To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) are considered a subclinical component of psychosis continuum. Studies indicate that PLEs arise from multimodal factors, yet research comprehensively examining these factors together remains scarce. Using a large youth sample, we present the first model that simultaneously examines multimodal factors related to PLEs. As a secondary aim, we evaluate the model’s ability to explain psychosis in an external validation cohort that included individuals experiencing psychosis.
Methods
After applying variable selection including generalized estimating equations, correlation filtering, Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator model to 741 variables (i.e., environmental factors, cognitive appraisals, clinical variables, cognitive functioning, and structural brain connectome measures), obtained PLEs predictors (N = 27) and covariates (i.e., age, sex, IQ) were included in the classification model based on Elastic Net algorithm for predicting high/low PLEs in 396 healthy participants aged 14–24 (Mage = 19.72 ± 2.5). We externally validated PLE-related predictors in a clinical sample comprising first-episode psychosis patients (n = 19), their siblings (n = 20), and healthy controls (n = 19).
Results
Eleven factors, including environmental and cognitive appraisals, along with 16 structural network properties spanning frontal, temporal, occipital, and parietal regions, were identified as important predictors of PLEs. The model’s performance was moderate in predicting low versus high PLEs (accuracy = 75%, AUC = 0.750). Specificity was high (84.2%) in distinguishing siblings from patients.
Conclusions
Multimodal features, including environmental burden, cognitive schemas, and brain network alterations, predict PLEs and partially generalize to clinical psychosis. These variables may reflect intermediate phenotypes across the psychosis spectrum, offering insights into both vulnerability and resilience.
There is a substantial body of literature on environmental risk associated with schizophrenia. Most research has largely been conducted in Europe and North America, with little representation of the rest of the world; hence generalisability of findings is questionable. For this reason, we performed a mapping review of studies on environmental risk for schizophrenia spectrum disorders, recording the country where they were conducted, and we linked our findings with publicly available data to identify correlates with the uneven global distribution. Our aim was to evaluate how universal is the ‘common knowledge’ of environmental risk for psychosis collating the availability of evidence across different countries and to generate suggestions for future research identifying gaps in evidence.
Methods
We performed a systematic search and mapping of studies in the PubMed and PsycINFO electronic databases reporting on exposure to environmental risk for schizophrenia including obstetric complications, paternal age, migration, urbanicity, childhood trauma, and cannabis use and subsequent onset of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. This search focused on articles published from the date of the first available publication until 31 May 2023. We recorded the country where they were conducted. We downloaded publicly available data on population size, measures of wealth, medical provisions, research investment, and of quality research outputs per country and performed regression analyses of each predictor with the number of studies and recruited cases in each country.
Results
We identified 308 publications that included a sample size of 445,000 patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The majority were conducted in northern Europe and North America, with large parts of the world totally unrepresented. In the associations between the number of environmental risk studies for schizophrenia with potential predictors, we found that neither population nor wealth or research investment were strong predictors of research outputs in the field. Interestingly, the stronger correlations were found for number of researchers per population and for indicators of top-end scientific achievements, such as number of Nobel laureates per country.
Conclusions
Our results demonstrate a gap of knowledge due to the underrepresentation of studies on environmental risk of schizophrenia spectrum disorders in large parts of the world. This has implications not only in the generalisability of any findings from research conducted in the Northern hemisphere but also in our ability to progress in efforts to make causal inferences about biological pathways to schizophrenia. These findings reinforce the need to focus research on populations that are underrepresented in research and underserved in health care.
Although current prescribing guidelines suggest continuation of psychotropic drugs in pregnant women, population-based evidence supporting their safety is limited.
Aims
This study aims to clarify the plausible causal links between maternal psychotropic drug exposures and obstetric complications.
Method
This cohort study investigated all births by Hong Kong residents ≥18 years of age in public hospitals between 2004 and 2022. Birth episodes were classified according to whether they were unexposed to psychotropic drugs, exposed but discontinued before conception or exposed during pregnancy. Firth’s penalised logistic regression was employed in all analysis, and negative control analysis was conducted to assess causality. False discovery rate correction and sensitivity analyses were performed.
