The association between cannabis and psychosis is established, but the role of underlying genetics is unclear. We used data from the EU-GEI case-control study and UK Biobank to examine the independent and combined effect of heavy cannabis use and schizophrenia polygenic risk score (PRS) on risk for psychosis.

Genome-wide association study summary statistics from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium and the Genomic Psychiatry Cohort were used to calculate schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder (CUD) PRS for 1098 participants from the EU-GEI study and 143600 from the UK Biobank. Both datasets had information on cannabis use.

In both samples, schizophrenia PRS and cannabis use independently increased risk of psychosis. Schizophrenia PRS was not associated with patterns of cannabis use in the EU-GEI cases or controls or UK Biobank cases. It was associated with lifetime and daily cannabis use among UK Biobank participants without psychosis, but the effect was substantially reduced when CUD PRS was included in the model. In the EU-GEI sample, regular users of high-potency cannabis had the highest odds of being a case independently of schizophrenia PRS (OR daily use high-potency cannabis adjusted for PRS = 5.09, 95% CI 3.08–8.43, p = 3.21 × 10−10). We found no evidence of interaction between schizophrenia PRS and patterns of cannabis use.

Regular use of high-potency cannabis remains a strong predictor of psychotic disorder independently of schizophrenia PRS, which does not seem to be associated with heavy cannabis use. These are important findings at a time of increasing use and potency of cannabis worldwide.

Educational attainment (EduA) is correlated with life outcomes, and EduA itself is influenced by both cognitive and non-cognitive factors. A recent study performed a ‘genome-wide association study (GWAS) by subtraction,’ subtracting genetic effects for cognitive performance from an educational attainment GWAS to create orthogonal ‘cognitive’ and ‘non-cognitive’ factors. These cognitive and non-cognitive factors showed associations with behavioral health outcomes in adults; however, whether these correlations are present during childhood is unclear.

Using data from up to 5517 youth (ages 9–11) of European ancestry from the ongoing Adolescent Brain Cognitive DevelopmentSM Study, we examined associations between polygenic scores (PGS) for cognitive and non-cognitive factors and cognition, risk tolerance, decision-making & personality, substance initiation, psychopathology, and brain structure (e.g. volume, fractional anisotropy [FA]). Within-sibling analyses estimated whether observed genetic associations may be consistent with direct genetic effects.

Both PGSs were associated with greater cognition and lower impulsivity, drive, and severity of psychotic-like experiences. The cognitive PGS was also associated with greater risk tolerance, increased odds of choosing delayed reward, and decreased likelihood of ADHD and bipolar disorder; the non-cognitive PGS was associated with lack of perseverance and reward responsiveness. Cognitive PGS were more strongly associated with larger regional cortical volumes; non-cognitive PGS were more strongly associated with higher FA. All associations were characterized by small effects.

While the small sizes of these associations suggest that they are not effective for prediction within individuals, cognitive and non-cognitive PGS show unique associations with phenotypes in childhood at the population level.

Although the link between alcohol involvement and behavioral phenotypes (e.g. impulsivity, negative affect, executive function [EF]) is well-established, the directionality of these associations, specificity to stages of alcohol involvement, and extent of shared genetic liability remain unclear. We estimate longitudinal associations between transitions among alcohol milestones, behavioral phenotypes, and indices of genetic risk.

Data came from the Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (n = 3681; ages 11–36). Alcohol transitions (first: drink, intoxication, alcohol use disorder [AUD] symptom, AUD diagnosis), internalizing, and externalizing phenotypes came from the Semi-Structured Assessment for the Genetics of Alcoholism. EF was measured with the Tower of London and Visual Span Tasks. Polygenic scores (PGS) were computed for alcohol-related and behavioral phenotypes. Cox models estimated associations among PGS, behavior, and alcohol milestones.

Externalizing phenotypes (e.g. conduct disorder symptoms) were associated with future initiation and drinking problems (hazard ratio (HR)⩾1.16). Internalizing (e.g. social anxiety) was associated with hazards for progression from first drink to severe AUD (HR⩾1.55). Initiation and AUD were associated with increased hazards for later depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation (HR⩾1.38), and initiation was associated with increased hazards for future conduct symptoms (HR = 1.60). EF was not associated with alcohol transitions. Drinks per week PGS was linked with increased hazards for alcohol transitions (HR⩾1.06). Problematic alcohol use PGS increased hazards for suicidal ideation (HR = 1.20).

