Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Self-reported hearing loss questions provide a good measure for genetic studies: a polygenic risk score analysis from UK Biobank

A Correction to this article was published on 12 March 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Age-related hearing impairment (ARHI) is very common in older adults and has major impact on quality of life. The heritability of ARHI has been estimated to be around 50%. The present study aimed to estimate heritability and environmental contributions to liability of ARHI and the extent to which a polygenic risk score (PRS) derived from a recent genome-wide association study of questionnaire items regarding hearing loss using the UK Biobank is predictive of hearing loss in other samples. We examined (1) a sample from TwinsUK who have had hearing ability measured by pure-tone audiogram and the speech-to-noise ratio test as well as questionnaire measures that are comparable with the UK Biobank questionnaire items and (2) European and non-European samples from the UK Biobank which were not part of the original GWAS. Results indicated that the questionnaire items were over 50% heritable in TwinsUK and comparable with the objective hearing measures. In addition, we found very high genetic correlation (0.30–0.84) between the questionnaire responses and objective hearing measures in the TwinsUK sample. Finally, PRS computed from weighted UK Biobank GWAS results were predictive of both questionnaire and objective measures of hearing loss in the TwinsUK sample, as well as questionnaire-measured hearing loss in Europeans but not non-European subpopulations. These results demonstrate the utility of questionnaire-based methods in genetic association studies of hearing loss in adults and highlight the differences in genetic predisposition to ARHI by ethnic background.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Hearing aid (HAID) polygenic risk score (PRS) from UK Biobank British genome-wide association study used to predict HAID in TwinsUK.
Fig. 2: Odds ratios for ten evenly spaced quantiles of polygenic risk score (PRS) for the optimal p value threshold, for hearing aid (HAID) from UK Biobank British genome-wide association study used to predict HAID in TwinsUK.
Fig. 3: Hearing difficulties (HD) polygenic risk score (PRS) from UK Biobank British genome-wide association study used to predict HD in TwinsUK.
Fig. 4: Odds ratios for ten evenly spaced quantiles of polygenic risk score (PRS) for the optimal p value threshold, for hearing difficulties (HD) from UK Biobank British genome-wide association study used to predict HD in TwinsUK.

Change history

References

  1. 1.

    Davis AC. The prevalence of hearing impairment and reported hearing disability among adults in Great Britain. Int J Epidemiol. 1989;18:911–7.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Mathers CD, Loncar D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Med. 2006;3:e442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Dalton DS, Cruickshanks KJ, Klein BEK, Klein R, Wiley TL, Nondahl DM. The impact of hearing loss on quality of life in older adults. Gerontologist. 2003;43:661–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Gopinath B, Rochtchina E, Wang JJ, Schneider J, Leeder SR, Mitchell P. Prevalence of age-related hearing loss in older adults: blue mountains study. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:415–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Lin FR, Yaffe K, Xia J, Xue Q-L, Harris TB, Purchase-Helzner E, et al. Hearing loss and cognitive decline among older adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3869227/.

  6. 6.

    Nachtegaal J, Festen JM, Kramer SE. Hearing ability and its relationship with psychosocial health, work-related variables, and health care use: the national longitudinal study on hearing. Audiol Res. 2011;1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4627167/.

  7. 7.

    Huddle MG, Goman AM, Kernizan FC, Foley DM, Price C, Frick KD, et al. The Economic impact of adult hearing loss: a systematic review. JAMA Otolaryngol Neck Surg. 2017;143:1040–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Wolber LE, Steves CJ, Spector TD, Williams FMK. Hearing ability with age in northern European women: a new web-based approach to genetic studies. PLoS ONE 2012;7:e35500.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Cruickshanks KJ, Zhan W, Zhong W. Epidemiology of age-related hearing impairment. In: Gordon-Salant S, Frisina RD, Popper AN, Fay RR, editors. The aging auditory system. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2010. p. 259–74. (Springer Handbook of Auditory Research). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0993-0_9.

  10. 10.

