Subtyping Schizophrenia Using Psychiatric Polygenic Scores
Lu, Y.; Kowalec, K.; Song, J.; Karlsson, R.; Harder, A.; Giusti-Rodriguez, P.; Sullivan, P. F.; Yao, S.
Show abstract
BackgroundSubtyping schizophrenia can disentangle heterogeneity and help with treatment decision- making. However, current schizophrenia subtypes have not demonstrated adequate clinical utility, limited by sample size, suboptimal clustering methods, and choice of clustering input. Polygenic scores (PGS) reflect the genetic risk of phenotypes including comorbidities and are available before treatment, making them candidate clustering input. MethodsWe derived PGS for schizophrenia, autism spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder type-1, depression, and intelligence in 4,915 schizophrenia cases with register linkage. We randomly divided the sample into discovery and replication partitions and applied a novel clustering workflow on both: preprocessing PGS, feature extraction with uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP), and clustering with density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise (DBSCAN). After replication, we re-performed clustering on the entire sample and evaluated treatment-relevant variables of medication and hospitalization (extracted from registers) across clusters. OutcomesWe identified five well-replicated PGS clusters. Cluster 1 (26% of entire sample) with generally lower PGS, had the least use of antipsychotics (including clozapine), and fewer outpatient visits. Cluster 2 (48%) with generally higher PGS, especially schizophrenia PGS, had more prescriptions of antipsychotics including clozapine and longer treatment with clozapine. Each featured by specific PGS, clusters 3 (high IQ-PGS, 11%), 4 (high ASD-PGS, 8%), 5 (high BIP-PGS, 7%) showed sub-threshold level significance in the corresponding phenotypic measures but did not differ significantly in the treatment-relevant variables. Solely categorizing the patients with SCZ-PGS did not generate any significant patterns in the phenotypic and treatment-relevant variables. InterpretationThe results suggest that combinations of PGS of brain disorders and traits can provide clinically relevant clusters, offering a direction for future research on schizophrenia subtyping. Future replications in independent samples are required. The workflow can be generalized to other disorders and with mechanism-informed PGS.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Increased Prevalence of Rare Copy Number Variants in Treatment-Resistant Psychosis 96%
- A 10-Year Longitudinal Study of Brain Cortical Thickness in People with First-Episode Psychosis using Normative Models 96%
- Evidence from imaging resilience genetics for a protective mechanism against schizophrenia in the ventral visual pathway 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Molecular phenotypes associated with antipsychotic drugs in the human caudate nucleus 96%
- Genetic Analysis of Psychosis Biotypes: Shared Ancestry-Adjusted Polygenic Risk and Unique Genomic Associations 96%
- Molecular and micro-architectural mapping of abnormal gray matter developmental trajectories in psychosis 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Connectivity patterns of task-specific brain networks allow individual prediction of cognitive symptom dimension of schizophrenia and link to molecular architecture 95%
- Genomic stratification of clozapine prescription patterns using schizophrenia polygenic scores 95%
- Sex differences in the human brain transcriptome of cases with schizophrenia 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating the role of common risk variation in the recurrence risk of schizophrenia in multiplex schizophrenia families 96%
- Pairwise genetic meta-analyses between schizophrenia and substance dependence phenotypes reveals novel association signals 96%
- Meta-analysis of the brain transcriptomes of multiple genetic mouse models of schizophrenia highlights dysregulation in striatum and thalamus 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.