Results
Among 587 419 births, 7182 episodes involved psychotropic prescriptions (antipsychotics, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, benzodiazepines) during pregnancy. In broad drug class analysis, all significant associations observed in the exposed group were also observed in negative control analysis (psychotropics discontinued before conception), suggesting that elevated risks could be attributed to unmeasured confounders. Nevertheless, in subclass analyses, certain psychotropic drugs showed increased risks of obstetric complications, i.e. significant associations between atypical antipsychotics and genito-urinary infection (odds ratio 2.70, 95% CI 1.46–4.83), and between valproate and low birth weight (odds ratio 1.68, 95% CI 1.16–2.37). These associations became non-significant in negative control analysis, and the high E-values (atypical antipsychotics and genito-urinary infection, 4.84; valproate and low birth weight, 2.75) suggested that the results were unlikely to have been driven by unmeasured confounders. Maternal diagnoses of schizophrenia and depression were independently associated with increased risk of obstetric complications, after controlling for the effects of psychotropics.
Conclusions
The population-based data and meticulous analyses did not support any clear causal link between broad-class psychotropic exposure during pregnancy and increased risk of obstetric/neonatal complications. However, some psychotropic subclasses may increase obstetric/neonatal complications. The limited number of episodes involving discontinuation of some psychotropic subclasses may have resulted in false negative findings in the negative control analysis.
Previous studies identified clusters of first-episode psychosis (FEP) patients based on cognition and premorbid adjustment. This study examined a range of socio-environmental risk factors associated with clusters of FEP, aiming a) to compare clusters of FEP and community controls using the Maudsley Environmental Risk Score for psychosis (ERS), a weighted sum of the following risks: paternal age, childhood adversities, cannabis use, and ethnic minority membership; b) to explore the putative differences in specific environmental risk factors in distinguishing within patient clusters and from controls.
Methods
A univariable general linear model (GLS) compared the ERS between 1,263 community controls and clusters derived from 802 FEP patients, namely, low (n = 223) and high-cognitive-functioning (n = 205), intermediate (n = 224) and deteriorating (n = 150), from the EU-GEI study. A multivariable GLS compared clusters and controls by different exposures included in the ERS.
Results
The ERS was higher in all clusters compared to controls, mostly in the deteriorating (β=2.8, 95% CI 2.3 3.4, η2 = 0.049) and the low-cognitive-functioning cluster (β=2.4, 95% CI 1.9 2.8, η2 = 0.049) and distinguished them from the cluster with high-cognitive-functioning. The deteriorating cluster had higher cannabis exposure (meandifference = 0.48, 95% CI 0.49 0.91) than the intermediate having identical IQ, and more people from an ethnic minority (meandifference = 0.77, 95% CI 0.24 1.29) compared to the high-cognitive-functioning cluster.
Conclusions
High exposure to environmental risk factors might result in cognitive impairment and lower-than-expected functioning in individuals at the onset of psychosis. Some patients’ trajectories involved risk factors that could be modified by tailored interventions.
The association between cannabis and psychosis is established, but the role of underlying genetics is unclear. We used data from the EU-GEI case-control study and UK Biobank to examine the independent and combined effect of heavy cannabis use and schizophrenia polygenic risk score (PRS) on risk for psychosis.
Methods
Genome-wide association study summary statistics from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium and the Genomic Psychiatry Cohort were used to calculate schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder (CUD) PRS for 1098 participants from the EU-GEI study and 143600 from the UK Biobank. Both datasets had information on cannabis use.
Results
In both samples, schizophrenia PRS and cannabis use independently increased risk of psychosis. Schizophrenia PRS was not associated with patterns of cannabis use in the EU-GEI cases or controls or UK Biobank cases. It was associated with lifetime and daily cannabis use among UK Biobank participants without psychosis, but the effect was substantially reduced when CUD PRS was included in the model. In the EU-GEI sample, regular users of high-potency cannabis had the highest odds of being a case independently of schizophrenia PRS (OR daily use high-potency cannabis adjusted for PRS = 5.09, 95% CI 3.08–8.43, p = 3.21 × 10−10). We found no evidence of interaction between schizophrenia PRS and patterns of cannabis use.
Conclusions
Regular use of high-potency cannabis remains a strong predictor of psychotic disorder independently of schizophrenia PRS, which does not seem to be associated with heavy cannabis use. These are important findings at a time of increasing use and potency of cannabis worldwide.
Positive, negative and disorganised psychotic symptom dimensions are associated with clinical and developmental variables, but differing definitions complicate interpretation. Additionally, some variables have had little investigation.
Aims
To investigate associations of psychotic symptom dimensions with clinical and developmental variables, and familial aggregation of symptom dimensions, in multiple samples employing the same definitions.
