Identification of Two Heritable Cross-Disorder Endophenotypes for Tourette Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Phenotypic heterogeneity in Tourette syndrome is partly due to complex genetic relationships among Tourette syndrome, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Identifying symptom-based endophenotypes across diagnoses may aid gene-finding efforts. METHOD: Assessments for Tourette syndrome, OCD, and ADHD symptoms were conducted in a discovery sample of 3,494 individuals recruited for genetic studies. Symptom-level factor and latent class analyses were conducted in Tourette syndrome families and replicated in an independent sample of 882 individuals. Classes were characterized by comorbidity rates and proportion of parents included. Heritability and polygenic load associated with Tourette syndrome, OCD, and ADHD were estimated. RESULTS: The authors identified two cross-disorder symptom-based phenotypes across analyses: symmetry (symmetry, evening up, checking obsessions; ordering, arranging, counting, writing-rewriting compulsions, repetitive writing tics) and disinhibition (uttering syllables/words, echolalia/palilalia, coprolalia/copropraxia, and obsessive urges to offend/mutilate/be destructive). Heritability estimates for both endophenotypes were high and statistically significant (disinhibition factor=0.35, SE=0.03; symmetry factor=0.39, SE=0.03; symmetry class=0.38, SE=0.10). Mothers of Tourette syndrome probands had high rates of symmetry (49%) but not disinhibition (5%). Polygenic risk scores derived from a Tourette syndrome genome-wide association study (GWAS) were significantly associated with symmetry, while risk scores derived from an OCD GWAS were not. OCD polygenic risk scores were significantly associated with disinhibition, while Tourette syndrome and ADHD risk scores were not. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses identified two heritable endophenotypes related to Tourette syndrome that cross traditional diagnostic boundaries. The symmetry phenotype correlated with Tourette syndrome polygenic load and was present in otherwise Tourette-unaffected mothers, suggesting that this phenotype may reflect additional Tourette syndrome (rather than OCD) genetic liability that is not captured by traditional DSM-based diagnoses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".