Simulations suggest bias in genetic predictions of drug benefit
Simulations yielded hazard ratios (relative event rates) versus placebo of 0.77 for high genetic risk and 0.95 for low risk, despite no true response difference.
Limit: The simulations did not measure the causes of response differences in the original trials
Edited by Boris Djordjevic · AgingResearch.News
In observational analyses, researchers studied 175,106 people in the Helix Research Network and 92,859 people in UK Biobank. They also ran computer simulations. They examined genetic risk scores, which combine many genetic variants to estimate disease risk.
The simulations assumed genetic risk did not change treatment response. Trial-like entry rules nevertheless produced apparent differences in cholesterol-lowering treatment benefit by genetic risk for coronary artery disease. Without those rules, the cohorts showed little evidence that these scores modified the association between statin use and acute coronary events—sudden problems involving the heart’s blood supply. Statins are cholesterol-lowering drugs. The authors warned that randomizing treatment does not prevent bias introduced by eligibility rules.
Why it matters
For efforts to prevent coronary artery disease in later life, the work highlights a challenge in testing whether genetic risk can guide drug choices.
Caveats
The cohort analyses were observational, and simulations do not establish that bias caused the patterns in the original trials. The preprint has not been peer-reviewed.
- Statins
- Coronary artery disease
- Acute coronary events
- Coronary artery disease polygenic risk score
- LDL cholesterol
- Humans
The paper
Polygenic prediction of treatment response for precision medicine is vulnerable to collider bias
5 Prime Sciences
medRxiv, Oct 20, 2026, Open access, CC BY, Preprint, not peer-reviewed
