Disease areas:
  • drug and alcohol-related diseases
Last updated:
Author(s):
Emma C. Johnson, Sandra Sanchez-Roige, Laura Acion, Mark J. Adams, Kathleen K. Bucholz, Grace Chan, Michael J. Chao, David B. Chorlian, Danielle M. Dick, Howard J. Edenberg, Tatiana Foroud, Caroline Hayward, Jon Heron, Victor Hesselbrock, Matthew Hickman, Kenneth S. Kendler, Sivan Kinreich, John Kramer, Sally I-Chun Kuo, Samuel Kuperman, Dongbing Lai, Andrew M. McIntosh, Jacquelyn L. Meyers, Martin H. Plawecki, Bernice Porjesz, David Porteous, Marc A. Schuckit, Jinni Su, Yong Zang, Abraham A. Palmer, Arpana Agrawal, Toni-Kim Clarke, Alexis C. Edwards
Publish date:
20 January 2020
Journal:
Psychological Medicine
PubMed ID:
31955720

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies suggest that alcohol consumption and alcohol use disorders have distinct genetic backgrounds.

METHODS: 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.

RESULTS: 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).

CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Related projects

Progress in understanding the causes of major depressive disorder has been slow. Dividing depression into subtypes, a process called stratification, could ultimately lead to faster…

Institution:
University of Edinburgh, Great Britain

All projects