A meta-analysis comparing cognitive function across the mood/psychosis diagnostic spectrum.

BACKGROUND: The nature and degree of cognitive impairments in schizoaffective disorder is not well established. The aim of this meta-analysis was to characterise cognitive functioning in schizoaffective disorder and compare it with cognition in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Schizoaffective disorder was considered both as a single category and as its two diagnostic subtypes, bipolar and depressive disorder. METHODS: Following a thorough literature search (468 records identified), we included 31 studies with a total of 1685 participants with schizoaffective disorder, 3357 with schizophrenia and 1095 with bipolar disorder. Meta-analyses were conducted for seven cognitive variables comparing performance between participants with schizoaffective disorder and schizophrenia, and between schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder. RESULTS: Participants with schizoaffective disorder performed worse than those with bipolar disorder (g = -0.30) and better than those with schizophrenia (g = 0.17). Meta-analyses of the subtypes of schizoaffective disorder showed cognitive impairments in participants with the depressive subtype are closer in severity to those seen in participants with schizophrenia (g = 0.08), whereas those with the bipolar subtype were more impaired than those with bipolar disorder (g = -0.23) and less impaired than those with schizophrenia (g = 0.29). Participants with the depressive subtype had worse performance than those with the bipolar subtype but this was not significant (g = 0.25, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Cognitive impairments increase in severity from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder to schizophrenia. Differences between the subtypes of schizoaffective disorder suggest combining the subtypes of schizoaffective disorder may obscure a study's results and hamper efforts to understand the relationship between this disorder and schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

Clinical indicators of treatment-resistant psychosis.

BACKGROUND: Around 30% of individuals with schizophrenia remain symptomatic and significantly impaired despite antipsychotic treatment and are considered to be treatment resistant. Clinicians are currently unable to predict which patients are at higher risk of treatment resistance. AIMS: To determine whether genetic liability for schizophrenia and/or clinical characteristics measurable at illness onset can prospectively indicate a higher risk of treatment-resistant psychosis (TRP). METHOD: In 1070 individuals with schizophrenia or related psychotic disorders, schizophrenia polygenic risk scores (PRS) and large copy number variations (CNVs) were assessed for enrichment in TRP. Regression and machine-learning approaches were used to investigate the association of phenotypes related to demographics, family history, premorbid factors and illness onset with TRP. RESULTS: Younger age at onset (odds ratio 0.94, P = 7.79 × 10-13) and poor premorbid social adjustment (odds ratio 1.64, P = 2.41 × 10-4) increased risk of TRP in univariate regression analyses. These factors remained associated in multivariate regression analyses, which also found lower premorbid IQ (odds ratio 0.98, P = 7.76 × 10-3), younger father's age at birth (odds ratio 0.97, P = 0.015) and cannabis use (odds ratio 1.60, P = 0.025) increased the risk of TRP. Machine-learning approaches found age at onset to be the most important predictor and also identified premorbid IQ and poor social adjustment as predictors of TRP, mirroring findings from regression analyses. Genetic liability for schizophrenia was not associated with TRP. CONCLUSIONS: People with an earlier age at onset of psychosis and poor premorbid functioning are more likely to be treatment resistant. The genetic architecture of susceptibility to schizophrenia may be distinct from that of treatment outcomes.

