We sought to construct and evaluate IOP PRSs for IOP and glaucoma through the inclusion of the large-scale UKB data set, a population-based cohort of over 500,000 participants,
11 which can provide more definitive answers to the questions of whether IOP PRSs are associated with IOP and improve glaucoma prediction. We observed significant associations between the PRSs and IOP (
P ∼ 10
−200) and POAG (
P = 1.8 × 10
−77). Our findings showed substantially greater associations than previous studies reporting on the associations between IOP PRSs with IOP and POAG.
9,22 Moreover, the magnitude of the association is much larger in the current report for study subjects in the highest PRS category, with a 3-fold greater odds of POAG in this study (OR = 6.34 [95% CI: 4.82–8.33]) compared to a multiethnic Asian study (OR = 2.00 [95% CI: 1.32–3.03]).
22 We also observed a significant improvement in the AUC (5%) with the inclusion of the PRSs. The AUC with PRS is even higher than the combined effect of IOP- and vertical cup-to-disc ratio (VCDR)-PRSs (AUC increased by 3%) reported by Tham et al.
22 in a Singapore multiethnic study (
n = 6881). There are also a number of differences compared to two other recent studies, that is, Khawaja et al.
23 and MacGregor et al.,
24 that used UKB IOP and glaucoma data. A subtle yet important difference of our study is that we used a less stringent cutoff, that is, 5 × 10
−5, instead of the genome-wide significance threshold, 5 × 10
−8, to select SNPs for building PRSs. Given the polygenic nature of complex traits/diseases like IOP and glaucoma,
10,23,24 the stringent 5 × 10
−8 cutoff can miss many biologically relevant variants that do not reach genome-wide significance given the current sample sizes of GWASs. It is critical to include variants that do not reach GWAS significance in genetic risk prediction models, which was clearly shown in Khera et al.'s
25 recent investigation of polygenic scores for several common diseases. For example, it required 6.6 million (assuming 0.1% of genome-wide SNPs are causal) and 5218 SNPs (
P < 5 × 10
−4 and
r2 < 0.2) to reach optimal PRS performance for coronary artery disease and breast cancer, respectively.
25 We tested a grid of
P-value cutoffs for selecting SNPs, such as 0.01, 0.001, 10
−4, 5 × 10
−5, and 5 × 10
−8.
26 Balancing the prediction accuracy and easy interpretation, especially for nonstatisticians, we used 5 × 10
−5 in this study. When we used GWAS-significant SNPs (
P < 5 × 10
−8) only for building PRSs, we got worse association results and worse prediction accuracy for IOP and POAG, respectively, compared to the results using the 5 × 10
−5 cutoff (
Supplementary Tables S3 and
S4). This likely explained why we obtained a stronger discrimination accuracy in POAG (OR = 6.34) than MacGregor et al.
24 (OR = 4.2) for the top IOP PRS quintile versus the bottom quintile comparison. Khawaja et al.
23 used a regression-based model instead of PRS
23 and got an AUC of 0.737 for glaucoma prediction using age, sex, IOP and POAG SNPs as covariates, while we obtained a better AUC = 0.766 using age, sex, and IOP PRS. The regression-based model, which includes each SNP as a covariate (rather than aggregating the genetic effects into a single PRS), can lead to model overfitting if too many SNPs are included as covariates. Overfitting issues are typically solved by shrinkage statistical methods, such as the LASSO and ridge regression.
27 In addition to assess the discriminatory ability of IOP PRSs on predicting POAG, we tested their association with IOP, which can be useful to predict the risk of IOP elevation. Furthermore, our IOP PRSs showed a much stronger discriminatory ability for POAG than traditional risk factors such as T2D, BMI, and blood pressure (AUC difference: 5% vs. 0.1%). To our knowledge, this is the first time that IOP PRSs are reported to perform better than traditional risk factors in predicting POAG. Overall, our results demonstrated the utility of IOP PRSs to assess IOP elevation and glaucoma risk and its potential to serve as a clinically useful tool to reduce the occurrence of glaucoma.