Background

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) are linear combinations of genetic markers weighted by effect size that are commonly used to predict disease risk. For complex heritable diseases such as late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD), PRS models fail to capture much of the heritability. Additionally, PRS models are highly dependent on the population structure of the data on which effect sizes are assessed and have poor generalizability to new data.

Objective

The goal of this study is to construct a paragenic risk score that, in addition to single genetic marker data used in PRS, incorporates epistatic interaction features and machine learning methods to predict risk for LOAD.

Methods

We construct a new state-of-the-art genetic model for risk of Alzheimer's disease. Our approach innovates over PRS models in two ways: First, by directly incorporating epistatic interactions between SNP loci using an evolutionary algorithm guided by shared pathway information; and second, by estimating risk via an ensemble of non-linear machine learning models rather than a single linear model. We compare the paragenic model to several PRS models from the literature trained on the same dataset.

Results

The paragenic model is significantly more accurate than the PRS models under 10-fold cross-validation, obtaining an AUC of 83% and near-clinically significant matched sensitivity/specificity of 75%. It remains significantly more accurate when evaluated on an independent holdout dataset and maintains accuracy within APOE genotype strata.

Conclusions

Paragenic models show potential for improving disease risk prediction for complex heritable diseases such as LOAD over PRS models.

White matter hyperintensities of presumed vascular origin (WMH) are associated with cognitive impairment and are a key imaging marker in evaluating brain health. However, WMH volume alone does not fully account for the extent of cognitive deficits and the mechanisms linking WMH to these deficits remain unclear. Lesion network mapping (LNM) enables us to infer if brain networks are connected to lesions and could be a promising technique for enhancing our understanding of the role of WMH in cognitive disorders. Our study employed LNM to test the following hypotheses: (i) LNM-informed markers surpass WMH volumes in predicting cognitive performance; and (ii) WMH contributing to cognitive impairment map to specific brain networks. We analysed cross-sectional data of 3485 patients from 10 memory clinic cohorts within the Meta VCI Map Consortium, using harmonized test results in four cognitive domains and WMH segmentations. WMH segmentations were registered to a standard space and mapped onto existing normative structural and functional brain connectome data. We employed LNM to quantify WMH connectivity to 480 atlas-based grey and white matter regions of interest (ROI), resulting in ROI-level structural and functional LNM scores. We compared the capacity of total and regional WMH volumes and LNM scores in predicting cognitive function using ridge regression models in a nested cross-validation. LNM scores predicted performance in three cognitive domains (attention/executive function, information processing speed, and verbal memory) significantly better than WMH volumes. LNM scores did not improve prediction for language functions. ROI-level analysis revealed that higher LNM scores, representing greater connectivity to WMH, in grey and white matter regions of the dorsal and ventral attention networks were associated with lower cognitive performance. Measures of WMH-related brain network connectivity significantly improve the prediction of current cognitive performance in memory clinic patients compared to WMH volume as a traditional imaging marker of cerebrovascular disease. This highlights the crucial role of network integrity, particularly in attention-related brain regions, improving our understanding of vascular contributions to cognitive impairment. Moving forward, refining WMH information with connectivity data could contribute to patient-tailored therapeutic interventions and facilitate the identification of subgroups at risk of cognitive disorders.