Genome-wide association study of borderline personality disorder identifies 11 loci and highlights shared risk with mental and somatic disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted the largest genome-wide meta-analysis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) to date, with a discovery sample of 12,339 cases and 1,041,717 controls, and a replication study of 685 cases and 107,750 controls (all participants of European ancestry). We identified 11 independent associated genomic loci, and nine risk genes in the gene-based analysis. We observed a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) heritability of 17.3% and derived polygenic scores (PGS) predicted 4.6% of the phenotypic variance in BPD on the liability scale. BPD showed the strongest positive genetic correlations with GWAS of posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, antisocial behavior, and measures of suicide and self-harm. Phenome-wide association analyses using BPD-PGS confirmed these associations and additionally revealed associations with general medical conditions including obstructive pulmonary disease and diabetes. The present analyses highlight BPD as a polygenic disorder, with the genetic risk showing substantial overlap with psychiatric and physical health conditions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".