Cited by 183Schizophrenia research and treatmentCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Family-Based Analysis of Genetic Variation Underlying Psychosis-Inducing Effects of Cannabis<subtitle>Sibling Analysis and Proband Follow-up</subtitle><alt-title>Genetic Variation Underlying Cannabis Effects</alt-title>

Open access
van Winkel, Ruud·2011·Archives of General Psychiatry

Abstract

CONTEXT: Individual differences exist in sensitivity to the psychotomimetic effect of cannabis; the molecular genetic basis underlying differential sensitivity remains elusive. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether selected schizophrenia candidate single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) moderate effects of cannabis use. DESIGN: Interactions between recent cannabis use, determined by urinalysis results, and 152 SNPs in 42 candidate genes were examined in 740 unaffected siblings of 801 patients with psychosis to examine genetic moderation of the association between Structured Interview for Schizotypy-Revised positive schizotypy and recent cannabis use (at-risk paradigm). The SNPs showing Bonferroni-adjusted association in the at-risk paradigm were used in a case-only analysis in the 801 patients, as well as in a case-sibling and case-control analysis (using 419 controls) focusing on genetic moderation of developmental effects of cannabis on later psychotic disorder. SETTING: The Netherlands and Flanders, Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Eight hundred one patients with psychosis and their 740 unaffected siblings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Significant interaction between any of the selected SNPs and cannabis in the at-risk paradigm, followed by selective case-only, case-sibling, and case-control analyses. RESULTS: In the unaffected siblings, 16 SNPs in 12 genes showed significant interaction at P < .05, 3 of which survived correction for multiple testing (P < .0003), situated in AKT1 (rs2494732 and rs1130233) and LRRTM1 (rs673871). Follow-up analysis supported AKT1 rs2494732 × cannabis interaction in the case-only (β = 0.20; P = .007), case-sibling (interaction P = .040), and case-control (interaction P = .057) analyses, with individuals with C/C genotypes having an approximately 2-fold odds of being diagnosed with a psychotic disorder when having used cannabis. In the unaffected siblings, the AKT1 × cannabis interaction explained 2.2% additional variance in schizotypy in the whole sample and 19.0% additional variance in the exposed siblings with recent cannabis use. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variation in AKT1 may mediate both short-term as well as longer-term effects on psychosis expression associated with use of cannabis, possibly through a mechanism of cannabinoid-regulated AKT1/GSK-3 signaling downstream of the dopamine D(2) receptor.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.152

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Winkel, R.
Venue
Archives of General Psychiatry
Published
2011-02-07
Volume
68
Issue
2
Pages
148
ISSN
0003-990X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126551481
Cited by
183
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 21
FWCI
13.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
cannabis use, psychosis, schizophrenia, AKT1, LRRTM1, single nucleotide polymorphisms, gene-environment interaction, schizotypy, cannabis-induced psychosis, cannabinoid receptors, unaffected siblings, cannabis use disorder
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Belgium, Marijuana Abuse, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Gene Expression Regulation, Genotype, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychoses, Substance-Induced, Risk Factors, Schizotypal Personality Disorder, Dronabinol, Genetic Variation, Case-Control Studies, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Siblings, Young Adult, Genetic Association Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review