Abstract
Background Exposure to adversity during childhood is estimated to at least double the risk of depression later in life. Some evidence suggests childhood adversity may have a greater impact on depression risk, if experienced during specific windows of development called sensitive periods. During these sensitive periods, there is evidence that adversity may leave behind biological memories, including changes in DNA methylation (DNAm). Here we ask if those changes play a role in the link between adversity and later adolescent depressive symptoms.
Methods We applied a method for high-dimensional mediation analysis using data from a subsample (n=627-675) of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We first assessed the possibility of time-dependent relationships between seven types of childhood adversity (caregiver abuse, physical/sexual abuse, maternal psychopathology, one-adult household, family instability, financial stress, neighborhood disadvantage), measured on at least four occasions between ages 0-7 years, and adolescent depression at mean age 10.6. Specifically, we considered three types of life course hypotheses (sensitive periods, accumulation, and recency), and then evaluated which of these hypotheses had the strongest association in each adversity-adolescent depression relationship using the structured life course modeling approach (SLCMA; pronounced “slick-mah”). To conduct the mediation analyses, we used a combination of pruning and sure independence screening (a dimension reduction method) to reduce the number of methylated CpG sites under consideration to a viable subset for our sample size. We then applied a sparse group lasso penalized model to identify the top mediating loci from that subset using the combined strength of the coefficient measuring the relationship between the childhood adversity and a CpG site (α) and of the coefficient measuring the relationship between the CpG site and depressive symptoms (β) as a metric. Using a Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation (MCMAM), we assigned a significance level and confidence interval to each identified mediator.
Results Across all seven adversities, we identified a total of 70 CpG sites that showed evidence of mediating the relationship between adversity and adolescent depression symptoms. Of these 70 mediators, 37 were significant at the p < 0.05 level when applying the MCMAM, a method tailored to estimating the significance of SEM-derived mediation effects. These sites exhibited four different mediating patterns, differentiated by the direction of α and β. These patterns had signals that were: (1) both positive (19 loci), (2) both negative (18 loci), (3) positive α and negative β (23 loci) or (4) negative α and positive β (10 loci).
Conclusion Our results suggest that DNAm partially mediates the relationship between different types of childhood adversity and depressive symptoms in adolescence. These findings provide insight into the biological mechanisms that link childhood adversity to depression, which will ultimately help develop treatments to prevent depression in more vulnerable populations.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health (grant number R01MH113930 awarded to ECD). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dunn and Dr. Lussier were also supported by a grant from One Mind. The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (Grant ref: 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 funded by grants from the BBSRC (BBI025751/1; BB/I025263/1), IEU (MC_UU_12013/1; MC_UU_12013/2; MC_UU_12013/8), National Institute of Child and Human Development (R01HD068437), NIH (5RO1AI121226-02), and CONTAMED EU (212502). This publication is the work of the authors, whom will serve as guarantors for the contents of this paper. This work was partially supported by the U.S. Public Health Service and National Institutes of Health [DJS, contract grant number R35 GM140487]. Dr. Walton is funded by CLOSER, whose mission is to maximise the use, value and impact of longitudinal studies (www.closer.ac.uk). CLOSER was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and the Medical Research Council (MRC) between 2012 and 2017. Its initial five-year grant has since been extended to March 2021 by the ESRC (grant reference: ES/K000357/1). The funders took no role in the design, execution, analysis or interpretation of the data or in the writing up of the findings. Dr. Walton is also supported by the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant no. 848158).
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 study was obtained from the ALSPAC Law and Ethics Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees. Consent for biological samples was collected in accordance with the Human Tissue Act (2004). 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. Secondary analyses of these data were approved with oversight by the Mass General Brigham Institutional Review Boards (IRB) (Protocol ID 2017P001110).
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
All data are available by request from the ALSPAC Executive Committee for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.
