Omics Approaches to Investigate the Pathogenesis of Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicide is the second leading cause of death in U.S. adolescents and young adults and is generally associated with a psychiatric disorder. Suicidal behavior has a complex etiology and pathogenesis. Moderate heritability suggests genetic causes. Associations between childhood and recent life adversity indicate contributions from epigenetic factors. Genomic contributions to suicide pathogenesis remain largely unknown. This article is based on a workshop held to design strategies to identify molecular drivers of suicide neurobiology that would be putative new treatment targets. The panel determined that while bulk tissue studies provide comprehensive information, single-nucleus approaches that identify cell type-specific changes are needed. While single-nuclei techniques lack information on cytoplasm, processes, spines, and synapses, spatial multiomic technologies on intact tissue detect cell alterations specific to brain tissue layers and subregions. Because suicide has genetic and environmental drivers, multiomic approaches that combine cell type-specific epigenome, transcriptome, and proteome provide a more complete picture of pathogenesis. To determine the direction of effect of suicide risk gene variants on RNA and protein expression and how these interact with epigenetic marks, single-nuclei and spatial multiomics quantitative trait loci maps should be integrated with whole-genome sequencing and genome-wide association databases. The workshop concluded with a recommendation for the formation of an international suicide biology consortium that will bring together brain banks and investigators with expertise in cutting-edge omics technologies to delineate the biology of suicide and identify novel potential treatment targets to be tested in cellular and animal models for drug and biomarker discovery to guide suicide prevention.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".