Association of polygenic risk scores, traumatic life events and coping strategies with war-related PTSD diagnosis and symptom severity in the South Eastern Europe (SEE)-PTSD cohort

Objectives Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is triggered by extremely stressful environmental events and characterized by high emotional distress, re-experiencing of trauma, avoidance and hypervigilance. The present study uses polygenic risk scores (PRS) derived from the UK Biobank (UKBB) mega-cohort analysis as part of the PGC PTSD GWAS effort to determine the heritable basis of PTSD in the South Eastern Europe (SEE)-PTSD cohort. We further analyzed the relation between PRS and additional disease-related variables, such as number and intensity of life events, coping, sex and age at war on PTSD and CAPS as outcome variables. Methods Association of PRS, number and intensity of life events, coping, sex and age on PTSD were calculated using logistic regression in a total of 321 subjects with current and remitted PTSD and 337 controls previously subjected to traumatic events but not having PTSD. In addition, PRS and other disease-related variables were tested for association with PTSD symptom severity, measured by the Clinician Administrated PTSD Scale (CAPS) by liner regression. To assess the relationship between the main outcomes PTSD diagnosis and symptom severity, each of the examined variables was adjusted for all other PTSD related variables. Results The categorical analysis showed significant polygenic risk in patients with remitted PTSD and the total sample, whereas no effects were found on symptom severity. Intensity of life events as well as the individual coping style were significantly associated with PTSD diagnosis in both current and remitted cases. The dimensional analyses showed as association of war-related frequency of trauma with symptom severity, whereas the intensity of trauma yielded significant results independently of trauma timing in current PTSD. Conclusions The present PRS application in the SEE-PTSD cohort confirms modest but significant polygenic risk for PTSD diagnosis. Environmental factors, mainly the intensity of traumatic life events and negative coping strategies, yielded associations with PTSD both categorically and dimensionally with more significant p-values. This suggests that, at least in the present cohort of war-related trauma, the association of environmental factors and current individual coping strategies with PTSD psychopathology was stronger than the polygenic risk

ADORA2A Gene Variation, Caffeine, and Emotional Processing: A Multi-level Interaction on Startle Reflex

There is converging evidence for genetic, biochemical, and neuropsychological factors to increase the risk for anxiety and anxiety disorders. The pathogenesis of anxiety disorders is assumed to be influenced by a complex interaction of these individual risk factors on several levels, affecting intermediate phenotypes of anxiety such as the startle reflex. Thus, in the present double-blind, placebo-controlled study we attempted to paradigmatically investigate a multi-level pathogenetic model of anxiety by testing the effect of 300 mg caffeine citrate as an antagonist at the adenosine A2A receptor vs placebo on the emotion-potentiated (unpleasant, neutral, and pleasant International Affective Picture System pictures) startle reflex in 110 healthy individuals (male=56, female=54) stratified for the adenosine A2A receptor (ADORA2A) 1976T>C polymorphism (rs5751876). In addition to the expected main effect of picture category (highest startle amplitude for unpleasant, lowest for pleasant pictures) groups across all ADORA2A 1976T>C genotype and intervention (caffeine vs placebo) groups, an interaction effect of genotype, intervention, and picture category was discerned: In ADORA2A 1976TT risk genotype carriers, highest startle magnitudes were observed after caffeine administration in response to unpleasant pictures, with this effect arising particularly from the female subgroup. Our data point to a complex, multi-level, and potentially gender-specific pathogenetic model of anxiety, with genetic and biochemical factors interactively increasing the risk of maladaptive emotional processing and thereby possibly also anxiety disorders. The present findings may eventually aid in improving primary and secondary prevention by sharpening the risk profiles of anxiety-prone individuals

Dual guidance structure for evaluation of patients with unclear diagnosis in centers for rare diseases (ZSE-DUO): study protocol for a controlled multi-center cohort study

Background: In individuals suffering from a rare disease the diagnostic process and the confirmation of a final diagnosis often extends over many years. Factors contributing to delayed diagnosis include health care professionals' limited knowledge of rare diseases and frequent (co-)occurrence of mental disorders that may complicate and delay the diagnostic process. The ZSE-DUO study aims to assess the benefits of a combination of a physician focusing on somatic aspects with a mental health expert working side by side as a tandem in the diagnostic process. Study design: This multi-center, prospective controlled study has a two-phase cohort design. Methods: Two cohorts of 682 patients each are sequentially recruited from 11 university-based German Centers for Rare Diseases (CRD): the standard care cohort (control, somatic expertise only) and the innovative care cohort (experimental, combined somatic and mental health expertise). Individuals aged 12 years and older presenting with symptoms and signs which are not explained by current diagnoses will be included. Data will be collected prior to the first visit to the CRD's outpatient clinic (T0), at the first visit (T1) and 12 months thereafter (T2). Outcomes: Primary outcome is the percentage of patients with one or more confirmed diagnoses covering the symptomatic spectrum presented. Sample size is calculated to detect a 10 percent increase from 30% in standard care to 40% in the innovative dual expert cohort. Secondary outcomes are (a) time to diagnosis/diagnoses explaining the symptomatology; (b) proportion of patients successfully referred from CRD to standard care; (c) costs of diagnosis including incremental cost effectiveness ratios; (d) predictive value of screening instruments administered at T0 to identify patients with mental disorders; (e) patients' quality of life and evaluation of care; and f) physicians' satisfaction with the innovative care approach. Conclusions: This is the first multi-center study to investigate the effects of a mental health specialist working in tandem with a somatic expert physician in CRDs. If this innovative approach proves successful, it will be made available on a larger scale nationally and promoted internationally. In the best case, ZSE-DUO can significantly shorten the time to diagnosis for a suspected rare disease