Results of the Cox proportional hazards model are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Risk was increased for males, subjects from case families, and subjects with increased PRS. PRS from MAX_ALC.P1 (which uses the threshold p < .1) was associated (p < 6.1 × 10−6 by Cox test) with AOO of AUD in EA subjects (Table 1). PRSs derived from AUD or AUDIT-C scores did not show a strong relationship with AOO in EA subjects (p > .001 at most thresholds). PRS variables were not significantly associated with AOO in AA subjects (Tables S1A and S1B).Table 2Cox Proportional Hazards Model for Sex, PRSs (EA_MAX_ALC.P1), and Family Type (Case/Comparison) in EA Subjects: Analysis of Maximum Likelihood EstimatesParameterParameter EstimateStandard Errorχ21p ValueHR95% Confidence LimitsSex−0.280300.0685216.73444.30 × 10−50.7560.661–0.864EA_MAX_ALC.P1 (With PC1—PC4)0.164510.0360020.88034.89 × 10−61.1791.099–1.265Family Type0.540920.1171721.31103.90 × 10−61.7181.365–2.161The model is also adjusted for ancestry using the first four PCs of population stratification (PC1–PC4). All HRs show the effect of a particular variable after accounting for the effects of all other variables.EA, European ancestry; HR, hazard ratio; PC, principal component; PRS, polygenic risk score.Table 3Cox Proportional Hazards Model for
