Comparison of subjective cognitive decline and polygenic risk score in the prediction of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia.

Abstract

Background: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) and subjective cognitive decline (SCD) are associated with the risk of developing dementia. It remains to examine whether they can improve the established cardiovascular risk factors aging and dementia (CAIDE) model and how their predictive abilities compare.

Methods: The CAIDE model was applied to a sub-sample of a large, population-based cohort study (n = 5,360; aged 50-75) and evaluated for the outcomes of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VD) by calculating Akaike's information criterion (AIC) and the area under the curve (AUC). The improvement of the CAIDE model by PRS and SCD was further examined using the net reclassification improvement (NRI) method and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).

Results: During 17 years of follow-up, 410 participants were diagnosed with dementia, including 139 AD and 152 VD diagnoses. Overall, the CAIDE model showed high discriminative ability for all outcomes, reaching AUCs of 0.785, 0.793, and 0.789 for all-cause dementia, AD, and VD, respectively. Adding information on SCD significantly increased NRI for all-cause dementia (4.4%, p = 0.04) and VD (7.7%, p = 0.01). In contrast, prediction models for AD further improved when PRS was added to the model (NRI, 8.4%, p = 0.03). When APOE ε4 carrier status was included (CAIDE Model 2), AUCs increased, but PRS and SCD did not further improve the prediction.

Conclusions: Unlike PRS, information on SCD can be assessed more efficiently, and thus, the model including SCD can be more easily transferred to the clinical setting. Nevertheless, the two variables seem negligible if APOE ε4 carrier status is available.