4.8 Article

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and lifetime cannabis use: genetic overlap and causality

期刊

MOLECULAR PSYCHIATRY
卷 25, 期 10, 页码 2493-2503

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-018-0339-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [U54 EB020403] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [U01 MH109539, R01 MH101519, U01 MH109536, R01 MH094469] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a severely impairing neurodevelopmental disorder with a prevalence of 5% in children and adolescents and of 2.5% in adults. Comorbid conditions in ADHD play a key role in symptom progression, disorder course and outcome. ADHD is associated with a significantly increased risk for substance use, abuse and dependence. ADHD and cannabis use are partly determined by genetic factors; the heritability of ADHD is estimated at 70-80% and of cannabis use initiation at 40-48%. In this study, we used summary statistics from the largest available meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of ADHD (n = 53,293) and lifetime cannabis use (n = 32,330) to gain insights into the genetic overlap and causal relationship of these two traits. We estimated their genetic correlation to ber(2) = 0.29 (P = 1.63 x 10(-5)) and identified four new genome-wide significant loci in a cross-trait analysis: two in a single variant association analysis (rs145108385,P = 3.30 x 10(-8)and rs4259397,P = 4.52 x 10(-8)) and two in a gene-based association analysis (WDPCP,P = 9.67 x 10(-7)andZNF251,P = 1.62 x 10(-6)). Using a two-sample Mendelian randomization approach we found support that ADHD is causal for lifetime cannabis use, with an odds ratio of 7.9 for cannabis use in individuals with ADHD in comparison to individuals without ADHD (95% CI (3.72, 15.51),P = 5.88 x 10(-5)). These results substantiate the temporal relationship between ADHD and future cannabis use and reinforce the need to consider substance misuse in the context of ADHD in clinical interventions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据