MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937409374 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbz019.291

T11. THE STRUCTURAL VARIANTS OF COMPLEMENT COMPONENT (C4) IN THE RISK AND CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA

2019· article· en· W2937409374 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cheng Cheng Chen, Julia Woo, Jennie G. Pouget, Clement C. Zai, James L. Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Copy-number variationC4ASchizoaffective disorderSynaptic pruningPopulationLogistic regressionPsychologyMedicinePsychosisPsychiatryBiologyInternal medicineGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schizophrenia (SCZ) is a heritable psychiatric disorder which affects approximately 1% of the population. The disease is characterized by both positive and negative symptoms, as well as declines in cognitive functioning. SCZ often becomes clinically apparent from late adolescence to early adulthood and severely impacts the quality of life. Although treatments exist, the development of preventive or curative interventions is hindered by the lack of mechanistic understanding of the pathophysiology of SCZ. The complement component 4 (C4) gene has been identified as one of the largest effect size markers for SCZ risk (Sekar et al., 2016). Sekar et al. have shown the longer version of C4A (C4AL) is linked with higher neural C4A expression which is associated with higher SCZ risk. The C4 gene discovery opened a new direction in SCZ research. This study aims to further explore the relationship between C4 structural variations and clinical characteristics in our Toronto Schizophrenia sample. 599 adults (age 18+) with SCZ or schizoaffective disorder were recruited from our CAMH hospital. Clinical and demographic information was gathered through structured clinical interviews (SCID) and chart review. The copy numbers of the C4A, C4B, C4L, and C4S in each sample were determined using ABI TaqMan copy number variation (CNV) protocol. Also, C4 CNV data on healthy controls were obtained on a small preliminary sample (n=111) from the Sekar et al. paper. Fisher’s exact test was performed to compare C4 CNV distribution between patients and controls. Linear and binomial logistic regression were performed to assess the relationship between C4 CNV and clinical characteristics of SCZ. The additive genotypic model in the analyses and sex was adjusted in the model of the age of onset. All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS software. The CNV counts of C4 structural variants in our sample ranges from 0–6, 0–5, 0–6, and 0–4 for C4A, C4B, C4L, and C4S respectively. No significant difference was observed in C4 CNV distribution between patients and healthy controls (p = 0.866, 0.795, 0.570, 0.430 for C4A, C4B, C4L, and C4S respectively). Age of onset was the only clinical characteristic that showed nominal association with C4A CNV, and the effect became more robust with sex was as a covariate (p = 0.05, p = 0.008, adjusted for sex). There was no significant association observed between C4 CNV and other clinical characteristics tested, such as symptom severity; Global Assessment of Function; and presence of symptoms such as delusions, hallucinations, disorganized speech or behavior, catatonia, alogia, avolition, inappropriate affect, and affective flattening. In the brain, C4 plays a crucial role in synaptic pruning. The process of synaptic pruning reaches a peak in late adolescence which is the same time when SCZ becomes clinically apparent. Synaptic pruning also explains the deficit of synaptic connections, as well as the cognitive decline that is commonly seen in SCZ. Sekar et al. previously identified the combination of C4A and the retroviral insertion creating - long version (C4AL) as a risk haplotype for SCZ. In our sample, we found no difference in C4 CNV distribution between patients and healthy control. Age of onset was the only clinical characteristic showed nominal significance with CA4 CNV, but the finding is contrary to the current knowledge of C4 in SCZ. Our results suggested higher C4A copy number leads to a later age of onset. The lack of significant finds could be due to the discordance in ancestry between patients and healthy controls, and small sample size. The next step is to estimate neural C4A expression using C4 structural haplotype data and explore the roles of neural C4A expression in SCZ risk and phenotypes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207