Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Transplant. 2018 Sep 5;19(3):801–810. doi: 10.1111/ajt.15057

Table 3.

PRS logistic and Cox regression top results

Logistic
Cancer
Type
Top PRS OR Lower
CI
Upper
CI
Padj Pbon N
cases
N
NMSC BCC pT1×10−5 1.61 1.22 2.12 0.0022 0.03 165 438
SCC SCC pT1×10−9 1.97 1.32 2.93 0.0023 0.03 100 283
BCC SCC pT1×10−6 3.03 1.78 5.16 0.0001 0.0016 60 243
Cox
Cancer
Type
Top PRS HR Lower
CI
Upper
CI
Padj Pbon N
events
N
NMSC SCC_pT1×10−5 1.41 1.24 1.61 9.39E-
07
1.29E-05 239 889
SCC SCC_pT1×10−6 1.48 1.25 1.74 9.35E-
06
0.0001 150 593
BCC SCC_pT1×10−6 1.67 1.35 2.06 5.5E-06 7.02E-05 106 549

Meta-analysis results for logistic regression and Cox regression. Models were adjusted for age at time of transplant, era of transplant (pre-2000 vs 2000 onwards), recruitment site and the first 8 principal components. (NMSC=non-melanoma skin cancer, SCC = squamous cell carcinoma, BCC= basal cell carcinoma, Top PRS = most significant polygenic risk score associated with given skin cancer in given model. OR = odds ratio, HR= hazards ratio, Lower/Upper CI = lower/upper 95% confidence interval, OR and HR based on 1 standard deviation increase in normalized PRS, Padj=approximate adjusted p value, Pbon=Bonferroni corrected p value (corrected for 36 tests); N = number of individuals tested