Method
We investigated associations between lifetime symptom dimensions and clinical and developmental variables in two twin and two general psychosis samples. Dimension symptom scores and most other variables were from the Operational Criteria Checklist. We used logistic regression in generalised linear mixed models for combined sample analysis (n = 875 probands). We also investigated correlations of dimensions within monozygotic (MZ) twin pairs concordant for psychosis (n = 96 pairs).
Results
Higher symptom scores on all three dimensions were associated with poor premorbid social adjustment, never marrying/cohabiting and earlier age at onset, and with a chronic course, most strongly for the negative dimension. The positive dimension was also associated with Black and minority ethnicity and lifetime cannabis use; the negative dimension with male gender; and the disorganised dimension with gradual onset, lower premorbid IQ and substantial within twin-pair correlation. In secondary analysis, disorganised symptoms in MZ twin probands were associated with lower premorbid IQ in their co-twins.
Conclusions
These results confirm associations that dimensions share in common and strengthen the evidence for distinct associations of co-occurring positive symptoms with ethnic minority status, negative symptoms with male gender and disorganised symptoms with substantial familial influences, which may overlap with influences on premorbid IQ.
Incidence of first-episode psychosis (FEP) varies substantially across geographic regions. Phenotypes of subclinical psychosis (SP), such as psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) and schizotypy, present several similarities with psychosis. We aimed to examine whether SP measures varied across different sites and whether this variation was comparable with FEP incidence within the same areas. We further examined contribution of environmental and genetic factors to SP.
Methods
We used data from 1497 controls recruited in 16 different sites across 6 countries. Factor scores for several psychopathological dimensions of schizotypy and PLEs were obtained using multidimensional item response theory models. Variation of these scores was assessed using multi-level regression analysis to estimate individual and between-sites variance adjusting for age, sex, education, migrant, employment and relational status, childhood adversity, and cannabis use. In the final model we added local FEP incidence as a second-level variable. Association with genetic liability was examined separately.
Results
Schizotypy showed a large between-sites variation with up to 15% of variance attributable to site-level characteristics. Adding local FEP incidence to the model considerably reduced the between-sites unexplained schizotypy variance. PLEs did not show as much variation. Overall, SP was associated with younger age, migrant, unmarried, unemployed and less educated individuals, cannabis use, and childhood adversity. Both phenotypes were associated with genetic liability to schizophrenia.
Conclusions
Schizotypy showed substantial between-sites variation, being more represented in areas where FEP incidence is higher. This supports the hypothesis that shared contextual factors shape the between-sites variation of psychosis across the spectrum.
Edited by
Deepak Cyril D'Souza, Staff Psychiatrist, VA Connecticut Healthcare System; Professor of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine,David Castle, University of Tasmania, Australia,Sir Robin Murray, Honorary Consultant Psychiatrist, Psychosis Service at the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust; Professor of Psychiatric Research at the Institute of Psychiatry
Does cannabis use play a causal role in subsequent violence? The available research suggests an association between cannabis use and risk of being a perpetrator of violence. Indeed, cannabis users are at increased risk of carrying out severe violence, including aggravated assault, sexual aggression, fighting, and robbery. There is also evidence on the association between cannabis use and subsequent victimization (e.g., intimate partner violence). Individuals with severe mental disorders also show an incremented risk of violence, considering their higher rate of cannabis use compared to the general population. Possible mechanisms underlying this association involve (1) the neurobiological effect of the substance after acute use, but also during abstinence and withdrawal, and (2) social factors, such as the violent/criminal lifestyles of cannabis users. However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the current literature. Most available studies are cross-sectional and retrospective, so it remains difficult to disentangle the direction of the association. Despite that, cannabis use may be a useful preventive intervention target, particularly among at-risk groups such as psychiatric patients.
Childhood adversity and cannabis use are considered independent risk factors for psychosis, but whether different patterns of cannabis use may be acting as mediator between adversity and psychotic disorders has not yet been explored. The aim of this study is to examine whether cannabis use mediates the relationship between childhood adversity and psychosis.
Methods
Data were utilised on 881 first-episode psychosis patients and 1231 controls from the European network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene–Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study. Detailed history of cannabis use was collected with the Cannabis Experience Questionnaire. The Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire was used to assess exposure to household discord, sexual, physical or emotional abuse and bullying in two periods: early (0–11 years), and late (12–17 years). A path decomposition method was used to analyse whether the association between childhood adversity and psychosis was mediated by (1) lifetime cannabis use, (2) cannabis potency and (3) frequency of use.