Examining cognition across the bipolar/schizophrenia diagnostic spectrum.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairments are well-established features of schizophrenia, but there is ongoing debate about the nature and degree of cognitive impairment in patients with schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder. We hypothesized that there is a spectrum of increasing impairment from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, to schizoaffective disorder depressive type and schizophrenia. METHODS: We compared performance on the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery between participants with schizophrenia (n = 558), schizoaffective disorder depressive type (n = 112), schizoaffective disorder type (n = 76), bipolar disorder (n = 78) and healthy participants (n = 103) using analysis of covariance with post hoc comparisons. We conducted an ordinal logistic regression to examine whether cognitive impairments followed the hypothesized spectrum from bipolar disorder (least severe) to schizophrenia (most severe). In addition to categorical diagnoses, we addressed the influence of symptom domains, examining the association between cognition and mania, depression and psychosis. RESULTS: Cognitive impairments increased in severity from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, to schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder depressive type. Participants with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder depressive type showed equivalent performance (d = 0.07, p = 0.90). The results of the ordinal logistic regression were consistent with a spectrum of deficits from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, to schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder depressive type (odds ratio = 1.98, p < 0.001). In analyses of the associations between symptom dimensions and cognition, higher scores on the psychosis dimension were associated with poorer performance (B = 0.015, standard error = 0.002, p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: There were fewer participants with schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder than schizophrenia. Despite this, our analyses were robust to differences in group sizes, and we were able to detect differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Cognitive impairments represent a symptom dimension that cuts across traditional diagnostic boundaries.

Examining cognition across the bipolar/schizophrenia diagnostic spectrum.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairments are well-established features of schizophrenia, but there is ongoing debate about the nature and degree of cognitive impairment in patients with schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder. We hypothesized that there is a spectrum of increasing impairment from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, to schizoaffective disorder depressive type and schizophrenia. METHODS: We compared performance on the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery between participants with schizophrenia (n = 558), schizoaffective disorder depressive type (n = 112), schizoaffective disorder type (n = 76), bipolar disorder (n = 78) and healthy participants (n = 103) using analysis of covariance with post hoc comparisons. We conducted an ordinal logistic regression to examine whether cognitive impairments followed the hypothesized spectrum from bipolar disorder (least severe) to schizophrenia (most severe). In addition to categorical diagnoses, we addressed the influence of symptom domains, examining the association between cognition and mania, depression and psychosis. RESULTS: Cognitive impairments increased in severity from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, to schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder depressive type. Participants with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder depressive type showed equivalent performance (d = 0.07, p = 0.90). The results of the ordinal logistic regression were consistent with a spectrum of deficits from bipolar disorder to schizoaffective disorder bipolar type, to schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder depressive type (odds ratio = 1.98, p < 0.001). In analyses of the associations between symptom dimensions and cognition, higher scores on the psychosis dimension were associated with poorer performance (B = 0.015, standard error = 0.002, p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: There were fewer participants with schizoaffective disorder and bipolar disorder than schizophrenia. Despite this, our analyses were robust to differences in group sizes, and we were able to detect differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Cognitive impairments represent a symptom dimension that cuts across traditional diagnostic boundaries.

Assessing the validity of a self-reported clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia.

The increasing availability of biobanks is changing the way individuals are identified for genomic research. This study assesses the validity of a self-reported clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia. The study included 1744 clinically-ascertained participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder depressed-type (SA-D) diagnosed by self-report and/or research interview and 1453 UK Biobank participants with self-reported and/or medical record diagnosis of schizophrenia or SA-D. Unaffected controls included a total of 501,837 participants. We assessed the positive predictive values (PPV) of self-reported clinical diagnoses against research interview and medical record diagnoses. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) and phenotypes relating to demographics, education and employment were compared across diagnostic groups. The variance explained (r2) in schizophrenia PRS for each diagnostic group was compared to samples in the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC). In the clinically-ascertained participants, the PPV of self-reported schizophrenia for a research diagnosis of schizophrenia was 0.70, which increased to 0.81 after expanding the research diagnosis to schizophrenia or SA-D. In UK Biobank, the PPV of self-reported schizophrenia for a medical record diagnosis was 0.74. Compared to participants who self-reported, participants with a clinically-ascertained research diagnosis were younger and more likely to have a high school qualification. Participants with a medical record diagnosis in UK Biobank were less likely to be employed or have a high school qualification than those who self-reported. Schizophrenia PRS did not differ between participants that had a diagnosis from self-report, research diagnosis or medical records. Polygenic liability r2, for all diagnosis definitions, fell within the distribution of PGC schizophrenia cohorts. Self-reported measures of schizophrenia are justified in genomic research to maximise sample size and reduce the burden of in-depth interviews on participants, although within sample validation of diagnoses is recommended.

