Cited by 285Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorTreatment of Major Depression

A direct test of the diathesis-stress model for depression

Open access
Major Depressive Disorder Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Colodro-Conde, L, Couvy-Duchesne, B, Zhu, G, Coventry, W L, Byrne, E M, Gordon, S, Wright, M J +8 more·2018·Molecular Psychiatry

Abstract

The diathesis-stress theory for depression states that the effects of stress on the depression risk are dependent on the diathesis or vulnerability, implying multiplicative interactive effects on the liability scale. We used polygenic risk scores for major depressive disorder (MDD) calculated from the results of the most recent analysis from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium as a direct measure of the vulnerability for depression in a sample of 5221 individuals from 3083 families. In the same we also had measures of stressful life events and social support and a depression symptom score, as well as DSM-IV MDD diagnoses for most individuals. In order to estimate the variance in depression explained by the genetic vulnerability, the stressors and their interactions, we fitted linear mixed models controlling for relatedness for the whole sample as well as stratified by sex. We show a significant interaction of the polygenic risk scores with personal life events (0.12% of variance explained, P-value=0.0076) contributing positively to the risk of depression. Additionally, our results suggest possible differences in the aetiology of depression between women and men. In conclusion, our findings point to an extra risk for individuals with combined vulnerability and high number of reported personal life events beyond what would be expected from the additive contributions of these factors to the liability for depression, supporting the multiplicative diathesis-stress model for this disease.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/mp.2017.130

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The modal clinical presentation of people with personality disorders is a complaint of depression and significant proportions of people with depression have a comorbid personality disorder.

    “Indeed, the modal clinical presentation of people with personality disorders is a complaint of depression 271,272 and significant proportions of people with depression have a comorbid personality disorder. 273”

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [35]Birnbaum A Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores Addison-Wesley Reading, MA 1968
  2. [59]Wray NR Lee SH Mehta D Vinkhuyzen AAE Dudbridge F Middeldorp CM Research Review: Polygenic methods and their application to psychiatric traits J Child Psychol Psyc 2014 55 10 1068 1087 25132410

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Major Depressive Disorder Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Colodro-Conde, L., Couvy-Duchesne, B., Zhu, G., Coventry, W. L., Byrne, E. M., Gordon, S., Wright, M. J., Montgomery, G. W., Madden, P. A. F., Ripke, S., Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Wray, N. R., Medland, S. E., & Martin, N. G.
Affiliations
  • QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute (AU)
  • University of New England (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Venue
Molecular Psychiatry
Published
2017-07-11
Volume
23
Issue
7
Pages
1590-1596
ISSN
  • 1359-4184 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5578
OpenAlex
W2735059498
Cited by
285
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 1
FWCI
12.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • International Rett Syndrome Foundation
  • Fundación Séneca
  • QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (AA007728)
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1103623)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R37AA007728, R01AA010249, R01AA013321, R01AA013326, R01AA007535)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
diathesis-stress model, major depressive disorder, polygenic risk score, life events, social support, gene-environment interaction, sex differences in depression, genetic susceptibility
MeSH terms
Adult, Depression, Major Depressive Disorder, Disease Susceptibility, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Multifactorial Inheritance, Genome-Wide Association Study, Gene-Environment Interaction

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