6533b837fe1ef96bd12a1db0
RESEARCH PRODUCT
The independent and combined influence of schizophrenia polygenic risk score and heavy cannabis use on risk for psychotic disorder: A case-control analysis from the EUGEI study.
Manuel ArrojoAlexander RichardsJose Luis SantosDel Ben CmIlaria TarriconeWu-choi BDomenico BerardiLaura FerraroJulio SanjuánM O'donovanPeter B. JonesAndrei SzökeDiego QuattroneJulio BobesEvangelos VassosRutten BnGiada TripoliJames B. KirkbrideMiguel BernardoJean-paul SeltenPak C. ShamCelso ArangoEva VelthorstHannah E. JongsmaRobin M. MurrayMichael T. LynskeyDi Forti MLa Cascia CDe Haan LCharlotte Gayer-andersonRodriguezSarah TosatoVan Os JCathryn M. LewisTom P. FreemanCraig Morgansubject
medicine.medical_specialtybiologybusiness.industryFrequency of useCannabis usebiology.organism_classificationmedicine.disease030227 psychiatry3. Good health03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineSchizophreniaFirst episode psychosisCase control analysisMedicinemedia_common.cataloged_instancePolygenic risk scoreCannabisEuropean unionbusinessPsychiatry030217 neurology & neurosurgerymedia_commondescription
Background: Some recent studies have challenged the direction of causality for the association between cannabis use and psychotic disorder, suggesting that cannabis use initiation is explained by common genetic variants associated with risk of schizophrenia. We used data from the European Union Gene-Environment Interaction consortium (EUGEI) case-control study to test for the independent and combined effect of heavy cannabis use, and of Schizophrenia Polygenic risk score (SZ PRS), on risk for psychotic disorder. Methods: Genome-wide data were obtained from 492 first episode psychosis patients (FEPp) and from 787 controls of European Ancestry, and used to generate SZ PRS from the summary results of an independent meta-analysis. Information on pattern of cannabis use was used to build a 7-level frequency-type composite cannabis use measure that we previously found was a strong predictor of psychotic disorder. Results: SZ PRS did not predict cannabis initiation (b=0.027; p=0.51) or how frequently controls (b=0.027; p=0.06) or FEPp (b=0.006; p=0.91) used it, or the type of cannabis they used (Controls: b = 0.032; p=0.31); FEPp: b= 0.005; p=0.89). The frequency-type composite cannabis use measure (OR=1.32; 95% CI 1.22-1.44) and SZ PRS (OR=2.29; 95%CI 1.71-3.05) showed independent effects from each other on the OR for psychotic disorder. Conclusion: SZ PRS does not predict an individual s propensity to try cannabis, frequency of use, or the potency of the cannabis used. Our findings provide the first evidence that SZ PRS and heavy cannabis use exert effects independent from each other on the risk for psychotic disorder.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2019-11-16 |