Investigating the polygenic relationship between heavy cannabis use and schizophrenia in the All of Us Research Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Decades of research have identified a strong association between heavy cannabis use and schizophrenia (SCZ), with evidence of correlated genetic factors. However, many studies on the genetic relationship between cannabis use and psychosis have lacked data on both phenotypes within the same individuals, creating challenges due to unmeasured confounding. We aimed to address this by using multimodal data from the All of Us Research Program, which contains genetic data as well as information on SCZ diagnosis and cannabis use. METHODS: We tested the association between cannabis use disorder (CUD) and SCZ polygenic scores (PGSs) with SCZ and heavy cannabis use. We tested models where both CUD and SCZ PGSs were included as joint predictors of heavy cannabis use and SCZ case status. We defined three sets of cases based on comorbidities: relaxed (assessing for only the primary condition), strict (excluding comorbidity), and dual-comorbidity. RESULTS: CUD and SCZ polygenic liability were independently associated with heavy cannabis use; the SCZ PGS effect was very modest. In contrast, both SCZ and CUD PGSs were independently associated with SCZ, with independent significant effects of CUD PGS. Polygenic liability to CUD was associated with SCZ in individuals without a documented history of cannabis use, suggesting widespread pleiotropy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings underscore the need for comprehensive models that integrate genetic risk factors for heavy cannabis use to advance our understanding of SCZ etiology.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".