Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 38853841

Multi-Polygenic prediction of Frailty and its Trajectories highlights Chronic Pain, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Educational Attainment pathways.

J P Flint·M Welstead·S R Cox·T C Russ·A Marshall·M Luciano
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Frailty is a complex ageing-related trait with a growing evidence base for genetic influence. While a single polygenic score (PGS) for frailty has shown predictive value, few studies have examined the joint effect of multiple genetic risks. This study used a multi-polygenic score (MPS) approach to evaluate the combined and relative contributions of 26 PGSs to frailty, measured via the Frailty Index (FI), in two UK cohorts aged 65 and older: the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) and the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 (LBC1936). Using elastic net regression with repeated cross-validation, we identified chronic pain and depressive symptoms PGSs as the strongest risk predictors of cross-sectional frailty status, while educational attainment, parental longevity, and rheumatoid arthritis PGSs were protective. Compared to single PGS models, MPS models provided improved prediction of frailty levels, explaining up to 4.7% of variance in frailty status - an improvement over the best single PGS (2.5%). To assess whether PGSs also predicted longitudinal frailty progression, we applied generalized additive mixed models (GAMMs) to model age-related trajectories. In ELSA, five PGSs (chronic pain, depressive symptoms, rheumatoid arthritis, educational attainment, and parental death) significantly interacted with age, influencing the rate of frailty change. In LBC1936, consistent though weaker effects were observed for chronic pain and education PGSs. These findings show that polygenic liability shapes both frailty levels and trajectories in later life. Our results support the use of multi-trait genomic models to improve risk prediction and understanding of frailty's complex aetiology.

Explore related subjects

Journal ArticlePreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J P Flint, M Welstead, S R Cox, T C Russ, A Marshall, M Luciano. 2025-07-21. Multi-Polygenic prediction of Frailty and its Trajectories highlights Chronic Pain, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Educational Attainment pathways.. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.31.24308260

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2027

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