Table 2 The psychiatric disorder PRS can distinguish better between groups than simulated PRS

Group	Disorder PRS	Simulated PRS min. p_PRS	N simulated PRS with p ≤ p of disorder PRS	Prob. of success	95% CI
FAM_BD vs. CC_controls	BD	1 × 10⁻⁵	0	<1 × 10⁻⁴	0–0
	SCZ	1 × 10⁻⁵	0	<1 × 10⁻⁴	0–0
	MDD	1 × 10⁻⁵	91	0.0091	0.007–0.011
	Shared	1 × 10⁻⁵	2	0.0002	0–0.001
FAM_BD vs. CC_BD	BD	1 × 10⁻⁷	0	<1 × 10⁻⁴	0–0
	SCZ	1 × 10⁻⁷	2858	0.2858	0.277–0.295
	MDD	1 × 10⁻⁷	744	0.0744	0.069–0.080
	Shared	1 × 10⁻⁷	2229	0.2229	0.215–0.231
FAM_unaffected vs. CC_controls	BD	1 × 10⁻⁷	0	<1 × 10⁻⁴	0–0
	SCZ	1 × 10⁻⁷	0	<1 × 10⁻⁴	0–0
	MDD	1 × 10⁻⁷	37	0.0037	0.003–0.005
	Shared	1 × 10⁻⁷	74	0.0074	0.006–0.009
FAM_MDD vs. CC_controls	BD	2 × 10⁻¹	0	<1 × 10⁻⁴	0–0
	SCZ	2 × 10⁻¹	409	0.0409	0.037–0.045
	MDD	2 × 10⁻¹	2	0.0002	0–0.001
	Shared	2 × 10⁻¹	125	0.0125	0.010–0.015

In binomial tests with 10,000 trials, the number of successes was the number of simulated PRS that showed the same or a stronger association than the disorder PRS (one-sided p-values). The 10,000 simulated PRS with ten p-value thresholds each were calculated by drawing random variants from across the genome, using the same number of variants as for the BD PRS at each threshold and random effect sizes from the pool of all available BD, SCZ, and MDD effects. For the present test, the p_PRS of the simulated PRS showing the lowest mean association p-value was chosen. Prob. = binomial test probability estimate of success; CI = confidence interval of the probability estimate, both calculated using the R package binom (method: exact). Significance threshold: 0.05/16 = 0.003125, comparisons surpassing this threshold are shown in bold font

Quick links

Search