Polygenic dissection of suicidal thoughts and behaviours in high-risk mood-disorder cohorts.

IF 10.4 1区 医学 Q1 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Zuriel Ceja, Luis M García-Marín, Ian B Hickie, Nicholas G Martin, Sarah E Medland, Miguel E Rentería, Alexis C Edwards
{"title":"Polygenic dissection of suicidal thoughts and behaviours in high-risk mood-disorder cohorts.","authors":"Zuriel Ceja, Luis M García-Marín, Ian B Hickie, Nicholas G Martin, Sarah E Medland, Miguel E Rentería, Alexis C Edwards","doi":"10.1038/s41380-026-03952-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STB) span ideation (SI), attempt (SA), and death (SD), yet the factors distinguishing ideation from attempt remain poorly understood. Genome-wide studies suggest shared yet partially distinct genetic liabilities. However, few analyses have tested the differential contributions of SI-, SA-, and SD-related genetic liability across STB phenotypes, particularly in high-risk mood-disorder populations. We analysed up to 17,622 participants from the Australian Genetics of Depression Study and the Australian Genetics of Bipolar Disorder study, jointly modelling polygenic scores (PGS) for SI, SA, and SD across mutually exclusive STB phenotypes using multinomial regression, alongside dimensional outcomes, age of onset, and the ideation-to-attempt transition. SI-PGS and SA-PGS showed independent and distinct associations: SI-PGS showed reduced odds of SI-only but increased odds of SI + SA, and SA-PGS robustly predicted attempt-related outcomes. Transition models captured the clearest clinical signal: SA-PGS predicted a 23% higher odds of attempt among ideators, with absolute risk differences of 9-12% between the top and bottom deciles-larger than those of the onset models (5-7%). Predictive discrimination improved incrementally (ΔAUC ≈ 0.02-0.03; ΔC ≈ 0.01). SD-PGS showed no robust effects. Sex-stratified analyses yielded broadly consistent findings across sexes. These findings support ideation-to-action models at the genetic level, demonstrating partially distinct polygenic liabilities for ideation and attempt. Although absolute predictive utility remains modest, these results indicate that PGS sharpen the stratification of ideators at risk of attempt, providing incremental value for future integrative risk models that combine genetics with mood disorders and environmental predictors.</p>","PeriodicalId":19008,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-026-03952-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STB) span ideation (SI), attempt (SA), and death (SD), yet the factors distinguishing ideation from attempt remain poorly understood. Genome-wide studies suggest shared yet partially distinct genetic liabilities. However, few analyses have tested the differential contributions of SI-, SA-, and SD-related genetic liability across STB phenotypes, particularly in high-risk mood-disorder populations. We analysed up to 17,622 participants from the Australian Genetics of Depression Study and the Australian Genetics of Bipolar Disorder study, jointly modelling polygenic scores (PGS) for SI, SA, and SD across mutually exclusive STB phenotypes using multinomial regression, alongside dimensional outcomes, age of onset, and the ideation-to-attempt transition. SI-PGS and SA-PGS showed independent and distinct associations: SI-PGS showed reduced odds of SI-only but increased odds of SI + SA, and SA-PGS robustly predicted attempt-related outcomes. Transition models captured the clearest clinical signal: SA-PGS predicted a 23% higher odds of attempt among ideators, with absolute risk differences of 9-12% between the top and bottom deciles-larger than those of the onset models (5-7%). Predictive discrimination improved incrementally (ΔAUC ≈ 0.02-0.03; ΔC ≈ 0.01). SD-PGS showed no robust effects. Sex-stratified analyses yielded broadly consistent findings across sexes. These findings support ideation-to-action models at the genetic level, demonstrating partially distinct polygenic liabilities for ideation and attempt. Although absolute predictive utility remains modest, these results indicate that PGS sharpen the stratification of ideators at risk of attempt, providing incremental value for future integrative risk models that combine genetics with mood disorders and environmental predictors.

Abstract Image

高危情绪障碍人群自杀念头和行为的多基因剖析。
自杀想法和行为(STB)跨越了意念(SI)、企图(SA)和死亡(SD),然而区分意念和企图的因素仍然知之甚少。全基因组研究表明,它们有共同但部分不同的遗传责任。然而,很少有分析测试了STB表型中SI-、SA-和sd相关遗传倾向性的差异贡献,特别是在高危情绪障碍人群中。我们分析了来自澳大利亚抑郁症遗传学研究和澳大利亚双相情感障碍遗传学研究的17,622名参与者,使用多项回归联合建模了相互排斥的STB表型中SI、SA和SD的多基因评分(PGS),以及维度结果、发病年龄和想法到尝试的转变。SI- pgs和SA- pgs表现出独立且明显的相关性:SI- pgs显示SI-单纯的几率降低,但SI + SA的几率增加,SA- pgs强有力地预测了与尝试相关的结果。过渡模型捕捉到了最清晰的临床信号:SA-PGS预测,在意念者中,企图自杀的几率要高出23%,顶端和底部十分之一之间的绝对风险差异为9-12%,比起始模型(5-7%)要大。预测判别逐渐提高(ΔAUC≈0.02-0.03;ΔC≈0.01)。SD-PGS无明显效果。性别分层分析在两性之间得出了大致一致的结果。这些发现在遗传水平上支持了从概念到行动的模型,证明了部分不同的概念和尝试的多基因责任。尽管绝对预测效用仍然不大,但这些结果表明,PGS强化了有尝试风险的想法者的分层,为未来将遗传学与情绪障碍和环境预测因素结合起来的综合风险模型提供了增加的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Molecular Psychiatry
Molecular Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
20.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
459
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Molecular Psychiatry focuses on publishing research that aims to uncover the biological mechanisms behind psychiatric disorders and their treatment. The journal emphasizes studies that bridge pre-clinical and clinical research, covering cellular, molecular, integrative, clinical, imaging, and psychopharmacology levels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书