Results
The association between household discord and psychosis was partially mediated by lifetime use of cannabis (indirect effect coef. 0.078, s.e. 0.022, 17%), its potency (indirect effect coef. 0.059, s.e. 0.018, 14%) and by frequency (indirect effect coef. 0.117, s.e. 0.038, 29%). Similar findings were obtained when analyses were restricted to early exposure to household discord.
Conclusions
Harmful patterns of cannabis use mediated the association between specific childhood adversities, like household discord, with later psychosis. Children exposed to particularly challenging environments in their household could benefit from psychosocial interventions aimed at preventing cannabis misuse.
While cannabis use is a well-established risk factor for psychosis, little is known about any association between reasons for first using cannabis (RFUC) and later patterns of use and risk of psychosis.
Methods
We used data from 11 sites of the multicentre European Gene-Environment Interaction (EU-GEI) case–control study. 558 first-episode psychosis patients (FEPp) and 567 population controls who had used cannabis and reported their RFUC.
We ran logistic regressions to examine whether RFUC were associated with first-episode psychosis (FEP) case–control status. Path analysis then examined the relationship between RFUC, subsequent patterns of cannabis use, and case–control status.
Results
Controls (86.1%) and FEPp (75.63%) were most likely to report ‘because of friends’ as their most common RFUC. However, 20.1% of FEPp compared to 5.8% of controls reported: ‘to feel better’ as their RFUC (χ2 = 50.97; p < 0.001). RFUC ‘to feel better’ was associated with being a FEPp (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.03–2.95) while RFUC ‘with friends’ was associated with being a control (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37–0.83). The path model indicated an association between RFUC ‘to feel better’ with heavy cannabis use and with FEPp-control status.
Conclusions
Both FEPp and controls usually started using cannabis with their friends, but more patients than controls had begun to use ‘to feel better’. People who reported their reason for first using cannabis to ‘feel better’ were more likely to progress to heavy use and develop a psychotic disorder than those reporting ‘because of friends’.
Progress towards understanding the aetiology of major depression is compromised by its clinical heterogeneity. The variety of contexts underlying the development of a major depressive episode may contribute to such heterogeneity.
Aims
To compare risk factor profiles for three subgroups of major depression according to episode context.
Method
Using self-report questionnaires and administrative records from the UK Biobank, we characterised three contextual subgroups of major depression: postpartum depression (3581 cases), depression following diagnosis of a chronic disease (409 cases) and a more typical (named heterogeneous) major depression phenotype excluding the two other contexts (34 699 cases). Controls with the same exposure were also defined. We tested each subgroup for association with the polygenic risk scores (PRS) for major depression and with other risk factors previously associated with major depression (bipolar disorder PRS, neuroticism, reported trauma in childhood and adulthood, socioeconomic status, family history of depression, education).
Results
Major depression PRS was associated with all subgroups, but postpartum depression cases had higher PRS than heterogeneous major depression cases (OR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.02–1.10). Relative to heterogeneous depression, postpartum depression was more weakly associated with adulthood trauma and neuroticism. Depression following diagnosis of a chronic disease had weaker association with neuroticism and reported trauma in adulthood and childhood relative to heterogeneous depression.
Conclusions
The observed differences in risk factor profiles according to the context of a major depressive episode help provide insight into the heterogeneity of depression. Future studies dissecting such heterogeneity could help reveal more refined aetiological insights.
Schizophrenia (SZ), bipolar disorder (BD) and depression (D) run in families. This susceptibility is partly due to hundreds or thousands of common genetic variants, each conferring a fractional risk. The cumulative effects of the associated variants can be summarised as a polygenic risk score (PRS). Using data from the EUropean Network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) first episode case–control study, we aimed to test whether PRSs for three major psychiatric disorders (SZ, BD, D) and for intelligent quotient (IQ) as a neurodevelopmental proxy, can discriminate affective psychosis (AP) from schizophrenia-spectrum disorder (SSD).
Methods
Participants (842 cases, 1284 controls) from 16 European EU-GEI sites were successfully genotyped following standard quality control procedures. The sample was stratified based on genomic ancestry and analyses were done only on the subsample representing the European population (573 cases, 1005 controls). Using PRS for SZ, BD, D, and IQ built from the latest available summary statistics, we performed simple or multinomial logistic regression models adjusted for 10 principal components for the different clinical comparisons.