Behavioral markers of addiction vulnerability precede and follow alcohol transitions, highlighting dynamic, bidirectional relationships between behavior and emerging addiction.

While cannabis use is a well-established risk factor for psychosis, little is known about any association between reasons for first using cannabis (RFUC) and later patterns of use and risk of psychosis.

We used data from 11 sites of the multicentre European Gene-Environment Interaction (EU-GEI) case–control study. 558 first-episode psychosis patients (FEPp) and 567 population controls who had used cannabis and reported their RFUC.

We ran logistic regressions to examine whether RFUC were associated with first-episode psychosis (FEP) case–control status. Path analysis then examined the relationship between RFUC, subsequent patterns of cannabis use, and case–control status.

Controls (86.1%) and FEPp (75.63%) were most likely to report ‘because of friends’ as their most common RFUC. However, 20.1% of FEPp compared to 5.8% of controls reported: ‘to feel better’ as their RFUC (χ2 = 50.97; p < 0.001). RFUC ‘to feel better’ was associated with being a FEPp (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.03–2.95) while RFUC ‘with friends’ was associated with being a control (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37–0.83). The path model indicated an association between RFUC ‘to feel better’ with heavy cannabis use and with FEPp-control status.

Both FEPp and controls usually started using cannabis with their friends, but more patients than controls had begun to use ‘to feel better’. People who reported their reason for first using cannabis to ‘feel better’ were more likely to progress to heavy use and develop a psychotic disorder than those reporting ‘because of friends’.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) and schizophrenia (SCZ) frequently co-occur, and large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified significant genetic correlations between these disorders.

We used the largest published GWAS for AUD (total cases = 77 822) and SCZ (total cases = 46 827) to identify genetic variants that influence both disorders (with either the same or opposite direction of effect) and those that are disorder specific.

We identified 55 independent genome-wide significant single nucleotide polymorphisms with the same direction of effect on AUD and SCZ, 8 with robust effects in opposite directions, and 98 with disorder-specific effects. We also found evidence for 12 genes whose pleiotropic associations with AUD and SCZ are consistent with mediation via gene expression in the prefrontal cortex. The genetic covariance between AUD and SCZ was concentrated in genomic regions functional in brain tissues (p = 0.001).

Our findings provide further evidence that SCZ shares meaningful genetic overlap with AUD.

Studies suggest that alcohol consumption and alcohol use disorders have distinct genetic backgrounds.

We examined whether polygenic risk scores (PRS) for consumption and problem subscales of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C, AUDIT-P) in the UK Biobank (UKB; N = 121 630) correlate with alcohol outcomes in four independent samples: an ascertained cohort, the Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA; N = 6850), and population-based cohorts: Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC; N = 5911), Generation Scotland (GS; N = 17 461), and an independent subset of UKB (N = 245 947). Regression models and survival analyses tested whether the PRS were associated with the alcohol-related outcomes.

In COGA, AUDIT-P PRS was associated with alcohol dependence, AUD symptom count, maximum drinks (R2 = 0.47–0.68%, p = 2.0 × 10−8–1.0 × 10−10), and increased likelihood of onset of alcohol dependence (hazard ratio = 1.15, p = 4.7 × 10−8); AUDIT-C PRS was not an independent predictor of any phenotype. In ALSPAC, the AUDIT-C PRS was associated with alcohol dependence (R2 = 0.96%, p = 4.8 × 10−6). In GS, AUDIT-C PRS was a better predictor of weekly alcohol use (R2 = 0.27%, p = 5.5 × 10−11), while AUDIT-P PRS was more associated with problem drinking (R2 = 0.40%, p = 9.0 × 10−7). Lastly, AUDIT-P PRS was associated with ICD-based alcohol-related disorders in the UKB subset (R2 = 0.18%, p < 2.0 × 10−16).

AUDIT-P PRS was associated with a range of alcohol-related phenotypes across population-based and ascertained cohorts, while AUDIT-C PRS showed less utility in the ascertained cohort. We show that AUDIT-P is genetically correlated with both use and misuse and demonstrate the influence of ascertainment schemes on PRS analyses.