The network structure of mania symptoms differs between people with and without binge eating.

OBJECTIVES: People with bipolar disorder who also report binge eating have increased psychopathology and greater impairment than those without binge eating. Whether this co-occurrence is related to binge eating as a symptom or presents differently across full-syndrome eating disorders with binge eating is unclear. METHODS: We first compared networks of 13 lifetime mania symptoms in 34,226 participants from the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Research BioResource with (n = 12,104) and without (n = 22,122) lifetime binge eating. Second, in the subsample with binge eating, we compared networks of mania symptoms in participants with lifetime anorexia nervosa binge-eating/purging (n = 825), bulimia nervosa (n = 3737), and binge-eating disorder (n = 3648). RESULTS: People with binge eating endorsed every mania symptom significantly more often than those without binge eating. Within the subsample, people with bulimia nervosa most often had the highest endorsement rate of each mania symptom. We found significant differences in network parameter statistics, including network structure (M = 0.25, p = 0.001) and global strength (S = 1.84, p = 0.002) when comparing the binge eating with no binge-eating participants. However, network structure differences were sensitive to reductions in sample size and the greater density of the latter network was explained by the large proportion of participants (34%) without mania symptoms. The structure of the anorexia nervosa binge-eating/purging network differed from the bulimia nervosa network (M = 0.66, p = 0.001), but the result was unstable. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the presence and structure of mania symptoms may be more associated with binge eating as a symptom rather than any specific binge-type eating disorder. Further research with larger sample sizes is required to confirm our findings.

Risk and protective factors for new-onset binge eating, low weight, and self-harm symptoms in >35,000 individuals in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with poor mental health, including increases in eating disorders and self-harm symptoms. We investigated risk and protective factors for the new onset of these symptoms during the pandemic. METHOD: Data were from the COVID-19 Psychiatry and Neurological Genetics study and the Repeated Assessment of Mental health in Pandemics Study (n = 36,715). Exposures were socio-demographic characteristics, lifetime psychiatric disorder, and COVID-related variables, including SARS-CoV-2 infection/illness with COVID-19. We identified four subsamples of participants without pre-pandemic experience of our outcomes: binge eating (n = 24,211), low weight (n = 24,364), suicidal and/or self-harm ideation (n = 18,040), and self-harm (n = 29,948). Participants reported on our outcomes at frequent intervals (fortnightly to monthly). We fitted multiple logistic regression models to identify factors associated with the new onset of our outcomes. RESULTS: Within each subsample, new onset was reported by: 21% for binge eating, 10.8% for low weight, 23.5% for suicidal and/or self-harm ideation, and 3.5% for self-harm. Shared risk factors included having a lifetime psychiatric disorder, not being in paid employment, higher pandemic worry scores, and being racially minoritized. Conversely, infection with SARS-CoV-2/illness with COVID-19 was linked to lower odds of binge eating, low weight, and suicidal and/or self-harm ideation. DISCUSSION: Overall, we detected shared risk factors that may drive the comorbidity between eating disorders and self-harm. Subgroups of individuals with these risk factors may require more frequent monitoring during future pandemics. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: In a sample of 35,000 UK residents, people who had a psychiatric disorder, identified as being part of a racially minoritized group, were not in paid employment, or were more worried about the pandemic were more likely to experience binge eating, low weight, suicidal and/or self-harm ideation, and self-harm for the first time during the pandemic. People with these risk factors may need particular attention during future pandemics to enable early identification of new psychiatric symptoms.

The United Kingdom Eating Disorders Genetics Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The United Kingdom Eating Disorders Genetics Initiative (EDGI UK), part of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Mental Health BioResource, aims to deepen our understanding of the environmental and genetic etiology of eating disorders. EDGI UK launched in February 2020 and is partnered with the UK eating disorders charity, Beat. Multiple EDGI branches exist worldwide. This article serves the dual function of providing an in-depth description of our study protocol and of describing our initial sample including demographics, diagnoses, and physical and psychiatric comorbidities. METHOD: EDGI UK recruits via media and clinical services. Anyone living in England, at least 16 years old, with a lifetime probable or clinical eating disorder is eligible to sign up online: edgiuk.org. Participants complete online questionnaires, donate a saliva sample for genetic analysis, and consent to medical record linkage and recontact for future studies. RESULTS: As of September 2022, EDGI UK recruited 7435 survey participants: 98% female, 93.1% white, 97.8% cisgender, 65.9% heterosexual, and 52.1% have a university degree. Over half (57.8%) of these participants have returned their saliva DNA kit. The most common diagnoses are anorexia nervosa (48.3%), purging disorder (37.8%), bulimia nervosa (37.5%), binge-eating disorder (15.8%), and atypical anorexia nervosa (7.8%). CONCLUSION: EDGI UK is the largest UK eating disorders study and efforts to increase its diversity are underway. It offers a unique opportunity to accelerate eating disorder research. Researchers and participants with lived experience can collaborate on projects with unparalleled sample size. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Eating disorders are debilitating and costly for society but are under-researched due to underfunding. EDGI UK is one of the largest eating disorder studies worldwide with ongoing recruitment. The collected data constitute a resource for secondary analysis. We will combine data from all international EDGI branches and the NIHR BioResource to facilitate research that improves our understanding of eating disorders and their comorbidities.

Genetic examination of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire and its relationship with bipolar disorder.

The Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) is a common screening tool for bipolar disorder that assesses manic symptoms. Its utility for genetic studies of mania or bipolar traits has not been fully examined. We psychometrically compared the MDQ to self-reported bipolar disorder in participants from the United Kingdom National Institute of Health and Care Research Mental Health BioResource. We conducted genome-wide association studies of manic symptom quantitative traits and symptom subgroups, derived from the MDQ items (N = 11,568-19,859). We calculated genetic correlations with bipolar disorder and other psychiatric and behavioral traits. The MDQ screener showed low positive predictive value (0.29) for self-reported bipolar disorder. Neither concurrent nor lifetime manic symptoms were genetically correlated with bipolar disorder. Lifetime manic symptoms had a highest genetic correlation (rg = 1.0) with posttraumatic stress disorder although this was not confirmed by within-cohort phenotypic correlations (rp = 0.41). Other significant genetic correlations included attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (rg = 0.69), insomnia (rg = 0.55), and major depressive disorder (rg = 0.42). Our study adds to existing literature questioning the MDQ's validity and suggests it may capture symptoms of general distress or psychopathology, rather than hypomania/mania specifically, in at-risk populations.

Pre-pandemic mental health and disruptions to healthcare, economic and housing outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from 12 UK longitudinal studies.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted lives and livelihoods, and people already experiencing mental ill health may have been especially vulnerable. AIMS: Quantify mental health inequalities in disruptions to healthcare, economic activity and housing. METHOD: We examined data from 59 482 participants in 12 UK longitudinal studies with data collected before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Within each study, we estimated the association between psychological distress assessed pre-pandemic and disruptions since the start of the pandemic to healthcare (medication access, procedures or appointments), economic activity (employment, income or working hours) and housing (change of address or household composition). Estimates were pooled across studies. RESULTS: Across the analysed data-sets, 28% to 77% of participants experienced at least one disruption, with 2.3-33.2% experiencing disruptions in two or more domains. We found 1 s.d. higher pre-pandemic psychological distress was associated with (a) increased odds of any healthcare disruptions (odds ratio (OR) 1.30, 95% CI 1.20-1.40), with fully adjusted odds ratios ranging from 1.24 (95% CI 1.09-1.41) for disruption to procedures to 1.33 (95% CI 1.20-1.49) for disruptions to prescriptions or medication access; (b) loss of employment (odds ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.21) and income (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 -1.19), and reductions in working hours/furlough (odds ratio 1.05, 95% CI 1.00-1.09) and (c) increased likelihood of experiencing a disruption in at least two domains (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.18-1.32) or in one domain (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07-1.16), relative to no disruption. There were no associations with housing disruptions (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: People experiencing psychological distress pre-pandemic were more likely to experience healthcare and economic disruptions, and clusters of disruptions across multiple domains during the pandemic. Failing to address these disruptions risks further widening mental health inequalities.

Genetics of eating disorders in the genome-wide era.

Enabled by advances in high throughput genomic sequencing and an unprecedented level of global data sharing, molecular genetic research is beginning to unlock the biological basis of eating disorders. This invited review provides an overview of genetic discoveries in eating disorders in the genome-wide era. To date, five genome-wide association studies on eating disorders have been conducted - all on anorexia nervosa (AN). For AN, several risk loci have been detected, and ~11-17% of the heritability has been accounted for by common genetic variants. There is extensive genetic overlap between AN and psychological traits, especially obsessive-compulsive disorder, and intriguingly, with metabolic phenotypes even after adjusting for body mass index (BMI) risk variants. Furthermore, genetic risk variants predisposing to lower BMI may be causal risk factors for AN. Causal genes and biological pathways of eating disorders have yet to be elucidated and will require greater sample sizes and statistical power, and functional follow-up studies. Several studies are underway to recruit individuals with bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder to enable further genome-wide studies. Data collections and research labs focused on the genetics of eating disorders have joined together in a global effort with the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium. Molecular genetics research in the genome-wide era is improving knowledge about the biology behind the established heritability of eating disorders. This has the potential to offer new hope for understanding eating disorder etiology and for overcoming the therapeutic challenges that confront the eating disorder field.

Comparison of symptom-based versus self-reported diagnostic measures of anxiety and depression disorders in the GLAD and COPING cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Understanding and improving outcomes for people with anxiety or depression often requires large sample sizes. To increase participation and reduce costs, such research is typically unable to utilise "gold-standard" methods to ascertain diagnoses, instead relying on remote, self-report measures. AIMS: Assess the comparability of remote diagnostic methods for anxiety and depression disorders commonly used in research. METHOD: Participants from the UK-based GLAD and COPING NBR cohorts (N = 58,400) completed an online questionnaire between 2018 and 2020. Responses to detailed symptom reports were compared to DSM-5 criteria to generate symptom-based diagnoses of major depressive disorder (MDD), generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and agoraphobia. Participants also self-reported any prior diagnoses from health professionals, termed self-reported diagnoses. "Any anxiety" included participants with at least one anxiety disorder. Agreement was assessed by calculating accuracy, Cohen's kappa, McNemar's chi-squared, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: Agreement between diagnoses was moderate for MDD, any anxiety, and GAD, but varied by cohort. Agreement was slight to fair for the phobic disorders. Many participants with self-reported GAD did not receive a symptom-based diagnosis. In contrast, symptom-based diagnoses of the phobic disorders were more common than self-reported diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement for MDD, any anxiety, and GAD was higher for cases in the case-enriched GLAD cohort and for controls in the general population COPING NBR cohort. For anxiety disorders, self-reported diagnoses classified most participants as having GAD, whereas symptom-based diagnoses distributed participants more evenly across the anxiety disorders. Further validation against gold standard measures is required.