Skip to main content

Table 1 Results of the PRS regression analyses in iPSYCH; updated results from the pilot study sample are shown for comparison

From: Pleiotropy between language impairment and broader behavioral disorders—an investigation of both common and rare genetic variants

Phenotype

R2/Nagelkerke’s R2 (%)

Adjusted R2 (%)

Scaled PRS beta/ odds ratio (95% CI)

P value

iPSYCH sample*

ASD

0.017

0.007

1.02 (1.00–1.05)

0.037

Childhood autism

0.079

0.042

1.06 (1.021.10)

0.001

 Asperger’s syndrome

0.002

0.001

1.01 (0.981.04)

0.552

 ADHD

0.002

0.002

1.01 (0.991.03)

0.426

 Schizophrenia

0.002

0.001

0.99 (0.951.03)

0.613

Pilot study sample**

 ASD

0.017

0.017

0.97 (0.591.57)

0.887

 ADHD

0.008

0.009

1.02 (0.751.39)

0.897

 SLI

3.5

5.09

1.60 (1.022.54)

0.041

 Height

0.006

NA

0.07 ((− 0.98) 1.13)

0.895

  1. The adjusted R2 includes an adjustment for the prevalence and proportion of cases in each sample, as implemented in the PRSice software. Associations in boldface survive Bonferroni correction for multiple testing (not applicable to positive or negative controls). Associations in italic are only nominally significant (not applicable to positive or negative controls)
  2. PRS polygenic risk score, CI confidence interval, ASD autism spectrum disorder, ADHD attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, SLI specific language impairment, NA not applicable
  3. The R2 reported for height is a true R2 from a linear regression and not a Nagelkerke’s R2, and the effect is the beta (regression coefficient) and not an odds ratio; it should therefore be judged relative to 0 and not to 1. The height variable was collected in different ways at the Copenhagen and Aarhus centers for the VIA 7 study; the Aarhus center used, for the most part, a uniform method of measuring height with a special device, but we note that the PRS is not significantly predictive of height even if we restrict the analysis to include only children measured in Aarhus. We include this for the sake of completeness, even though the sample size is much smaller and thus the estimates are less reliable (R2 = 0.7%, P = 0.419)
  4. *72,932 SNPs were included in the PRS
  5. **80,121 SNPs were included in the PRS