Abstract
Constitutional thinness and anorexia nervosa are both characterised by persistent, extremely low weight with body mass indices (BMI) below 18.5 kg/m2. Individuals with anorexia nervosa concurrently show distorted perceptions of their own body and engage in weight-loss behaviours, whereas individuals with constitutional thinness typically wish to gain weight. Both are heritable, share genomics with BMI, but have not been shown to be genetically correlated with each other. We aim to differentiate between constitutional thinness and anorexia nervosa on a genomic level.
First, we estimated genetic correlations between constitutional thinness and eleven psychiatric disorders and compared them with anorexia nervosa using publicly available data. Second, we identified individuals with constitutional thinness in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) by latent class growth analysis of measured BMI from 10 to 24 years (n = 8,505) and assigned polygenic scores for eleven psychiatric disorders and a range of anthropometric traits to evaluate associations.
In contrast to anorexia nervosa, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (rgAN = 0.02 vs. rgCT = −0.24) and alcohol dependence (rgAN = 0.07 vs. rgCT = −0.44) showed a statistically significant negative genetic correlation with constitutional thinness. A higher polygenic score for posttraumatic stress disorder was associated with an increased risk of constitutional thinness in the ALSPAC cohort (OR = 1.27; Q = 0.03) whereas posttraumatic stress disorder shows no genetic correlation with anorexia nervosa (rg = −0.02). Overall, results suggest that constitutional thinness is different from anorexia nervosa on the genomic level.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Breen has received grant funding from and served as a consultant to Eli Lilly, has received honoraria from Illumina and has served on advisory board for Otsuka and is a scientific advisor for COMPASS Pathways. CM Bulik reports: Shire (grant recipient, Scientific Advisory Board member); Idorsia (consultant); Lundbeckfonden (grant recipient); Pearson (author, royalty recipient). All other authors have indicated they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Funding Statement
This study represents independent research part funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the UK NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. High performance computing facilities were funded with capital equipment grants from the GSTT Charity (TR130505) and Maudsley Charity (980). This work was supported by the UK Medical Research Council and the Medical Research Foundation (ref: MR/R004803/1). The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (Grant ref: 102215/2/13/2 and 217065/Z/19/Z) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/external/documents/grant-acknowledgements.pdf); This research was specifically funded by the NIHR (CS/01/2008/014), the NIH (MH087786-01). GWAS data was generated by Sample Logistics and Genotyping Facilities at Wellcome Sanger Institute and LabCorp (Laboratory Corporation of America) using support from 23andMe. NM and CB acknowledge funding from the National Institute of Mental Health (R21 MH115397). CMB is supported by NIMH (R01MH120170; R01MH119084; R01MH118278; U01 MH109528); Brain and Behavior Research Foundation Distinguished Investigator Grant; Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsradet, award: 538-2013-8864); CMB and CH are supported by Lundbeck Foundation (Grant no. R276-2018-4581). MH is supported by fellowship from the Medical Research Council UK (MR/T027843/1). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The funders were not involved in the design or conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; or preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval for the ALSPAC participants was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees: www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/research-ethics/. The main caregiver initially provided consent for child participation, and from the age 16 years, the offspring themselves have provided informed written consent. At 16 years old, sole consent from the study child was considered acceptable by the Committee and although the law was not specific about young people with regards to research, this complied with the Family Law Reform Act 19695 as regards treatment: those who are 16 years old or above have the same legal ability to consent to any medical, surgical or dental treatment as anyone above 18, without consent from their parent or guardian [44]. Children were invited to give assent where appropriate. Consent for biological samples was collected in accordance with the Human Tissue Act (2004) and informed consent for the use of data collected via questionnaires and clinics was obtained from participants following the recommendations of the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee at the time. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This study is based on data from the ALSPAC study (http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/). Interested researchers can apply for data access with the University of Bristol, UK. Analysis scripts can be requested from the authors.
