C-reactive protein (CRP) is a sensitive biomarker of chronic low-grade inflammation and is associated with multiple complex diseases. The genetic determinants of chronic inflammation remain largely unknown, and the causal role of CRP in several clinical outcomes is debated. We performed two genome-wide association studies (GWASs), on HapMap and 1000 Genomes imputed data, of circulating amounts of CRP by using data from 88 studies comprising 204,402 European individuals. Additionally, we performed in silico functional analyses and Mendelian randomization analyses with several clinical outcomes. The GWAS meta-analyses of CRP revealed 58 distinct genetic loci (p < 5 3 10 À8). After adjustment for body mass index in the regression analysis, the associations at all except three loci remained. The lead variants at the distinct loci explained up to 7.0% of the variance in circulating amounts of CRP. We identified 66 gene sets that were organized in two substantially correlated clusters, one mainly composed of immune pathways and the other characterized by metabolic pathways in the liver. Mendelian randomization analyses revealed a causal protective effect of CRP on schizophrenia and a risk-increasing effect on bipolar disorder. Our findings provide further insights into the biology of inflammation and could lead to interventions for treating inflammation and its clinical consequences.

Intriguing findings on genetic and environmental causation suggest a need to reframe the etiology of mental disorders. Molecular genetics shows that thousands of common and rare genetic variants contribute to mental illness. Epidemiological studies have identified dozens of environmental exposures that are associated with psychopathology. The effect of environment is likely conditional on genetic factors, resulting in geneenvironment interactions. The impact of environmental factors also depends on previous exposures, resulting in environment-environment interactions. Most known genetic and environmental factors are shared across multiple mental disorders. Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, in particular, are closely causally linked. Synthesis of findings from twin studies, molecular genetics and epidemiological research suggests that joint consideration of multiple genetic and environmental factors has much greater explanatory power than separate studies of genetic or environmental causation. Multi-factorial gene-environment interactions are likely to be a generic mechanism involved in the majority of cases of mental illness, which is only partially tapped by existing gene-environment studies. Future research may cut across psychiatric disorders and address poly-causation by considering multiple genetic and environmental measures across the life course with a specific focus on the first two decades of life. Integrative analyses of poly-causation including gene-environment and environmentenvironment interactions can realize the potential for discovering causal types and mechanisms that are likely to generate new preventive and therapeutic tools.

Schizophrenia and other types of psychosis incur suffering, high health care costs and loss of human potential, due to the combination of early onset and poor response to treatment. Our ability to prevent or cure psychosis depends on knowledge of causal mechanisms. Molecular genetic studies show that thousands of common and rare variants contribute to the genetic risk for psychosis. Epidemiological studies have identified many environmental factors associated with increased risk of psychosis. However, no single genetic or environmental factor is sufficient to cause psychosis on its own. The risk of developing psychosis increases with the accumulation of many genetic risk variants and exposures to multiple adverse environmental factors. Additionally, the impact of environmental exposures likely depends on genetic factors, through gene-environment interactions. Only a few specific gene-environment combinations that lead to increased risk of psychosis have been identified to date. An example of replicable gene-environment interaction is a common polymorphism in the AKT1 gene that makes its carriers sensitive to developing psychosis with regular cannabis use. A synthesis of results from twin studies, molecular genetics, and epidemiological research outlines the many genetic and environmental factors contributing to psychosis. The interplay between these factors needs to be considered to draw a complete picture of etiology. To reach a more complete explanation of psychosis that can inform preventive strategies, future research should focus on longitudinal assessments of multiple environmental exposures within large, genotyped cohorts beginning early in life.

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and lower cognitive ability have been linked with increased likelihood of exposure to adversity. We hypothesized that these associations may be partly due to genetic factors. Methods: We calculated polygenic scores for ADHD and intelligence and assessed psychopathology and general cognitive ability in a sample of 297 youth aged 5-27 years enriched for offspring of parents with mood and psychotic disorders. We calculated an adversity score as a mean of 10 indicators, including socio-economic disadvantage, childhood maltreatment and bullying. We tested the effects of polygenic scores, externalizing symptoms and IQ on adversity scores using mixed-effects linear regression. Results: Externalizing symptoms and general cognitive ability showed expected positive and negative relationships with adversity, respectively. Polygenic scores for intelligence were unrelated to adversity, but polygenic scores for ADHD were associated with adversity (b = 0.23, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.34, p < .0001). ADHD polygenic scores uniquely explained 4.0% of variance in adversity score. The relationship between polygenic scores for ADHD and adversity was independently significant among individuals with (b = 0.49, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.75, p < .0001) and without (b = 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.26, p = .022) ADHD. Conclusions: A genetic score indexing liability to ADHD was associated with exposure to adversity in early life. Previously observed associations between externalizing symptoms, lower cognitive ability and adversity may be partially attributed to genetic liability to ADHD.