    Duan H, Zhang D, Liang Y, Xu C, Wu Y, Tian X, et al. Heritability of age-related hearing loss in middle-aged and elderly chinese: a population-based twin study. Ear Hear. 2019;40:253–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Momi SK, Wolber LE, Fabiane SM, MacGregor AJ, Williams FMK. Genetic and environmental factors in age-related hearing impairment. Twin Res Hum Genet. 2015;18:383–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Viljanen A, Kaprio J, Pyykkö I, Sorri M, Kauppinen M, Koskenvuo M, et al. Genetic and environmental influences on hearing at different frequencies separately for the better and worse hearing ear in older women. Int J Audio. 2007;46:772–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Wingfield A, Panizzon M, Grant MD, Toomey R, Kremen WS, Franz CE, et al. A twin-study of genetic contributions to hearing acuity in late middle age. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62:1294–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Karlsson KK, Harris JR, Svartengren M. Description and primary results from an audiometric study of male twins. Ear Hear. 1997;18:114–20.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Christensen K, Frederiksen H, Hoffman HJ. Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported reduced hearing in the old and oldest old. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:1512–7.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Hoffmann TJ, Keats BJ, Yoshikawa N, Schaefer C, Risch N, Lustig LR. A large genome-wide association study of age-related hearing impairment using electronic health records. PLoS Genet. 2016;12:e1006371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Wells HRR, Freidin MB, Zainul Abidin FN, Payton A, Dawes P, Munro KJ, et al. GWAS identifies 44 independent associated genomic loci for self-reported adult hearing difficulty in UK Biobank. Am J Hum Genet. 2019;105:788–802.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Wayne S, Robertson NG, DeClau F, Chen N, Verhoeven K, Prasad S, et al. Mutations in the transcriptional activator EYA4 cause late-onset deafness at the DFNA10 locus. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10:195–200.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Euesden J, Lewis CM, O’Reilly PF. PRSice: Polygenic Risk Score software. Bioinforma Oxf Engl. 2015;31:1466–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Moayyeri A, Hammond CJ, Hart DJ, Spector TD. The UK Adult Twin Registry (TwinsUK Resource). Twin Res Hum Genet. 2013;16:144–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Davis A. Hearing in adults: the prevalence and distribution of hearing impairment and reported hearing disability in the MRC Institute of Hearing Research’s National Study of Hearing. Whurr Publishers, London, 1995.

  22. 22.

    Dawes P, Fortnum H, Moore DR, Emsley R, Norman P, Cruickshanks K, et al. Hearing in middle age: a population snapshot of 40- to 69-year olds in the United Kingdom. Ear Hear. 2014;35:e44–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Wilson DH, Walsh PG, Sanchez L, Davis AC, Taylor AW, Tucker G, et al. The epidemiology of hearing impairment in an Australian adult population. Int J Epidemiol. 1999;28:247–52.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Malkin I, Ginsburg E. Program package for pedigree analysis (version MAN-2014). Tel Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University; 2014. https://www.tau.ac.il/~idak/MAN_Manual.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Choi SW. PRSice-2. 2018. https://choishingwan.github.io/PRSice/.

  26. 26.

    Lee SH, Wray NR, Goddard ME, Visscher PM. Estimating missing heritability for disease from genome-wide association studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2011;88:294–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Yang J, Benyamin B, McEvoy BP, Gordon S, Henders AK, Nyholt DR, et al. Common SNPs explain a large proportion of the heritability for human height. Nat Genet 2010;42:565–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Yang J, Lee SH, Goddard ME, Visscher PM. GCTA: a tool for genome-wide complex trait analysis. Am J Hum Genet. 2011;88:76–82.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Yang J, Manolio TA, Pasquale LR, Boerwinkle E, Caporaso N, Cunningham JM, et al. Genome partitioning of genetic variation for complex traits using common SNPs. Nat Genet. 2011;43:519–25.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Tung JY, Do CB, Hinds DA, Kiefer AK, Macpherson JM, Chowdry AB, et al. Efficient replication of over 180 genetic associations with self-reported medical data. PLoS ONE 2011;6:e23473.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Duncan L, Shen H, Gelaye B, Meijsen J, Ressler K, Feldman M, et al. Analysis of polygenic risk score usage and performance in diverse human populations. Nat Commun. 2019;10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6658471/.

  32. 32.

    Luo H, Wu H, Shen H, Chen H, Yang T, Huang Z, et al. The European GWAS-identified risk SNP rs457717 within IQGAP2 is not associated with age-related hearing impairment in Han male Chinese population. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273:1677–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work used data from UK Biobank (project 11516) was supported by a grant from Med_el. The TwinsUK study was funded by the Wellcome Trust and European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013). HRRW is funded by a PhD Studentship Grant, S44, from Action on Hearing Loss. The study also receives support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Facility at Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frances M. K. Williams.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cherny, S.S., Livshits, G., Wells, H.R.R. et al. Self-reported hearing loss questions provide a good measure for genetic studies: a polygenic risk score analysis from UK Biobank. Eur J Hum Genet 28, 1056–1065 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0603-2

Download citation

Search

Quick links