SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Insights into ancestral diversity in Parkinson's disease risk: a comparative assessment of polygenic risk scores.

NPJ Parkinsons Dis · 2025-07-03

DOI: 10.1038/s41531-025-00967-4PMID: 40610451

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Risk prediction models play a crucial role in advancing healthcare by enabling early detection and supporting personalized medicine. Nonetheless, polygenic risk scores (PRS) for Parkinson's disease (PD) have not been extensively studied across diverse populations, contributing to health disparities. In this study, we constructed 105 PRS using individual-level data from seven ancestries and compared two different models. Model 1 was based on the cumulative effect of 90 known European PD risk variants, weighted by summary statistics from four independent ancestries (European, East Asian, Latino/Admixed American, and African/Admixed). Model 2 leveraged multi-ancestry summary statistics using a p-value thresholding approach to improve prediction across diverse populations. Our findings provide a comprehensive assessment of PRS performance across ancestries and highlight the limitations of a "one-size-fits-all" approach to genetic risk prediction. We observed variability in predictive performance between models, underscoring the need for larger sample sizes and ancestry-specific approaches to enhance accuracy. These results establish a foundation for future research aimed at improving generalizability in genetic risk prediction for PD.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.