BackgroundChildren of parents with mood and psychotic disorders are at elevated risk for a range of behavioral and emotional problems. However, as the usual reporter of psychopathology in children is the parent, reports of early problems in children of parents with mood and psychotic disorders may be biased by the parents' own experience of mental illness and their mental state.MethodsIndependent observers rated psychopathology using the Test Observation Form in 378 children and youth between the ages of 4 and 24 (mean = 11.01, s.d. = 4.40) who had a parent with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or no history of mood and psychotic disorders.ResultsObserved attentional problems were elevated in offspring of parents with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia (effect sizes ranging between 0.31 and 0.56). Oppositional behavior and language/thought problems showed variable degrees of elevation (effect sizes 0.17 to 0.57) across the three high-risk groups, with the greatest difficulties observed in offspring of parents with bipolar disorder. Observed anxiety was increased in offspring of parents with major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder (effect sizes 0.19 and 0.25 respectively) but not in offspring of parents with schizophrenia.ConclusionsOur results suggest that externalizing problems and cognitive and language difficulties may represent a general manifestation of familial risk for mood and psychotic disorders, while anxiety may be a specific marker of liability for mood disorders. Observer assessment may improve early identification of risk and selection of youth who may benefit from targeted prevention.

Background. Psychotic symptoms are common in children and adolescents and may be early manifestations of liability to severe mental illness (SMI), including schizophrenia. SMI and psychotic symptoms are associated with impairment in executive functions. However, previous studies have not differentiated between 'cold' and 'hot' executive functions. We hypothesized that the propensity for psychotic symptoms is specifically associated with impairment in 'hot' executive functions, such as decision-making in the context of uncertain rewards and losses.Methods. In a cohort of 156 youth (mean age 12.5, range 7-24 years) enriched for familial risk of SMI, we measured cold and hot executive functions with the spatial working memory (SWM) task (total errors) and the Cambridge Gambling Task (decision-making), respectively. We assessed psychotic symptoms using the semi-structured Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia interview, Structured Interview for Prodromal Syndromes, Funny Feelings, and Schizophrenia Proneness Instrument -Child and Youth version.Results. In total 69 (44.23%) youth reported psychotic symptoms on one or more assessments. Cold executive functioning, indexed with SWM errors, was not significantly related to psychotic symptoms [odds ratio (OR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-2.17, p = 0.204). Poor hot executive functioning, indexed as decision-making score, was associated with psychotic symptoms after adjustment for age, sex and familial clustering (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.25-4.50, p = 0.008). The association between worse hot executive functions and psychotic symptoms remained significant in sensitivity analyses controlling for general cognitive ability and cold executive functions.Conclusions. Impaired hot executive functions may be an indicator of risk and a target for pre-emptive early interventions in youth.

IMPORTANCEEstablishing genetic contributions to the transmission of bipolar disorder (BD) from parents to offspring may inform the risk of developing this disorder and further serve to validate BD in youth.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the specific association of BD polygenic risk scores (PRSs) on the familial transmission and validity of pediatric BD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This community-based case-control longitudinal study (Pittsburgh Biological Offspring Study) included parents with BD I/II and their offspring and parents without BD (healthy or non-BD psychopathology) and their offspring. Participants were recruited between March 2001 and May 2007, and analysis took place from December 2020 to September 2021. EXPOSURES PRSs for BD, major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, and attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Participants were prospectively evaluated using standardized interviews blind to parental diagnosis. DNA was extracted from saliva and genotyped. PRSs were constructed based on independent large-scale genome-wide association studies. RESULTS A total of 156 parents with BD I/II and 180 parents without BD (mean [SD] age, 39.6 [7.9] years; 241 female [72%]) as well as 251 offspring of parents with BD and 158 offspring of parents without BD (mean [SD] age, 10.4 [4.7] years; 213 female [52%]) of European ancestry were analyzed. Participants were assessed a mean of 6.7 times during a mean (SD) of 13 (3.4) years of follow-up (84% retention). More offspring of parents with BD developed BD (58 [23.1%] vs 8 [5.1%]; P < .001) and depression (126 [50.2%] vs 52 [32.9%];P < .001) compared with offspring of parents without BD. BD PRS was higher in both parents and offspring with BD than parents and offspring without BD (parents: odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.19-1.89; P < .001; explained 4.8% of the phenotypic variance vs offspring: hazard ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.03-1.7; P = .02; explained 5.0% of the phenotypic variance). BD PRS did not differ across BD subtypes. In a model combining parental and offspring BD PRS, the parental BD PRS association with offspring BD was fully mediated by offspring BD PRS (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05-1.86; P = .02). Parental BD had a stronger direct association than parental or offspring BD PRS with offspring BD risk (hazard ratio, 5.21; 95% CI, 1.86-14.62; P = .002), explaining 30% of the variance. Parental and offspring BD PRS explained 6% of the BD onset variance beyond parental diagnosis. There were no significant between-group differences in PRSs for major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in parents or offspring and they were not significantly associated with BD onset. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe findings of this study add to the extant clinical validation of BD in youth. Parental BD and offspring BD PRS independently associated with the risk of BD in offspring. Although this is promising, the association of BD PRS was relatively small and cannot be used alone to determine BD risk until further...

No abstract