Genetic and Environmental Risk for Chronic Pain and the Contribution of Risk Variants for Major Depressive Disorder: A Family-Based Mixed-Model Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is highly prevalent and a significant source of disability, yet its genetic and environmental risk factors are poorly understood. Its relationship with major depressive disorder (MDD) is of particular importance. We sought to test the contribution of genetic factors and shared and unique environment to risk of chronic pain and its correlation with MDD in Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS:SFHS). We then sought to replicate any significant findings in the United Kingdom Biobank study. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using family-based mixed-model analyses, we examined the contribution of genetics and shared family environment to chronic pain by spouse, sibling, and household relationships. These analyses were conducted in GS:SFHS (n = 23,960), a family- and population-based study of individuals recruited from the Scottish population through their general practitioners. We then examined and partitioned the correlation between chronic pain and MDD and estimated the contribution of genetic factors and shared environment in GS:SFHS. Finally, we used data from two independent genome-wide association studies to test whether chronic pain has a polygenic architecture and examine whether genomic risk of psychiatric disorder predicted chronic pain and whether genomic risk of chronic pain predicted MDD. These analyses were conducted in GS:SFHS and repeated in UK Biobank, a study of 500,000 from the UK population, of whom 112,151 had genotyping and phenotypic data. Chronic pain is a moderately heritable trait (heritability = 38.4%, 95% CI 33.6% to 43.9%) that is significantly concordant in spouses (variance explained 18.7%, 95% CI 9.5% to 25.1%). Chronic pain is positively correlated with depression (ρ = 0.13, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.15, p = 2.72x10-68) and shows a tendency to cluster within families for genetic reasons (genetic correlation = 0.51, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.62, p = 8.24x10-19). Polygenic risk profiles for pain, generated using independent GWAS data, were associated with chronic pain in both GS:SFHS (maximum ß = 6.18x10-2, 95% CI 2.84 x10-2 to 9.35 x10-2, p = 4.3x10-4) and UK Biobank (maximum ß = 5.68 x 10-2, 95% CI 4.70x10-2 to 6.65x10-2, p < 3x10-4). Genomic risk of MDD is also significantly associated with chronic pain in both GS:SFHS (maximum ß = 6.62x10-2, 95% CI 2.82 x10-2 to 9.76 x10-2, p = 4.3x10-4) and UK Biobank (maximum ß = 2.56x10-2, 95% CI 1.62x10-2 to 3.63x10-2, p < 3x10-4). Limitations of the current study include the possibility that spouse effects may be due to assortative mating and the relatively small polygenic risk score effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic factors, as well as chronic pain in a partner or spouse, contribute substantially to the risk of chronic pain for an individual. Chronic pain is genetically correlated with MDD, has a polygenic architecture, and is associated with polygenic risk of MDD.

Pharmaco-epidemiology of antidepressant exposure in a UK cohort record-linkage study.

OBJECTIVES: Antidepressants are the most commonly prescribed psychiatric medication but concern has been raised about significant increases in their usage in high income countries. We aimed to quantify antidepressant prevalence, incidence, adherence and predictors of use in the adult population. METHODS: The study record-linked administrative prescribing and morbidity data to the Generation Scotland cohort ( N = 11,052), between 2009 and 2016. Prevalence and incidence of any antidepressant use was determined. Antidepressant adherence was measured using Proportion of Days Covered and Medication Possession Ratio. Time-to-event analysis for incident antidepressant use within 5 years of Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS:SFHS) recruitment was performed to reveal patient-level predictors of use. RESULTS: Almost one-third (28.0%, 95%CI 26.9-29.1) of the adults in our sample were prescribed at least one antidepressant in the 5-year period 2012-2016. There was a 36.2% increase in annual prevalence between 2010 and 2016. Incidence was 2.4(2.1-2.7)% per year. The majority of antidepressant episodes (57.6%) were greater than 9 months duration and adherence was generally high (69.0% with Proportion of Days Covered >80%). Predictors of new antidepressant use included history of affective disorder, being female, physical comorbidities, higher neuroticism scores, and lower cognitive function scores. CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressant prevalence is greater than previously reported but incidence remains relatively stable. We found the majority of antidepressant episodes to be of relatively long duration with good estimated adherence. Our study supports the hypothesis that increased long-term use among existing (and returning) users, along with wider ranges of indications for antidepressants, has significantly increased the prevalence of these medications.

Cohort profile for the STratifying Resilience and Depression Longitudinally (STRADL) study: A depression-focused investigation of Generation Scotland, using detailed clinical, cognitive, and neuroimaging assessments.

STratifying Resilience and Depression Longitudinally (STRADL) is a population-based study built on the Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS:SFHS) resource. The aim of STRADL is to subtype major depressive disorder (MDD) on the basis of its aetiology, using detailed clinical, cognitive, and brain imaging assessments. The GS:SFHS provides an important opportunity to study complex gene-environment interactions, incorporating linkage to existing datasets and inclusion of early-life variables for two longitudinal birth cohorts. Specifically, data collection in STRADL included: socio-economic and lifestyle variables; physical measures; questionnaire data that assesses resilience, early-life adversity, personality, psychological health, and lifetime history of mood disorder; laboratory samples; cognitive tests; and brain magnetic resonance imaging. Some of the questionnaire and cognitive data were first assessed at the GS:SFHS baseline assessment between 2006-2011, thus providing longitudinal measures of depression and resilience. Similarly, routine NHS data and early-life variables are linked to STRADL data, further providing opportunities for longitudinal analysis. Recruitment has been completed and we consented and tested 1,188 participants.

Self-reported medication use validated through record linkage to national prescribing data.

OBJECTIVES: Researchers need to be confident about the reliability of epidemiologic studies that quantify medication use through self-report. Some evidence suggests that psychiatric medications are systemically under-reported. Modern record linkage enables validation of self-report with national prescribing data as gold standard. Here, we investigated the validity of medication self-report for multiple medication types. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Participants in the Generation Scotland population-based cohort (N = 10,244) recruited 2009-2011 self-reported regular usage of several commonly prescribed medication classes. This was matched against Scottish NHS prescriptions data using 3- and 6-month fixed time windows. Potential predictors of discordant self-report, including general intelligence and psychological distress, were studied via multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Antidepressants self-report showed very good agreement (κ = 0.85, [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-0.87]), comparable to antihypertensives (κ = 0.90 [CI 0.89-0.91]). Self-report of mood stabilizers showed moderate-poor agreement (κ = 0.42 [CI 0.33-0.50]). Relevant past medical history was the strongest predictor of self-report sensitivity, whereas general intelligence was not predictive. CONCLUSION: In this large population-based study, we found self-report validity varied among medication classes, with no simple relationship between psychiatric medication and under-reporting. History of indicated illness predicted more accurate self-report, for both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric medications. Although other patient-level factors influenced self-report for some medications, none predicted greater accuracy across all medications studied.