@article{ZayatsJacobsenKleppeetal.2016,
  author    = {Zayats, T and Jacobsen, KK and Kleppe, R and Jacob, CP and Kittel-Schneider, S and Ribas{\´e}s, M and Ramos-Quiroga, JA and Richarte, V and Casas, M and Mota, NR and Grevet, EH and Klein, M and Corominas, J and Bralten, J and Galesloot, T and Vasquez, AA and Herms, S and Forstner, AJ and Larsson, H and Breen, G and Asherson, P and Gross-Lesch, S and Lesch, KP and Cichon, S and Gabrielsen, MB and Holmen, OL and Bau, CHD and Buitelaar, J and Kiemeney, L and Faraone, SV and Cormand, B and Franke, B and Reif, A and Haavik, J and Johansson, S},
  title     = {Exome chip analyses in adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder},
  series = {Translational Psychiatry},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Translational Psychiatry},
  number    = {e923},
  doi       = {10.1038/tp.2016.196},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-168297},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a highly heritable childhood-onset neuropsychiatric condition, often persisting into adulthood. The genetic architecture of ADHD, particularly in adults, is largely unknown. We performed an exome-wide scan of adult ADHD using the Illumina Human Exome Bead Chip, which interrogates over 250 000 common and rare variants. Participants were recruited by the International Multicenter persistent ADHD CollaboraTion (IMpACT). Statistical analyses were divided into 3 steps: (1) gene-level analysis of rare variants (minor allele frequency (MAF)<1\%); (2) single marker association tests of common variants (MAF⩾1\%), with replication of the top signals; and (3) pathway analyses. In total, 9365 individuals (1846 cases and 7519 controls) were examined. Replication of the most associated common variants was attempted in 9847 individuals (2077 cases and 7770 controls) using fixed-effects inverse variance meta-analysis. With a Bonferroni-corrected significance level of 1.82E-06, our analyses of rare coding variants revealed four study-wide significant loci: 6q22.1 locus (P=4.46E-08), where NT5DC1 and COL10A1 reside; the SEC23IP locus (P=6.47E-07); the PSD locus (P=7.58E-08) and ZCCHC4 locus (P=1.79E-06). No genome-wide significant association was observed among the common variants. The strongest signal was noted at rs9325032 in PPP2R2B (odds ratio=0.81, P=1.61E-05). Taken together, our data add to the growing evidence of general signal transduction molecules (NT5DC1, PSD, SEC23IP and ZCCHC4) having an important role in the etiology of ADHD. Although the biological implications of these findings need to be further explored, they highlight the possible role of cellular communication as a potential core component in the development of both adult and childhood forms of ADHD.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ManchiaAdliAkulaetal.2013,
  author    = {Manchia, Mirko and Adli, Mazda and Akula, Nirmala and Arda, Raffaella and Aubry, Jean-Michel and Backlund, Lena and Banzato, Claudio E. M. and Baune, Bernhard T. and Bellivier, Frank and Bengesser, Susanne and Biernacka, Joanna M. and Brichant-Petitjean, Clara and Bui, Elise and Calkin, Cynthia V. and Cheng, Andrew Tai Ann and Chillotti, Caterina and Cichon, Sven and Clark, Scott and Czerski, Piotr M. and Dantas, Clarissa and Del Zompo, Maria and DePaulo, J. Raymond and Detera-Wadleigh, Sevilla D. and Etain, Bruno and Falkai, Peter and Fris{\´e}n, Louise and Frye, Mark A. and Fullerton, Jan and Gard, S{\´e}bastien and Garnham, Julie and Goes, Fernando S. and Grof, Paul and Gruber, Oliver and Hashimoto, Ryota and Hauser, Joanna and Heilbronner, Urs and Hoban, Rebecca and Hou, Liping and Jamain, St{\´e}phane and Kahn, Jean-Pierre and Kassem, Layla and Kato, Tadafumi and Kelsoe, John R. and Kittel-Schneider, Sarah and Kliwicki, Sebastian and Kuo, Po-Hsiu and Kusumi, Ichiro and Laje, Gonzalo and Lavebratt, Catharina and Leboyer, Marion and Leckband, Susan G. and L{\´o}pez Jaramillo, Carlos A. and Maj, Mario and Malafosse, Alain and Martinsson, Lina and Masui, Takuya and Mitchell, Philip B. and Mondimore, Frank and Monteleone, Palmiero and Nallet, Audrey and Neuner, Maria and Nov{\´a}k, Tom{\´a}s and O'Donovan, Claire and {\"O}sby, Urban and Ozaki, Norio and Perlis, Roy H. and Pfennig, Andrea and Potash, James B. and Reich-Erkelenz, Daniela and Reif, Andreas and Reininghaus, Eva and Richardson, Sara and Rouleau, Guy A. and Rybakowski, Janusz K. and Schalling, Martin and Schofield, Peter R. and Schubert, Oliver K. and Schweizer, Barbara and Seem{\"u}ller, Florian and Grigoroiu-Serbanescu, Maria and Severino, Giovanni and Seymour, Lisa R. and Slaney, Claire and Smoller, Jordan W. and Squassina, Alessio and Stamm, Thomas and Steele, Jo and Stopkova, Pavla and Tighe, Sarah K. and Tortorella, Alfonso and Turecki, Gustavo and Wray, Naomi R. and Wright, Adam and Zandi, Peter P. and Zilles, David and Bauer, Michael and Rietschel, Marcella and McMahon, Francis J. and Schulze, Thomas G. and Alda, Martin},
  title     = {Assessment of Response to Lithium Maintenance Treatment in Bipolar Disorder: A Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) Report},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {6},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0065636},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130938},
  pages     = {e65636},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Objective: The assessment of response to lithium maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder (BD) is complicated by variable length of treatment, unpredictable clinical course, and often inconsistent compliance. Prospective and retrospective methods of assessment of lithium response have been proposed in the literature. In this study we report the key phenotypic measures of the "Retrospective Criteria of Long-Term Treatment Response in Research Subjects with Bipolar Disorder" scale currently used in the Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) study. Materials and Methods: Twenty-nine ConLiGen sites took part in a two-stage case-vignette rating procedure to examine inter-rater agreement [Kappa (\(\kappa\))] and reliability [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)] of lithium response. Annotated first-round vignettes and rating guidelines were circulated to expert research clinicians for training purposes between the two stages. Further, we analyzed the distributional properties of the treatment response scores available for 1,308 patients using mixture modeling. Results: Substantial and moderate agreement was shown across sites in the first and second sets of vignettes (\(\kappa\) = 0.66 and \(\kappa\) = 0.54, respectively), without significant improvement from training. However, definition of response using the A score as a quantitative trait and selecting cases with B criteria of 4 or less showed an improvement between the two stages (\(ICC_1 = 0.71\) and \(ICC_2 = 0.75\), respectively). Mixture modeling of score distribution indicated three subpopulations (full responders, partial responders, non responders). Conclusions: We identified two definitions of lithium response, one dichotomous and the other continuous, with moderate to substantial inter-rater agreement and reliability. Accurate phenotypic measurement of lithium response is crucial for the ongoing ConLiGen pharmacogenomic study.},
  language  = {en}
}