Machine Learning Models of Polygenic Risk for Enhanced Prediction of Alzheimer Disease Endophenotypes

Abstract

Background and objectives: Alzheimer disease (AD) has a polygenic architecture, for which genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have helped elucidate sequence variants (SVs) influencing susceptibility. Polygenic risk score (PRS) approaches show promise for generating summary measures of inherited risk for clinical AD based on the effects of APOE and other GWAS hits. However, existing PRS approaches, based on traditional regression models, explain only modest variation in AD dementia risk and AD-related endophenotypes. We hypothesized that machine learning (ML) models of polygenic risk (ML-PRS) could outperform standard regression-based PRS methods and therefore have the potential for greater clinical utility.

Methods: We analyzed combined data from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (n = 1,791) and the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (n = 864). An AD PRS was computed for each participant using the top common SVs obtained from a large AD dementia GWAS. In parallel, ML models were trained using those SV genotypes, with amyloid PET burden as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included amyloid PET positivity and clinical diagnosis (cognitively unimpaired vs impaired). We compared performance between ML-PRS and standard PRS across 100 training sessions with different data splits. In each session, data were split into 80% training and 20% testing, and then five-fold cross-validation was used within the training set to ensure the best model was produced for testing. We also applied permutation importance techniques to assess which genetic factors contributed most to outcome prediction.

Results: ML-PRS models outperformed the AD PRS (r² = 0.28 vs r² = 0.24 in test set) in explaining variation in amyloid PET burden. Among ML approaches, methods accounting for nonlinear genetic influences were superior to linear methods. ML-PRS models were also more accurate when predicting amyloid PET positivity (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.80 vs AUC = 0.63) and the presence of cognitive impairment (AUC = 0.75 vs AUC = 0.54) compared with the standard PRS.

Discussion: We found that ML-PRS approaches improved upon standard PRS for prediction of AD endophenotypes, partly related to improved accounting for nonlinear effects of genetic susceptibility alleles. Further adaptations of the ML-PRS framework could help to close the gap of remaining unexplained heritability for AD and therefore facilitate more accurate presymptomatic and early-stage risk stratification for clinical decision-making.