SLC39A8.p.(Ala391Thr) is associated with poorer cognitive ability: a cross-sectional study of schizophrenia and the general UK population.

The missense SNP NC_000004.12:g.102267552C>T (SLC39A8.p.(Ala391Thr), rs13107325) in SLC39A8, which encodes a zinc transporter, has been linked to schizophrenia and is the likely causal variant for one of the genome-wide association loci associated with the disorder. We tested whether the schizophrenia-risk allele at p.(Ala391Thr) was associated with schizophrenia-related phenotypes, including positive, negative, and disorganised symptoms, cognitive ability, educational attainment, and age of psychosis onset, within three schizophrenia cohorts (combined N=1,232) and, with equivalent phenotypes, in a sample of population controls (UK Biobank, N=355,069). We used regression analyses controlling for age, sex, and population stratification. Within the schizophrenia cohorts, after correction for multiple testing, p.(Ala391Thr) was not significantly associated with any schizophrenia-related phenotypes. In the unaffected participants from the UK Biobank, the schizophrenia-risk allele at p.(Ala391Thr) was associated with significantly poorer cognitive ability and fluid intelligence, a lower probability of obtaining GCSEs or a degree-level qualification, and fewer years in education. There was no association between p.(Ala391Thr) and self-reported psychotic experiences in this cohort. The schizophrenia-risk allele was associated with poorer cognitive ability, but not psychotic experiences, in a volunteer sample drawn from of the general population. To determine whether p.(Ala391Thr) is associated with cognitive phenotypes in people with schizophrenia, and to understand the role of p.(Ala391Thr) in the aetiology of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia, larger independent samples are required.

DRAGON-Data: a platform and protocol for integrating genomic and phenotypic data across large psychiatric cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Current psychiatric diagnoses, although heritable, have not been clearly mapped onto distinct underlying pathogenic processes. The same symptoms often occur in multiple disorders, and a substantial proportion of both genetic and environmental risk factors are shared across disorders. However, the relationship between shared symptoms and shared genetic liability is still poorly understood. AIMS: Well-characterised, cross-disorder samples are needed to investigate this matter, but few currently exist. Our aim is to develop procedures to purposely curate and aggregate genotypic and phenotypic data in psychiatric research. METHOD: As part of the Cardiff MRC Mental Health Data Pathfinder initiative, we have curated and harmonised phenotypic and genetic information from 15 studies to create a new data repository, DRAGON-Data. To date, DRAGON-Data includes over 45 000 individuals: adults and children with neurodevelopmental or psychiatric diagnoses, affected probands within collected families and individuals who carry a known neurodevelopmental risk copy number variant. RESULTS: We have processed the available phenotype information to derive core variables that can be reliably analysed across groups. In addition, all data-sets with genotype information have undergone rigorous quality control, imputation, copy number variant calling and polygenic score generation. CONCLUSIONS: DRAGON-Data combines genetic and non-genetic information, and is available as a resource for research across traditional psychiatric diagnostic categories. Algorithms and pipelines used for data harmonisation are currently publicly available for the scientific community, and an appropriate data-sharing protocol will be developed as part of ongoing projects (DATAMIND) in partnership with Health Data Research UK.

Schizophrenia Polygenic Risk and Experiences of Childhood Adversity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Schizophrenia has been robustly associated with multiple genetic and environmental risk factors. Childhood adversity is one of the most widely replicated environmental risk factors for schizophrenia, but it is unclear if schizophrenia genetic risk alleles contribute to this association. STUDY DESIGN: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assessed the evidence for gene-environment correlation (genes influence likelihood of environmental exposure) between schizophrenia polygenic risk score (PRS) and reported childhood adversity. We also assessed the evidence for a gene-environment interaction (genes influence sensitivity to environmental exposure) in relation to the outcome of schizophrenia and/or psychosis. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020182812). Following PRISMA guidelines, a search for relevant literature was conducted using Cochrane, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases until February 2022. All studies that examined the association between schizophrenia PRS and childhood adversity were included. STUDY RESULTS: Seventeen of 650 identified studies met the inclusion criteria and were assessed against the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for quality. The meta-analysis found evidence for gene-environment correlation between schizophrenia PRS and childhood adversity (r = .02; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.03; P = .001), but the effect was small and therefore likely to explain only a small proportion of the association between childhood adversity and psychosis. The 4 studies that investigated a gene-environment interaction between schizophrenia PRS and childhood adversity in increasing risk of psychosis reported inconsistent results. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that a gene-environment correlation could explain a small proportion of the relationship between reported childhood adversity and psychosis.

