Pilot study of circulating cell-free mitochondrial DNA in relation to brain structure in youth bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial dysfunction is implicated in the neuropathology of bipolar disorder (BD). Higher circulating cell-free mitochondrial DNA (ccf-mtDNA), generally reflecting poorer mitochondrial health, has been associated with greater symptoms severity in BD. The current study examines the association of serum ccf-mtDNA and brain structure in relation to youth BD. We hypothesized that higher ccf-mtDNA will be associated with measures of lower brain structure, particularly in the BD group. METHODS: Participants included 40 youth (BD, n = 19; Control group [CG], n = 21; aged 13-20 years). Serum ccf-mtDNA levels were assayed. T1-weighted brain images were acquired using 3T-MRI. Region of interest (ROI) analyses examined prefrontal cortex (PFC) and whole brain gray matter, alongside exploratory vertex-wise analyses. Analyses examined ccf-mtDNA main-effects and ccf-mtDNA-by-diagnosis interaction effects controlling for age, sex, and intracranial volume. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in ccf-mtDNA levels between BD and CG. In ROI analyses, higher ccf-mtDNA was associated with higher PFC surface area (SA) (β = 0.32 p < 0.001) and PFC volume (β = 0.32 p = 0.002) in the overall sample. In stratified analyses, higher ccf-mtDNA was associated with higher PFC SA within both subgroups (BD: β = 0.39 p = 0.02; CG: β = 0.24 p = 0.045). Higher ccf-mtDNA was associated with higher PFC volume within the BD group (β = 0.39 p = 0.046). In vertex-wise analyses, higher ccf-mtDNA was associated with higher SA and volume in frontal clusters within the overall sample and within the BD group. There were significant ccf-mtDNA-by-diagnosis interactions in three frontal and parietal clusters, whereby higher ccf-mtDNA was associated with higher neurostructural metrics in the BD group but lower neurostructural metrics in CG. CONCLUSIONS: Contrasting our hypothesis, higher ccf-mtDNA was consistently associated with higher, rather than lower, regional neuralstructural metrics among youth with BD. While this finding may reflect a compensatory mechanism, future repeated-measures prospective studies evaluating the inter-relationship among ccf-mtDNA, mood, and brain structure across developmental epochs and illness stages are warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".