive testing. The GRS is flexible and its performance can be adapted to the clinical situation by adjusting the threshold cut-off. Despite explaining a minority of disease heritability, our findings indicate a predictive GRS provides clinically relevant information to improve upon current diagnostic pathways for CD, and support further studies evaluating the clinical utility of this approach in CD and other complex diseases.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.