Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Psychol Med. 2021 May;51(7):1147-1156. doi: 10.1017/S0033291719004045. Epub 2020 Jan 20.
Studies suggest that alcohol consumption and alcohol use disorders have distinct genetic backgrounds.
We examined whether polygenic risk scores (PRS) for consumption and problem subscales of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C, AUDIT-P) in the UK Biobank (UKB; N = 121 630) correlate with alcohol outcomes in four independent samples: an ascertained cohort, the Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA; N = 6850), and population-based cohorts: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC; N = 5911), Generation Scotland (GS; N = 17 461), and an independent subset of UKB (N = 245 947). Regression models and survival analyses tested whether the PRS were associated with the alcohol-related outcomes.
In COGA, AUDIT-P PRS was associated with alcohol dependence, AUD symptom count, maximum drinks (R2 = 0.47-0.68%, p = 2.0 × 10-8-1.0 × 10-10), and increased likelihood of onset of alcohol dependence (hazard ratio = 1.15, p = 4.7 × 10-8); AUDIT-C PRS was not an independent predictor of any phenotype. In ALSPAC, the AUDIT-C PRS was associated with alcohol dependence (R2 = 0.96%, p = 4.8 × 10-6). In GS, AUDIT-C PRS was a better predictor of weekly alcohol use (R2 = 0.27%, p = 5.5 × 10-11), while AUDIT-P PRS was more associated with problem drinking (R2 = 0.40%, p = 9.0 × 10-7). Lastly, AUDIT-P PRS was associated with ICD-based alcohol-related disorders in the UKB subset (R2 = 0.18%, p < 2.0 × 10-16).
AUDIT-P PRS was associated with a range of alcohol-related phenotypes across population-based and ascertained cohorts, while AUDIT-C PRS showed less utility in the ascertained cohort. We show that AUDIT-P is genetically correlated with both use and misuse and demonstrate the influence of ascertainment schemes on PRS analyses.
研究表明,饮酒和酒精使用障碍具有不同的遗传背景。
我们在英国生物库(UKB;N=121630)中检查了用于消费和酒精使用障碍识别测试(AUDIT-C、AUDIT-P)问题子量表的多基因风险评分(PRS)是否与四个独立样本中的酒精结果相关:一个确定的队列、合作酒精遗传学研究(COGA;N=6850),以及基于人群的队列:雅芳纵向父母与子女研究(ALSPAC;N=5911)、苏格兰世代研究(GS;N=17461)和 UKB 的一个独立子集(N=245947)。回归模型和生存分析测试了 PRS 是否与酒精相关的结果相关。
在 COGA 中,AUDIT-P PRS 与酒精依赖、AUD 症状计数、最大饮酒量(R2=0.47-0.68%,p=2.0×10-8-1.0×10-10)和酒精依赖发作的可能性增加有关(危险比=1.15,p=4.7×10-8);AUDIT-C PRS 不是任何表型的独立预测因子。在 ALSPAC 中,AUDIT-C PRS 与酒精依赖相关(R2=0.96%,p=4.8×10-6)。在 GS 中,AUDIT-C PRS 是每周饮酒量的更好预测因子(R2=0.27%,p=5.5×10-11),而 AUDIT-P PRS 与问题饮酒更相关(R2=0.40%,p=9.0×10-7)。最后,AUDIT-P PRS 与 UKB 子集中基于 ICD 的酒精相关障碍相关(R2=0.18%,p<2.0×10-16)。
AUDIT-P PRS 与基于人群和确定的队列中的一系列与酒精相关的表型相关,而 AUDIT-C PRS 在确定的队列中的实用性较低。我们表明,AUDIT-P 与使用和滥用均具有遗传相关性,并证明了确定方案对 PRS 分析的影响。