Interaction Testing and Polygenic Risk Scoring to Estimate the Association of Common Genetic Variants With Treatment Resistance in Schizophrenia.

IMPORTANCE: About 20% to 30% of people with schizophrenia have psychotic symptoms that do not respond adequately to first-line antipsychotic treatment. This clinical presentation, chronic and highly disabling, is known as treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). The causes of treatment resistance and their relationships with causes underlying schizophrenia are largely unknown. Adequately powered genetic studies of TRS are scarce because of the difficulty in collecting data from well-characterized TRS cohorts. OBJECTIVE: To examine the genetic architecture of TRS through the reassessment of genetic data from schizophrenia studies and its validation in carefully ascertained clinical samples. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Two case-control genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of schizophrenia were performed in which the case samples were defined as individuals with TRS (n = 10 501) and individuals with non-TRS (n = 20 325). The differences in effect sizes for allelic associations were then determined between both studies, the reasoning being such differences reflect treatment resistance instead of schizophrenia. Genotype data were retrieved from the CLOZUK and Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) schizophrenia studies. The output was validated using polygenic risk score (PRS) profiling of 2 independent schizophrenia cohorts with TRS and non-TRS: a prevalence sample with 817 individuals (Cardiff Cognition in Schizophrenia [CardiffCOGS]) and an incidence sample with 563 individuals (Genetics Workstream of the Schizophrenia Treatment Resistance and Therapeutic Advances [STRATA-G]). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: GWAS of treatment resistance in schizophrenia. The results of the GWAS were compared with complex polygenic traits through a genetic correlation approach and were used for PRS analysis on the independent validation cohorts using the same TRS definition. RESULTS: The study included a total of 85 490 participants (48 635 [56.9%] male) in its GWAS stage and 1380 participants (859 [62.2%] male) in its PRS validation stage. Treatment resistance in schizophrenia emerged as a polygenic trait with detectable heritability (1% to 4%), and several traits related to intelligence and cognition were found to be genetically correlated with it (genetic correlation, 0.41-0.69). PRS analysis in the CardiffCOGS prevalence sample showed a positive association between TRS and a history of taking clozapine (r2 = 2.03%; P = .001), which was replicated in the STRATA-G incidence sample (r2 = 1.09%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this GWAS, common genetic variants were differentially associated with TRS, and these associations may have been obscured through the amalgamation of large GWAS samples in previous studies of broadly defined schizophrenia. Findings of this study suggest the validity of meta-analytic approaches for studies on patient outcomes, including treatment resistance.

Risk Factors, Clinical Features, and Polygenic Risk Scores in Schizophrenia and Schizoaffective Disorder Depressive-Type.

