Suppr超能文献

双相障碍亚型病因学的特异性:来自瑞典基于人群的家族研究的证据。

Specificity in Etiology of Subtypes of Bipolar Disorder: Evidence From a Swedish Population-Based Family Study.

机构信息

Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

出版信息

Biol Psychiatry. 2018 Dec 1;84(11):810-816. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2017.11.014. Epub 2017 Nov 20.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty remains whether bipolar I disorder (BDI) and bipolar II disorder (BDII) differ etiologically. We used a population-based family sample to examine the etiological boundaries between BDI and BDII by assessing their familial aggregation/coaggregation and by assessing the coaggregation between them and schizophrenia, depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, eating disorders, autism spectrum disorder, substance use disorders, anxiety disorders, and personality disorders.

METHODS

By linking Swedish national registers, we established a population-based cohort (N = 15,685,511) and identified relatives with different biological relationships. Odds ratios (ORs) were used to measure the relative risk of BDI and BDII in relatives of individuals diagnosed with BDI (n = 4309) and BDII (n = 4178). The heritability for BDI and BDII and the genetic correlation across psychiatric disorders were estimated by variance decomposition analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with the general population, the OR of BDI was 17.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.1-22.0) in first-degree relatives of BDI patients, higher than that of BDII patients (OR 9.8, 95% CI 7.7-12.5). The ORs of BDII were 13.6 (95% CI 10.2-18.2) in first-degree relatives of BDII patients and 9.8 (95% CI 7.7-12.4) in relatives of BDI patients. The heritabilities for BDI and BDII were estimated at 57% (95% CI 32%-79%) and 46% (95% CI 21%-67%), respectively, with a genetic correlation estimated as 0.78 (95% CI 0.36-1.00). The familial coaggregation of other psychiatric disorders, in particular schizophrenia, showed different patterns for BDI and BDII.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest a distinction between BDI and BDII in etiology, partly due to genetic differences.

摘要

背景

双相 I 障碍(BDI)和双相 II 障碍(BDII)在病因学上是否存在差异仍存在不确定性。我们使用基于人群的家族样本,通过评估它们的家族聚集/共同聚集以及评估它们与精神分裂症、抑郁症、注意缺陷/多动障碍、饮食障碍、自闭症谱系障碍、物质使用障碍、焦虑症和人格障碍之间的共同聚集,来研究 BDI 和 BDII 之间的病因学界限。

方法

通过链接瑞典国家登记册,我们建立了一个基于人群的队列(N=15685511),并确定了具有不同生物学关系的亲属。比值比(OR)用于衡量个体被诊断为 BDI(n=4309)和 BDII(n=4178)的个体的亲属中 BDI 和 BDII 的相对风险。通过方差分解分析估计 BDI 和 BDII 的遗传率以及精神障碍之间的遗传相关性。

结果

与普通人群相比,BDI 患者一级亲属患 BDI 的 OR 为 17.0(95%置信区间 [CI] 13.1-22.0),高于 BDII 患者(OR 9.8,95% CI 7.7-12.5)。BDII 患者一级亲属的 OR 为 13.6(95% CI 10.2-18.2),BDI 患者一级亲属的 OR 为 9.8(95% CI 7.7-12.4)。BDI 和 BDII 的遗传率分别估计为 57%(95% CI 32%-79%)和 46%(95% CI 21%-67%),遗传相关性估计为 0.78(95% CI 0.36-1.00)。其他精神障碍,特别是精神分裂症的家族共同聚集,对 BDI 和 BDII 表现出不同的模式。

结论

我们的结果表明,BDI 和 BDII 在病因学上存在差异,部分原因是遗传差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验