Copy-number variants and polygenic risk for intelligence confer risk for autism spectrum disorder irrespective of their effects on cognitive ability.

Introduction: Rare copy number variants (CNVs) and polygenic risk for intelligence (PRS-IQ) both confer susceptibility for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) but have opposing effects on cognitive ability. The field has struggled to disentangle the effects of these two classes of genomic variants on cognitive ability from their effects on ASD susceptibility, in part because previous studies did not include controls with cognitive measures. We aim to investigate the impact of these genomic variants on ASD risk while adjusting for their known effects on cognitive ability. Methods: In a cohort of 8,426 subjects with ASD and 169,804 controls with cognitive assessments, we found that rare coding CNVs and PRS-IQ increased ASD risk, even after adjusting for their effects on cognitive ability. Results: Bottom decile PRS-IQ and CNVs both decreased cognitive ability but had opposing effects on ASD risk. Models combining both classes of variants showed that the effects of rare CNVs and PRS-IQ on ASD risk and cognitive ability were largely additive, further suggesting that susceptibility for ASD is conferred independently from its effects on cognitive ability. Despite imparting mostly additive effects on ASD risk, rare CNVs and PRS-IQ showed opposing effects on core and associated features and developmental history among subjects with ASD. Discussion: Our findings suggest that cognitive ability itself may not be the factor driving the underlying liability for ASD conferred by these two classes of genomic variants. In other words, ASD risk and cognitive ability may be two distinct manifestations of CNVs and PRS-IQ. This study also highlights the challenge of understanding how genetic risk for ASD maps onto its dimensional traits.

Genetic and phenotypic similarity across major psychiatric disorders: a systematic review and quantitative assessment.

There is widespread overlap across major psychiatric disorders, and this is the case at different levels of observations, from genetic variants to brain structures and function and to symptoms. However, it remains unknown to what extent these commonalities at different levels of observation map onto each other. Here, we systematically review and compare the degree of similarity between psychiatric disorders at all available levels of observation. We searched PubMed and EMBASE between January 1, 2009 and September 8, 2022. We included original studies comparing at least four of the following five diagnostic groups: Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder, and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, with measures of similarities between all disorder pairs. Data extraction and synthesis were performed by two independent researchers, following the PRISMA guidelines. As main outcome measure, we assessed the Pearson correlation measuring the degree of similarity across disorders pairs between studies and biological levels of observation. We identified 2975 studies, of which 28 were eligible for analysis, featuring similarity measures based on single-nucleotide polymorphisms, gene-based analyses, gene expression, structural and functional connectivity neuroimaging measures. The majority of correlations (88.6%) across disorders between studies, within and between levels of observation, were positive. To identify a consensus ranking of similarities between disorders, we performed a principal component analysis. Its first dimension explained 51.4% (95% CI: 43.2, 65.4) of the variance in disorder similarities across studies and levels of observation. Based on levels of genetic correlation, we estimated the probability of another psychiatric diagnosis in first-degree relatives and showed that they were systematically lower than those observed in population studies. Our findings highlight that genetic and brain factors may underlie a large proportion, but not all of the diagnostic overlaps observed in the clinic.

Copy-number variants and polygenic risk for intelligence confer risk for autism spectrum disorder irrespective of their effects on cognitive ability.

Rare copy number variants (CNVs) and polygenic risk for intelligence (PRS-IQ) both confer risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) but have opposing effects on cognitive ability. The field has struggled to disentangle the effects of these two classes of genomic variants on cognitive ability from their effects on ASD risk, in part because previous studies did not include controls with cognitive measures. We aim to investigate the impact of these genomic variants on ASD risk while adjusting for their known effects on cognitive ability. In a cohort of 8,426 subjects with ASD and 169,804 controls with cognitive assessments, we found that rare coding CNVs and PRS-IQ increased ASD risk, even after adjusting for their effects on cognitive ability. Bottom decile PRS-IQ and CNVs both decreased cognitive ability but had opposing effects on ASD risk. Models combining both classes of variants showed that the effects of rare CNVs and PRS-IQ on ASD risk and cognitive ability were largely additive, further suggesting that risk for ASD is conferred independently from its effects on cognitive ability. Despite imparting mostly additive effects on ASD risk, rare CNVs and PRS-IQ showed opposing effects on core and associated features and developmental history among subjects with ASD. Our findings suggest that cognitive ability itself may not be the factor driving the underlying risk for ASD conferred by these two classes of genomic variants. In other words, ASD risk and cognitive ability may be two distinct manifestations of CNVs and PRS-IQ. This study also highlights the challenge of understanding how genetic risk for ASD maps onto its dimensional traits.