There is controversy about the status of schizoaffective disorder depressive-type (SA-D), particularly whether it should be considered a form of schizophrenia or a distinct disorder. We aimed to determine whether individuals with SA-D differ from individuals with schizophrenia in terms of demographic, premorbid, and lifetime clinical characteristics, and genetic liability to schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder. Participants were from the CardiffCOGS sample and met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia (n = 713) or SA-D (n = 151). Two samples, Cardiff Affected-sib (n = 354) and Cardiff F-series (n = 524), were used for replication. For all samples, phenotypic data were ascertained through structured interview, review of medical records, and an ICD-10 diagnosis made by trained researchers. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare individuals with schizophrenia and SA-D for demographic and clinical characteristics, and polygenic risk scores (PRS). In the CardiffCOGS, SA-D, compared to schizophrenia, was associated with female sex, childhood abuse, history of alcohol dependence, higher functioning Global Assessment Scale (GAS) score in worst episode of psychosis, lower functioning GAS score in worst episode of depression, and reduced lifetime severity of disorganized symptoms. Individuals with SA-D had higher depression PRS compared to those with schizophrenia. PRS for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder did not significantly differ between SA-D and schizophrenia. Compared to individuals with schizophrenia, individuals with SA-D had higher rates of environmental and genetic risk factors for depression and a similar genetic liability to schizophrenia. These findings are consistent with SA-D being a sub-type of schizophrenia resulting from elevated liability to both schizophrenia and depression.

Rare Copy Number Variants Are Associated With Poorer Cognition in Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia is a major contributor to poor outcomes, yet its causes are poorly understood. Some rare copy number variants (CNVs) are associated with schizophrenia risk and affect cognition in healthy populations, but their contribution to cognitive impairment in schizophrenia has not been investigated. We examined the effect of 12 schizophrenia CNVs on cognition in those with schizophrenia. METHODS: General cognitive ability was measured using the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia composite z score in 875 patients with schizophrenia and in a replication sample of 519 patients with schizophrenia using Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Full Scale IQ. Using linear regression, we tested for association between cognition and schizophrenia CNV status, covarying for age and sex. In addition, we tested whether CNVs hitting genes in schizophrenia-enriched gene sets (loss-of-function intolerant and synaptic gene sets) were associated with cognitive impairment. RESULTS: A total of 23 schizophrenia CNV carriers were identified. Schizophrenia CNV carriers had lower general cognitive ability than nonschizophrenia CNV carriers in discovery (ß = -0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.31 to -0.01) and replication samples (ß = -0.91, 95% CI = -1.71 to -0.11) and after meta-analysis (ß = -0.76, 95% CI = -1.26 to -0.25, p = .003). CNVs hitting loss-of-function intolerant genes were associated with lower cognition (ß = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.29 to -0.001, p = .048). CONCLUSIONS: In those with schizophrenia, cognitive ability in schizophrenia CNV carriers is 0.5-1.0 standard deviations below non-CNV carriers, which may have implications for clinical assessment and management. We also demonstrate that rare CNVs hitting genes intolerant to loss-of-function variation lead to more severe cognitive impairment, above and beyond the effect of known schizophrenia CNVs.

The Relationship Between Polygenic Risk Scores and Cognition in Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is a clinically important feature of schizophrenia. Polygenic risk score (PRS) methods have demonstrated genetic overlap between schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (BD), major depressive disorder (MDD), educational attainment (EA), and IQ, but very few studies have examined associations between these PRS and cognitive phenotypes within schizophrenia cases. METHODS: We combined genetic and cognitive data in 3034 schizophrenia cases from 11 samples using the general intelligence factor g as the primary measure of cognition. We used linear regression to examine the association between cognition and PRS for EA, IQ, schizophrenia, BD, and MDD. The results were then meta-analyzed across all samples. A genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of cognition was conducted in schizophrenia cases. RESULTS: PRS for both population IQ (P = 4.39 × 10-28) and EA (P = 1.27 × 10-26) were positively correlated with cognition in those with schizophrenia. In contrast, there was no association between cognition in schizophrenia cases and PRS for schizophrenia (P = .39), BD (P = .51), or MDD (P = .49). No individual variant approached genome-wide significance in the GWAS. CONCLUSIONS: Cognition in schizophrenia cases is more strongly associated with PRS that index cognitive traits in the general population than PRS for neuropsychiatric disorders. This suggests the mechanisms of cognitive variation within schizophrenia are at least partly independent from those that predispose to schizophrenia diagnosis itself. Our findings indicate that this cognitive variation arises at least in part due to genetic factors shared with cognitive performance in populations and is not solely due to illness or treatment-related factors, although our findings are consistent with important contributions from these factors.