@article{ChaudryGrimmFriedbergeretal.2020,
  author    = {Chaudry, Oliver and Grimm, Alexandra and Friedberger, Andreas and Kemmler, Wolfgang and Uder, Michael and Jakob, Franz and Quick, Harald H. and von Stengel, Simon and Engelke, Klaus},
  title     = {Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis to Assess Visceral and Abdominal Adipose Tissue},
  series = {Obesity},
  volume    = {28},
  journal   = {Obesity},
  number    = {2},
  doi       = {10.1002/oby.22712},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-213591},
  pages     = {277 -- 283},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Objective This study aimed to compare a state-of-the-art bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) device with two-point Dixon magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the quantification of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) as a health-related risk factor. Methods A total of 63 male participants were measured using a 3-T MRI scanner and a segmental, multifrequency BIA device. MRI generated fat fraction (FF) maps, in which VAT volume, total abdominal adipose tissue volume, and FF of visceral and total abdominal compartments were quantified. BIA estimated body fat mass and VAT area. Results Coefficients of determination between abdominal (r\(^{2}\) = 0.75) and visceral compartments (r\(^{2}\) = 0.78) were similar for both groups, but slopes differed by a factor of two. The ratio of visceral to total abdominal FF was increased in older men compared with younger men. This difference was not detected with BIA. MRI and BIA measurements of the total abdominal volume correlated moderately (r\(^{2}\) = 0.31-0.56), and visceral measurements correlated poorly (r\(^{2}\) = 0.13-0.44). Conclusions Visceral BIA measurements agreed better with MRI measurements of the total abdomen than of the visceral compartment, indicating that BIA visceral fat area assessment cannot differentiate adipose tissue between visceral and abdominal compartments in young and older participants.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BiereKranzMaturaetal.2020,
  author    = {Biere, Silvia and Kranz, Thorsten M. and Matura, Silke and Petrova, Kristiyana and Streit, Fabian and Chiocchetti, Andreas G. and Grimm, Oliver and Brum, Murielle and Brunkhorst-Kanaan, Natalie and Oertel, Viola and Malyshau, Aliaksandr and Pfennig, Andrea and Bauer, Michael and Schulze, Thomas G. and Kittel-Schneider, Sarah and Reif, Andreas},
  title     = {Risk Stratification for Bipolar Disorder Using Polygenic Risk Scores Among Young High-Risk Adults},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychiatry},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychiatry},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyt.2020.552532},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-214976},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Objective: Identifying high-risk groups with an increased genetic liability for bipolar disorder (BD) will provide insights into the etiology of BD and contribute to early detection of BD. We used the BD polygenic risk score (PRS) derived from BD genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to explore how such genetic risk manifests in young, high-risk adults. We postulated that BD-PRS would be associated with risk factors for BD. Methods: A final sample of 185 young, high-risk German adults (aged 18-35 years) were grouped into three risk groups and compared to a healthy control group (n = 1,100). The risk groups comprised 117 cases with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), 45 with major depressive disorder (MDD), and 23 help-seeking adults with early recognition symptoms [ER: positive family history for BD, (sub)threshold affective symptomatology and/or mood swings, sleeping disorder]. BD-PRS was computed for each participant. Logistic regression models (controlling for sex, age, and the first five ancestry principal components) were used to assess associations of BD-PRS and the high-risk phenotypes. Results: We observed an association between BD-PRS and combined risk group status (OR = 1.48, p < 0.001), ADHD diagnosis (OR = 1.32, p = 0.009), MDD diagnosis (OR = 1.96, p < 0.001), and ER group status (OR = 1.7, p = 0.025; not significant after correction for multiple testing) compared to healthy controls. Conclusions: In the present study, increased genetic risk for BD was a significant predictor for MDD and ADHD status, but not for ER. These findings support an underlying shared risk for both MDD and BD as well as ADHD and BD. Improving our understanding of the underlying genetic architecture of these phenotypes may aid in early identification and risk stratification.},
  language  = {en}
}