Results
In case–control comparisons PRS-SZ, PRS-BD and PRS-D distributed differentially across psychotic subcategories. In case–case comparisons, both PRS-SZ [odds ratio (OR) = 0.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54–0.92] and PRS-D (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.06–1.61) differentiated AP from SSD; and within AP categories, only PRS-SZ differentiated BD from psychotic depression (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.23–3.74).
Conclusions
Combining PRS for severe psychiatric disorders in prediction models for psychosis phenotypes can increase discriminative ability and improve our understanding of these phenotypes. Our results point towards the potential usefulness of PRSs in specific populations such as high-risk or early psychosis phases.
Mood disorders are characterised by pronounced symptom heterogeneity, which presents a substantial challenge both to clinical practice and research. Identification of subgroups of individuals with homogeneous symptom profiles that cut across current diagnostic categories could provide insights in to the transdiagnostic relevance of individual symptoms, which current categorical diagnostic systems cannot impart.
Aims
To identify groups of people with homogeneous clinical characteristics, using symptoms of manic and/or irritable mood, and explore differences between groups in diagnoses, functional outcomes and genetic liability.
Method
We used latent class analysis on eight binary self-reported symptoms of manic and irritable mood in the UK Biobank and PROTECT studies, to investigate how individuals formed latent subgroups. We tested associations between the latent classes and diagnoses of psychiatric disorders, sociodemographic characteristics and polygenic risk scores.
Results
Five latent classes were derived in UK Biobank (N = 42 183) and were replicated in the independent PROTECT cohort (N = 4445), including ‘minimally affected’, ‘inactive restless’, active restless’, ‘focused creative’ and ‘extensively affected’ individuals. These classes differed in disorder risk, polygenic risk score and functional outcomes. One class that experienced disruptive episodes of mostly irritable mood largely comprised cases of depression/anxiety, and a class of individuals with increased confidence/creativity reported comparatively lower disruptiveness and functional impairment.
Conclusions
Findings suggest that data-driven investigations of psychopathological symptoms that include sub-diagnostic threshold conditions can complement research of clinical diagnoses. Improved classification systems of psychopathology could investigate a weighted approach to symptoms, toward a more dimensional classification of mood disorders.
A history of childhood adversity is associated with psychotic disorder, with an increase in risk according to the number of exposures. However, it is not known why only some exposed individuals go on to develop psychosis. One possibility is pre-existing polygenic vulnerability. Here, we investigated, in the largest sample of first-episode psychosis (FEP) cases to date, whether childhood adversity and high polygenic risk scores for schizophrenia (SZ-PRS) combine synergistically to increase the risk of psychosis, over and above the effect of each alone.
Methods
We assigned a schizophrenia-polygenic risk score (SZ-PRS), calculated from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC2), to all participants in a sample of 384 FEP patients and 690 controls from the case–control component of the EU-GEI study. Only participants of European ancestry were included in the study. A history of childhood adversity was collected using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ). Synergistic effects were estimated using the interaction contrast ratio (ICR) [odds ratio (OR)exposure and PRS − ORexposure − ORPRS + 1] with adjustment for potential confounders.
Results
There was some evidence that the combined effect of childhood adversities and polygenic risk was greater than the sum of each alone, as indicated by an ICR greater than zero [i.e. ICR 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.29 to 3.85]. Examining subtypes of childhood adversities, the strongest synergetic effect was observed for physical abuse (ICR 6.25, 95% CI −6.25 to 20.88).
Conclusions
Our findings suggest possible synergistic effects of genetic liability and childhood adversity experiences in the onset of FEP, but larger samples are needed to increase precision of estimates.
Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depressive disorder (MDD) are commonly reported co-occurring mental health consequences of psychological trauma exposure. The disorders have high genetic overlap. Trauma is a complex phenotype but research suggests that trauma sensitivity has a heritable basis. We investigated whether sensitivity to trauma in those with MDD reflects a similar genetic component in those with PTSD.
Methods
Genetic correlations between PTSD and MDD in individuals reporting trauma and MDD in individuals not reporting trauma were estimated, as well as with recurrent MDD and single-episode MDD, using genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics. Genetic correlations were replicated using PTSD data from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium and the Million Veteran Program. Polygenic risk scores were generated in UK Biobank participants who met the criteria for lifetime MDD (N = 29 471). We investigated whether genetic loading for PTSD was associated with reporting trauma in these individuals.
