Coombes, Brandon J

Abstract Rationale Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) is characterized by chronic progressive pulmonary fibrosis and high mortality. Genetic markers, summarized into a polygenic risk score (PRS), associate with IPF in well-phenotyped research cohorts. Objectives To evaluate the performance of the PRS using real-world data from routinely captured electronic healthcare records. Methods We conducted an observational study evaluating the association of a PRS for IPF with electronic healthcare record diagnosis of IPF as well as lung transplant-free survival in four independent cohorts; the Mass General Brigham Biobank (MGBB), Mayo Clinic Biobank (MCBB), Mayo Clinic Tapestry Cohort (Tapestry), and U.K. Biobank (UKBB). We used multivariable logistic regression and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for age, gender, and principal components of ancestry. The cohorts then underwent fixed and random effects meta-analysis. Measurements and Main Results Of 37,709; 44,195; 43,202; and 447,422 participants from MGBB, MCBB, Tapestry and UKBB respectively, 1,015 (2.7%) 2,879 (6.5%), 1,310 (3.0%), and 2,742 (0.6%) participants had an IPF diagnosis. Meta-analysis demonstrated a high-risk PRS associated with IPF diagnosis, OR 2.88 (95%CI 2.41-3.44) compared to all other individuals. A high-risk PRS also associated with the composite endpoint of mortality or lung transplant among those with an IPF diagnosis, HR 1.23(95%CI 1.11-1.35) compared to all other individuals. Conclusions A PRS can identify those at risk for an IPF diagnosis and mortality in biobank-scale data, which may have implications for clinical decisions. Further work is necessary to evaluate the utility of adding genetics in clinical settings.

ABSTRACT Background Mood episodes in bipolar disorder (BD) follow a seasonal pattern in approximately 25% of patients. We aimed to examine the associations of specific seasonality patterns in BD with various clinical phenotypes and treatment‐related outcomes. Methods Patients from the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Disorder Biobank with available seasonality data were included in the study. Among those reporting any seasonality, participants were further categorized into four seasonality groups: fall/winter depression, spring/summer (hypo)mania, biphasic (fall/winter depression with spring/summer (hypo)mania), and equinoctial seasonality (any mood episode occurring in spring or fall). Regression models were used, treating seasonality patterns as the predictor of clinical phenotypes (BD subtype, early onset, history of psychosis, suicide attempt, rapid cycling), lifetime medication exposure (number of unique antidepressants, antipsychotics, and any psychotropics) and treatment response to mood stabilizers (Alda A score). Results Among 1702 patients with BD (61.5% female, mean age = 41.43 ± 14.73 years), 44.6% reported seasonal mood episodes. Individuals with any seasonality were more likely to have BD‐I (OR = 1.29, p = 0.024), early onset (OR = 1.29, p = 0.026), exposure to higher lifetime number of antipsychotics (IRR = 1.20, p < 0.001) and any psychotropics (IRR = 1.13, p < 0.001). Fall/winter depression was associated with a higher lifetime number of antidepressants (IRR = 1.18, p = 0.021), any psychotropics (IRR = 1.14, p = 0.013), worse response to lithium ( β = −0.82, p = 0.029) and all mood stabilizers ( β = −0.69, p = 0.014). Spring/summer (hypo)mania showed negative associations with rapid cycling (OR = 0.36, p < 0.001) and lifetime number of antidepressants (IRR = 0.70, p = 0.013). Equinoctial seasonality was linked to a history of psychosis (OR = 1.76, p = 0.004). Conclusion Seasonality in BD is associated with distinct clinical features and treatment‐related outcomes. Specific seasonality patterns, particularly fall/winter depression, may reflect a more complex and difficult‐to‐treat illness course. These findings highlight the need for research to better characterize seasonality subtypes beyond a binary “seasonal” vs. “non‐seasonal” classification and to explore how these patterns influence the illness course and management of BD.

Abstract Objectives To understand treatment practices for bipolar disorders (BD), this study leveraged the Global Bipolar Cohort collaborative network to investigate pharmacotherapeutic treatment patterns in multiple cohorts of well‐characterized individuals with BD in North America, Europe, and Australia. Methods Data on pharmacotherapy, demographics, diagnostic subtypes, and comorbidities were provided from each participating cohort. Individual site and regional pooled proportional meta‐analyses with generalized linear mixed methods were conducted to identify prescription patterns. Results This study included 10,351 individuals from North America ( n = 3985), Europe ( n = 3822), and Australia ( n = 2544). Overall, participants were predominantly female (60%) with BD‐I (60%; vs. BD‐II = 33%). Cross‐sectionally, mood‐stabilizing anticonvulsants (44%), second‐generation antipsychotics (42%), and antidepressants (38%) were the most prescribed medications. Lithium was prescribed in 29% of patients, primarily in the Australian (31%) and European (36%) cohorts. First‐generation antipsychotics were prescribed in 24% of the European versus 1% in the North American cohort. Antidepressant prescription rates were higher in BD‐II (47%) compared to BD‐I (35%). Major limitations were significant differences among cohorts based on inclusion/exclusion criteria, data source, and time/year of enrollment into cohort. Conclusions Mood‐stabilizing anticonvulsants, second‐generation antipsychotics, and antidepressants were the most prescribed medications suggesting prescription patterns that are not necessarily guideline concordant. Significant differences exist in the prescription practices across different geographic regions, especially the underutilization of lithium in the North American cohorts and the higher utilization of first‐generation antipsychotics in the European cohorts. There is a need to conduct future longitudinal studies to further explore these differences and their impact on outcomes, and to inform and implement evidence‐based guidelines to help improve treatment practices in BD.

Abstract There is increasing interest in individualizing treatment selection for more than 25 regulatory approved treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). Despite an inconclusive efficacy evidence base, antidepressants (ADs) are prescribed for the depressive phase of bipolar disorder with oftentimes an inadequate treatment response and or clinical concern for mood destabilization. This study explored the relationship between antidepressant response in MDD and antidepressant-associated treatment emergent mania (TEM) in bipolar disorder (BD). We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) and polygenic score analysis of TEM and tested its association with a subset of BD-I patients treated with SSRIs or SNRIs. Our results did not identify any genome-wide significant variants although, we found that a higher polygenic score (PGS) for antidepressant response in MDD was associated with higher odds of TEM in BD. Future studies with larger transdiagnostic cohorts treated with antidepressants are encouraged to identify a neurobiological mechanism associated with a spectrum of depression improvement (response- emergent mania).

Background: Risk for venous thromboembolism has a strong genetic component. Whole genome sequencing from the TOPMed program (Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine) allowed us to look for new associations, particularly rare variants missed by standard genome-wide association studies. Methods: The 3793 cases and 7834 controls (11.6% of cases were individuals of African, Hispanic/Latino, or Asian ancestry) were analyzed using a single variant approach and an aggregate gene-based approach using our primary filter (included only loss-of-function and missense variants predicted to be deleterious) and our secondary filter (included all missense variants). Results: Single variant analyses identified associations at 5 known loci. Aggregate gene-based analyses identified only PROC (odds ratio, 6.2 for carriers of rare variants; P =7.4×10 −14 ) when using our primary filter. Employing our secondary variant filter led to a smaller effect size at PROC (odds ratio, 3.8; P =1.6×10 −14 ), while excluding variants found only in rare isoforms led to a larger one (odds ratio, 7.5). Different filtering strategies improved the signal for 2 other known genes: PROS1 became significant (minimum P =1.8×10 −6 with the secondary filter), while SERPINC1 did not (minimum P =4.4×10 −5 with minor allele frequency <0.0005). Results were largely the same when restricting the analyses to include only unprovoked cases; however, one novel gene, MS4A1 , became significant ( P =4.4×10 −7 using all missense variants with minor allele frequency <0.0005). Conclusions: Here, we have demonstrated the importance of using multiple variant filtering strategies, as we detected additional genes when filtering variants based on their predicted deleteriousness, frequency, and presence on the most expressed isoforms. Our primary analyses did not identify new candidate loci; thus larger follow-up studies are needed to replicate the novel MS4A1 locus and to identify additional rare variation associated with venous thromboembolism.

AbstractTo date, bipolar disorder (BD) genetic studies and polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for BD are based primarily on populations of European descent (EUR) and lack representation from other ancestries including Latin American (LAT). Here, we describe a new LAT cohort from the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank (MCBB), a multisite collaboration with recruitment sites in the United States (EUR; 1,443 cases and 777 controls) and Mexico and Chile (LAT; 211 cases and 161 controls) and use the sample to explore the performance of a BD‐PRS in a LAT population. Using results from the largest genome‐wide association study of BD in EUR individuals, PRSice2 and LDpred2 were used to compute BD‐PRSs in the LAT and EUR samples from the MCBB. PRSs explained up to 1.4% (PRSice) and 4% (LDpred2) of the phenotypic variance on the liability scale in the LAT sample compared to 3.8% (PRSice2) and 3.4% (LDpred2) in the EUR samples. Future larger studies should further explore the differential performance of different PRS approaches across ancestries. International multisite studies, such as this one, have the potential to address diversity‐related limitations of prior genomic studies and ultimately contribute to the reduction of health disparities.

Abstract Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have become an increasingly popular approach for demonstrating polygenic influences on complex traits and for establishing common polygenic signals between different traits. PRSs are typically constructed using pruning and thresholding (P+T), but the best choice of parameters is uncertain; thus multiple settings are used and the best is chosen. Optimization can lead to inflated Type I error. Permutation procedures can correct this, but they can be computationally intensive. Alternatively, a single parameter setting can be chosen a priori for the PRS, but choosing suboptimal settings results in loss of power. We propose computing PRSs under a range of parameter settings, performing principal component analysis (PCA) on the resulting set of PRSs, and using the first PRS–PC in association tests. The first PC reweights the variants included in the PRS to achieve maximum variation over all PRS settings used. Using simulations and a real data application to study PRS association with bipolar disorder and psychosis in bipolar disorder, we compare the performance of the proposed PRS–PCA approach with a permutation test and an a priori selected p ‐value threshold. The PRS–PCA approach is simple to implement, outperforms the other strategies in most scenarios, and provides an unbiased estimate of prediction performance.

Several antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use as mood stabilizers in bipolar disorder (BD), but not all BD patients respond to these AED mood stabilizers (AED‐MSs). To identify genetic polymorphisms that contribute to the variability in AED‐MS response, we performed a discovery genome‐wide association study (GWAS) of 199 BD patients from the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Disorder Biobank. Most of these patients had been treated with the AED‐MS valproate/divalproex and/or lamotrigine. AED‐MS response was assessed using the Alda scale, which quantifies clinical improvement while accounting for potential confounding factors. We identified two genome‐wide significant single‐nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) signals that mapped to the THSD7A (rs78835388, P = 7.1E‐09) and SLC35F3 (rs114872993, P = 3.2E‐08) genes. We also identified two genes with statistically significant gene‐level associations: ABCC1 (P = 6.7E‐07; top SNP rs875740, P = 2.0E‐6), and DISP1 (P = 8.9E‐07; top SNP rs34701716, P = 8.9E‐07). THSD7A SNPs were previously found to be associated with risk for several psychiatric disorders, including BD. Both THSD7A and SLC35F3 are expressed in excitatory/glutamatergic and inhibitory/γ‐aminobutyric acidergic (GABAergic) neurons, which are targets of AED‐MSs. ABCC1 is involved in the transport of valproate and lamotrigine metabolites, and the SNPs in ABCC1 and DISP1 with the strongest evidence of association in our GWAS are strong splicing quantitative trait loci in the human gut, suggesting a possible influence on drug absorption. In conclusion, our pharmacogenomic study identified novel genetic loci that appear to contribute to AED‐MS treatment response, and may facilitate precision medicine in BD.