Shared genetic etiology between obsessive-compulsive disorder, obsessive-compulsive symptoms in the population, and insulin signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obsessive-compulsive symptoms (OCS) in the population have been linked to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in genetic and epidemiological studies. Insulin signaling has been implicated in OCD. We extend previous work by assessing genetic overlap between OCD, population-based OCS, and central nervous system (CNS) and peripheral insulin signaling. We conducted genome-wide association studies (GWASs) in the population-based Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort (PNC, 650 children and adolescents) of the total OCS score and six OCS factors from an exploratory factor analysis of 22 questions. Subsequently, we performed polygenic risk score (PRS)-based analysis to assess shared genetic etiologies between clinical OCD (using GWAS data from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium), the total OCS score and OCS factors. We then performed gene-set analyses with a set of OCD-linked genes centered around CNS insulin-regulated synaptic function and PRS-based analyses for five peripheral insulin signaling-related traits. For validation purposes, we explored data from the independent Spit for Science population cohort (5,047 children and adolescents). In the PNC, we found a significant shared genetic etiology between OCD and 'guilty taboo thoughts'. In the Spit for Science cohort, we additionally observed genetic sharing between 'symmetry/counting/ordering' and 'contamination/cleaning'. The CNS insulin-linked gene-set also associated with 'symmetry/counting/ordering' in the PNC. Further, we identified genetic sharing between peripheral insulin signaling-related traits: type 2 diabetes with 'aggressive taboo thoughts', and levels of fasting insulin and 2 h glucose with OCD. In conclusion, OCD, OCS in the population and insulin-related traits share genetic risk factors, indicating a common etiological mechanism underlying somatic and psychiatric disorders.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".