Results
Genetic loading for PTSD was significantly associated with reporting trauma in individuals with MDD [OR 1.04 (95% CI 1.01–1.07), Empirical-p = 0.02]. PTSD was significantly more genetically correlated with recurrent MDD than with MDD in individuals not reporting trauma (rg differences = ~0.2, p < 0.008). Participants who had experienced recurrent MDD reported significantly higher rates of trauma than participants who had experienced single-episode MDD (χ2 > 166, p < 0.001)
Conclusions
Our findings point towards the existence of genetic variants associated with trauma sensitivity that might be shared between PTSD and MDD, although replication with better powered GWAS is needed. Our findings corroborate previous research highlighting trauma exposure as a key risk factor for recurrent MDD.
Major depression (MD) is often characterised as a categorical disorder; however, observational studies comparing sub-threshold and clinical depression suggest MD is continuous. Many of these studies do not explore the full continuum and are yet to consider genetics as a risk factor. This study sought to understand if polygenic risk for MD could provide insight into the continuous nature of depression.
Methods
Factor analysis on symptom-level data from the UK Biobank (N = 148 957) was used to derive continuous depression phenotypes which were tested for association with polygenic risk scores (PRS) for a categorical definition of MD (N = 119 692).
Results
Confirmatory factor analysis showed a five-factor hierarchical model, incorporating 15 of the original 18 items taken from the PHQ-9, GAD-7 and subjective well-being questionnaires, produced good fit to the observed covariance matrix (CFI = 0.992, TLI = 0.99, RMSEA = 0.038, SRMR = 0.031). MD PRS associated with each factor score (standardised β range: 0.057–0.064) and the association remained when the sample was stratified into case- and control-only subsets. The case-only subset had an increased association compared to controls for all factors, shown via a significant interaction between lifetime MD diagnosis and MD PRS (p value range: 2.23 × 10−3–3.94 × 10−7).
Conclusions
An association between MD PRS and a continuous phenotype of depressive symptoms in case- and control-only subsets provides support against a purely categorical phenotype; indicating further insights into MD can be obtained when this within-group variation is considered. The stronger association within cases suggests this variation may be of particular importance.
Daily use of high-potency cannabis has been reported to carry a high risk for developing a psychotic disorder. However, the evidence is mixed on whether any pattern of cannabis use is associated with a particular symptomatology in first-episode psychosis (FEP) patients.
Method
We analysed data from 901 FEP patients and 1235 controls recruited across six countries, as part of the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study. We used item response modelling to estimate two bifactor models, which included general and specific dimensions of psychotic symptoms in patients and psychotic experiences in controls. The associations between these dimensions and cannabis use were evaluated using linear mixed-effects models analyses.
Results
In patients, there was a linear relationship between the positive symptom dimension and the extent of lifetime exposure to cannabis, with daily users of high-potency cannabis having the highest score (B = 0.35; 95% CI 0.14–0.56). Moreover, negative symptoms were more common among patients who never used cannabis compared with those with any pattern of use (B = −0.22; 95% CI −0.37 to −0.07). In controls, psychotic experiences were associated with current use of cannabis but not with the extent of lifetime use. Neither patients nor controls presented differences in depressive dimension related to cannabis use.
Conclusions
Our findings provide the first large-scale evidence that FEP patients with a history of daily use of high-potency cannabis present with more positive and less negative symptoms, compared with those who never used cannabis or used low-potency types.
Risk prediction algorithms have long been used in health research and practice (e.g. prediction of cardiovascular disease and diabetes). However, similar tools have not been developed for mental health. For example, for psychotic disorders, attempts to sum environmental risk are rare, unsystematic and dictated by available data. In light of this, we sought to develop a valid, easy to use measure of the aggregate environmental risk score (ERS) for psychotic disorders.
Methods
We reviewed the literature to identify well-replicated and validated environmental risk factors for psychosis that combine a significant effect and large-enough prevalence. Pooled estimates of relative risks were taken from the largest available meta-analyses. We devised a method of scoring the level of exposure to each risk factor to estimate ERS. Relative risks were rounded as, due to the heterogeneity of the original studies, risk effects are imprecisely measured.
Results
Six risk factors (ethnic minority status, urbanicity, high paternal age, obstetric complications, cannabis use and childhood adversity) were used to generate the ERS. A distribution for different levels of risk based on simulated data showed that most of the population would be at low/moderate risk with a small minority at increased environmental risk for psychosis.
Conclusions
This is the first systematic approach to develop an aggregate measure of environmental risk for psychoses in asymptomatic individuals. This can be used as a continuous measure of liability to disease; mostly relevant to areas where the original studies took place. Its predictive ability will improve with the collection of additional, population-specific data.