- 89% sensitivity and 89% specificity (“area under the curve”=AUC=0.95) on the discovery set,
- 60% sensitivity and 58% specificity (AUC=0.58) on a replication set of 253 independent cases and 341 genetically-matched controls, and
- 78% sensitivity and 61% specificity (AUC=0.74) on a replication set of 60 independent cases and 2,863 unmatched controls.
By David Hinds, Chuong Do, and Shirley WuIn January we wrote about the challenging search for genetic influences on human longevity, touching on two of the most recent studies as examples of how elusive solid findings have been. Because one of these studies was a new version of a paper that was previously retracted, we took a particular interest to see if the concerns raised by the previous analysis were addressed. What follows is a technical review of “Genetic Signatures of Extreme Longevity in Humans”, published last month in PLoS ONE.Although Paola Sebastiani and Thomas Perls (the main authors on both papers) do not directly discuss their previous study, their new version does appear to resolve many of the issues from the prior manuscript, and their GWAS results are substantially improved. They now report just one SNP clearly associated with longevity, rs2075650 near APOE. They also present a revised genetic model for predicting longevity based on 281 SNPs representing the common genetic variants most significantly associated with longevity in an analysis of 801 centenarians and 914 healthy control individuals.As described in the paper, the performance of the model remains quite impressive: