Polygenic liability for schizophrenia predicts shifting-specific executive function deficits and tobacco use in a moderate drinking community sample

5Citations
Citations of this article
67Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Individuals with schizophrenia have higher lifetime rates of substance use disorders than the general population, and research suggests high comorbidity rates may be partially explained by shared genetic influences related to common underlying etiology. Moreover, deficits in executive functions are thought to be central to the diagnosis of schizophrenia and are likewise associated with alcohol and tobacco use. The current study examined the associations between schizophrenia polygenic risk scores and tobacco and alcohol use and the mediation of these associations by executive function sub-domains. Results from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium's meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies of schizophrenia were used to calculate polygenic risk scores in a sample of moderate drinkers. Schizophrenia risk scores were significantly associated with shifting-specific executive function deficits and tobacco use phenotypes. However, risk scores were not significantly associated with alcohol use and executive functions were not significantly associated with either tobacco or alcohol use. These findings extend previous research by suggesting that genetic risk for schizophrenia may be associated with specific sub-domains of executive function as well as smoking. The lack of a relation with alcohol use suggests genetic factors related to schizophrenia and executive functioning may not influence drinking in a non-disordered, social-drinking sample.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Miller, A. P., Gizer, I. R., Fleming, W. A., Otto, J. M., Deak, J. D., Martins, J. S., & Bartholow, B. D. (2019). Polygenic liability for schizophrenia predicts shifting-specific executive function deficits and tobacco use in a moderate drinking community sample. Psychiatry Research, 279, 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.06.025

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free