Search

BackgroundNegative life events are strongly associated with the development of depression. However, the etiologic relationship between life events and depression is complex. Evidence suggests that life events can cause depression, and depression increases the risk for life events. Additionally, third factors influencing both phenotypes may be involved. In this work we sought to disentangle these relationships using a genetically informative longitudinal design.MethodAdult female twins (n=536, including 281 twin pairs) were followed up for measurements of negative life event exposure and depressive symptoms. Four follow-ups were completed, each approximately 3 months apart. Model fitting was carried out using the Mx program.ResultsThe best-fitting model included causal paths from life events to depressive symptoms for genetic and shared environmental risk factors, whereas paths from depressive symptoms to life events were apparent for shared environmental factors. Shared latent influence on both phenotypes was found for individual-specific effects.ConclusionsLife events and depressive symptoms have complex inter-relationships that differ across sources of variance. The results of the model, if replicated, indicate that reducing life event exposure would reduce depressive symptoms and that lowering depressive symptoms would decrease the occurrence of negative life events.

BackgroundTraumatic life events are generally more common in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) than in non-patients or patients with other personality disorders. This study investigates whether exposure to life events moderates the genetic architecture of BPD features. As the presence of genotype–environment correlation (rGE) can lead to spurious findings of genotype–environment interaction (G×E), we also test whether BPD features increase the likelihood of exposure to life events.MethodThe extent to which an individual is at risk to develop BPD was assessed with the Personality Assessment Inventory – Borderline features scale (PAI-BOR). Life events under study were a divorce/break-up, traffic accident, violent assault, sexual assault, robbery and job loss. Data were available for 5083 twins and 1285 non-twin siblings. Gene–environment interaction and correlation were assessed by using structural equation modelling (SEM) and the co-twin control design.ResultsThere was evidence for both gene–environment interaction and correlation. Additive genetic influences on BPD features interacted with the exposure to sexual assault, with genetic variance being lower in exposed individuals. In individuals who had experienced a divorce/break-up, violent assault, sexual assault or job loss, environmental variance for BPD features was higher, leading to a lower heritability of BPD features in exposed individuals. Gene–environment correlation was present for some life events. The genes that influence BPD features thus also increased the likelihood of being exposed to certain life events.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this study is the first to test the joint effect of genetic and environmental influences and the exposure to life events on BPD features in the general population. Our results indicate the importance of both genetic vulnerability and life events.

SummaryBackgroundMost of our knowledge about borderline personality disorder features has been obtained through the study of clinical samples. Although these studies are important in their own right, they are limited in their ability to address certain important epidemiological and aetiological questions such as the degree to which there is a genetic influence on the manifestation of borderline personality disorder features. Though family history studies of borderline personality disorder indicate genetic influences, there have been very few twin studies and the degree of genetic influence on borderline personality disorder remains unclear.MethodData were drawn from twin samples from The Netherlands (n=3918), Belgium (n=904) and Australia (n=674). In total, data were available on 5496 twins between the ages of 18 and 86 years from 3644 families who participated in the study by completion of a mailed self-report questionnaire on borderline personality disorder features.ResultsIn all countries, females scored higher than males and there was a general tendency for younger adults to endorse more borderline personality disorder features than older adults. Model-fitting results showed that additive genetic influences explain 42% of the variation in borderline personality disorder features in both men and women and that this heritability estimate is similar across The Netherlands, Belgium and Australia. Unique environmental influences explain the remaining 58% of the variance.ConclusionGenetic factors play a role in individual differences in borderline personality disorder features in Western society.

Background. Many studies suggest that pregnancy and birth complications (PBCs) are environmental risk factors for child psychopathology. However, it is not known whether the effects of PBCs occur independently of genetic predisposition. The current study examined the possibility of gene–environment interaction in a twin design.Method. The East Flanders Prospective Twin Survey prospectively records the births of all twin pairs born in East Flanders, Belgium. The current study included 760 twin pairs aged 6–17 years. Multilevel regression analysis was used to assess the effects of several PBCs collected around the time of birth. Using structural equation modelling, ACE models assuming additive genetic (A), shared environmental (C) and unique environmental (E) influences, were compared in order to examine whether the contribution of genetic factors to parent-rated child problem behaviour varied as a function of exposure to dichotomously and continuously defined PBCs.Results. A main independent effect of lower birth weight, corrected for gestational age (small for gestational age – SGA), on child problem behaviour was found. In addition, there was an interaction between genetic influence and SGA, in that being smaller for gestational age resulted in less influence of additive genetic factors on individual differences in problem behaviour.Conclusions. Results are suggestive of negative gene–birth weight interaction. Children who are SGA are less sensitive to the genetic effects, and those with high genetic vulnerability are less sensitive to the effects of being SGA in bringing about post-natal mental health effects.

BackgroundGenes for depression may act by making individuals more sensitive to childhood trauma. Given that childhood adversity is a risk factor for adult psychosis and symptoms of depression and psychosis tend to cluster within individuals and families, the aim was to examine whether the association between childhood adversity and psychotic-like symptoms is moderated by genetic liability for depression. A secondary aim was to determine to what degree a depression-related increase in stress sensitivity or depressive symptoms themselves occasioned the moderating effect.MethodFemale twins (n=508) completed both prospective and retrospective questionnaires regarding childhood adversity [the Symptom Checklist-90 – Revised (SCL-90-R) and SCID-I (psychotic symptoms)] and psychotic trait liability [the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)]. Stress sensitivity was indexed by appraisals of event-related stress and negative affect (NA) in the flow of daily life, assessed with momentary assessment technology for five consecutive days. Multilevel regression analyses were used to examine moderation of childhood adversity by genetic liability for depression in the prediction of follow-up psychotic experiences.ResultsThe effect of childhood adversity was significantly moderated by genetic vulnerability for depression in the model of both follow-up psychotic experiences (SCL-90-R) and follow-up psychotic trait liability (CAPE). The moderation by genetic liability was mediated by depressive experience but not by stress sensitivity.ConclusionsGenetic liability for depression may potentiate the pathway from childhood adversity to psychotic-like symptoms through dysfunctional emotional processing of anomalous experiences associated with childhood trauma.

Background Previous work suggests that daily life stress-sensitivity may be an intermediary phenotype associated with both genetic risk for depression and developmental stress exposures. In the current analysis we hypothesized that genetic risk for depression and three environmental exposures over the course of development [prenatal stress, childhood adversity and adult negative life events (NLEs)] combine synergistically to produce the phenotype of stress-sensitivity. Method Twin pairs (n=279) participated in a momentary assessment study using the Experience Sampling Method (ESM), collecting appraisals of stress and negative affect (NA) in the flow of daily life. Prospective data on birthweight and gestational age, questionnaire data on childhood adversity and recent NLEs, and interview data on depression were used in the analyses. Daily life stress-sensitivity was modelled as the effect of ESM daily life stress appraisals on ESM NA. Results All three developmental stress exposures were moderated by genetic vulnerability, modelled as dizygotic (DZ) or monozygotic (MZ) co-twin depression status, in their effect on daily life stress-sensitivity. Effects were much stronger in participants with MZ co-twin depression and a little stronger in participants with DZ co-twin depression status, compared to those without co-twin depression. NLE main effects and NLE genetic moderation were reducible to birthweight and childhood adversity. Conclusions The findings are consistent with the hypothesis that adult daily life stress-sensitivity is the result of sensitization processes initiated by developmental stress exposures. Genes associated with depression may act by accelerating the process of stress-induced sensitization.