Monson Eric T, Colbert Sarah M C, Andreassen Ole A, Ayinde Olatunde O, Bejan Cosmin A, Ceja Zuriel, Coon Hilary, DiBlasi Emily, Izotova Anastasia, Kaufman Erin A, Koromina Maria, Myung Woojae, Nurnberger John I, Serretti Alessandro, Smoller Jordan W, Stein Murray B, Zai Clement C, Aslan Mihaela, Barr Peter B, Bigdeli Tim B, Harvey Philip D, Kimbrel Nathan A, Patel Pujan R, Ruderfer Douglas, Docherty Anna R, Mullins Niamh, Mann J John
Department of Psychiatry, University of Utah Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine.
Huntsman Mental Health Institute.
medRxiv. 2024 Jul 29:2024.07.27.24311110. doi: 10.1101/2024.07.27.24311110.
Standardized definitions of suicidality phenotypes, including suicidal ideation (SI), attempt (SA), and death (SD) are a critical step towards improving understanding and comparison of results in suicide research. The complexity of suicidality contributes to heterogeneity in phenotype definitions, impeding evaluation of clinical and genetic risk factors across studies and efforts to combine samples within consortia. Here, we present expert and data-supported recommendations for defining suicidality and control phenotypes to facilitate merging current/legacy samples with definition variability and aid future sample creation.
A subgroup of clinician researchers and experts from the Suicide Workgroup of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) reviewed existing PGC definitions for SI, SA, SD, and control groups and generated preliminary consensus guidelines for instrument-derived and international classification of disease (ICD) data. ICD lists were validated in two independent datasets (N = 9,151 and 12,394).
Recommendations are provided for evaluated instruments for SA and SI, emphasizing selection of lifetime measures phenotype-specific wording. Recommendations are also provided for defining SI and SD from ICD data. As the SA ICD definition is complex, SA code list recommendations were validated against instrument results with sensitivity (range = 15.4% to 80.6%), specificity (range = 67.6% to 97.4%), and positive predictive values (range = 0.59-0.93) reported.
Best-practice guidelines are presented for the use of existing information to define SI/SA/SD in consortia research. These proposed definitions are expected to facilitate more homogeneous data aggregation for genetic and multisite studies. Future research should involve refinement, improved generalizability, and validation in diverse populations.
自杀性表型的标准化定义,包括自杀意念(SI)、自杀未遂(SA)和自杀死亡(SD),是提高对自杀研究结果的理解和比较的关键一步。自杀性的复杂性导致表型定义的异质性,阻碍了跨研究对临床和遗传风险因素的评估以及联盟内样本合并的工作。在此,我们提出基于专家意见和数据支持的关于定义自杀性和对照表型的建议,以促进合并具有定义差异的当前/遗留样本,并有助于未来样本的创建。
来自精神基因组学联盟(PGC)自杀工作组的一组临床研究人员和专家回顾了PGC现有的关于SI、SA、SD和对照组的定义,并为基于工具得出的数据和国际疾病分类(ICD)数据制定了初步的共识指南。ICD列表在两个独立的数据集中进行了验证(N = 9151和12394)。
提供了关于评估SA和SI工具的建议,强调选择终生测量的表型特异性措辞。还提供了从ICD数据定义SI和SD的建议。由于SA的ICD定义很复杂,SA代码列表建议根据工具结果进行了验证,报告的敏感性范围为15.4%至80.6%,特异性范围为67.6%至97.4%,阳性预测值范围为0.59 - 0.93。
提出了在联盟研究中使用现有信息定义SI/SA/SD的最佳实践指南。这些提议的定义有望促进遗传和多中心研究中更同质化的数据汇总。未来的研究应涉及完善、提高普遍性并在不同人群中进行验证。