Abstract
Both serotonin transporter (SLC6A4) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) genes have shown positive associations with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) and some other psychiatric disorders, but these results have not been consistently replicated. To explore the hypothesis that this variability might result from the effects of differing combinations of overlooked variants within SLC6A4 together with small OCD and control sample sizes, we studied three common functional polymorphisms (5-HTTLPR, STin2, and the newly discovered SNP, rs25531) in the largest sample size of OCD patients (N=347) and controls (N=749) ever investigated. During methods development, we found evidence for potential SLC6A4 genotyping problems with earlier methodology, a third possible contributor to variability in earlier studies. A fourth possible explanation might be SLC6A4 × BDNF interactions, which prompted us to investigate combined genotypes of BDNF V66M with the three SLC6A4 loci. Except for a nominal association with rs25531 alone, which did not survive correction for multiple comparisons, we found no evidence for any of these other variants being associated alone or together with OCD, and we therefore also examined clinical OCD subtypes within the sample to evaluate clinical heterogeneity. Subgroups based on the age of OCD onset, gender, familiality, factor analysis-derived symptom dimensions, or comorbidity with other psychiatric disorders failed to identify SLC6A4- or BDNF-associated phenotypes, with one exception of overall number of comorbid anxiety disorders being significantly associated with 5-HTTLPR/rs25531. We conclude that despite their attractiveness as candidate genes in OCD, our data provide no support for association in this large OCD patient sample and point toward the need to examine other genes as candidates for risk determinants in OCD.
Similar content being viewed by others
INTRODUCTION
Obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is a debilitating chronic psychiatric illness with a lifetime prevalence of 2–3% of the worldwide population (Hasler et al, 2006; Kessler et al, 2005; Weissman et al, 1994). This disorder is characterized by recurrent and intrusive thoughts (obsessions) and repetitive behaviors (compulsions) meant to reduce distress associated with obsessions. There is a substantial body of evidence from twin and family studies indicating that OCD has a genetic component (Hettema et al, 2001; Rasmussen and Tsuang, 1984). Complex segregation analyses, though not entirely conclusive, point toward a complex pattern of inheritance dominated by a few genes of major effect (Hemmings and Stein, 2006). This is in keeping with results from two genome-wide scans of OCD probands which provided suggestive evidence for susceptibility loci on 9p, 3q, 7p, 1q, 15q, and 6q (Hanna et al, 2002; Shugart et al, 2006).
In addition to the above-mentioned studies, a number of candidate genes for OCD have been investigated through association analyses (Hemmings and Stein, 2006). Particular emphasis has been placed on functional variants in the serotonin transporter gene (SERT, 5-HTT, SLC6A4), given an etiopathological hypothesis based on the effectiveness of serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the treatment of OCD. Studies have investigated common non-coding variants affecting transcriptional efficiency, such as the 43 bp promoter indel referred to as 5-HTTLPR and STin2, a variable number of tandem repeats polymorphism in intron 2 (Heils et al, 1995; Hranilovic et al, 2004; Hu et al, 2006; Lesch et al, 1995; Lovejoy et al, 2003; MacKenzie and Quinn, 1999). Rare coding mutations such as the gain-of-function I425V have also been reported as segregating in families with OCD probands (Ozaki et al, 2003). Whereas this SLC6A4 I425V polymorphism was subsequently found in additional probands with a predominantly OCD-like phenotype (Delorme et al, 2005; Wendland et al, in press), data linking OCD with common SLC6A4 variants have been generally inconclusive. Although a few reports found a positive association for the gain-of-function 5-HTTLPR L allele and OCD (Bengel et al, 1999; McDougle et al, 1998), the majority of studies have been negative (Camarena et al, 2001; Cavallini et al, 2002; Chabane et al, 2004; Frisch et al, 2000; Kinnear et al, 2000; Meira-Lima et al, 2004; Walitza et al, 2004). An association between OCD and the STin2 higher-expressing 12-repeat allele was reported in one study (Ohara et al, 1999).
Another potential explanation for the inconsistent findings seen in association studies might be a lack of appreciation of known variants. In particular, this may be relevant to 5-HTTLPR, as additional variants have been identified for both the L and S allele (Nakamura et al, 2000). In their recent report, Hu et al (2006) demonstrated that a substantial fraction of L alleles, designated LG by the authors (which refers to the haplotype of L at 5-HTTLPR and G at dbSNP rs25531, corresponding to the originally reported allele 16-D, GenBank accession number AB031254) acts similar to the low-expressing S allele, and that only the LA (16-A, AB031251) allele is the actual higher expressing variant. On the basis of genotyping using these functional data, a significant association between OCD and the higher expressing LA allele and the LALA genotype in both a case–control and a family-based investigation of trios was found (Hu et al, 2006).
One additional factor that might explain the lack of consistent findings in association analyses is the substantial clinical heterogeneity of OCD (Pato et al, 2002). It is thought that the diverse phenomenological and treatment presentation of this disorder may reflect, in turn, a heterogeneity of susceptibility genes. Attempts at better defining more homogeneous OCD subgroups have been made at the level of symptom presentation (Hasler et al, 2006), age of OCD onset (Shugart et al, 2006), family history (Denys et al, 2006), and comorbidity patterns (Leckman et al, 2003). Despite the theoretical plausibility of these subgroups, studies assessing candidate genes in light of more unified OCD sub-phenotypes have also been marked by inconclusive findings and a lack of replication.
The aim of this investigation was to analyze the SLC6A4 STin2 and refined 5-HTTLPR polymorphisms in the largest OCD sample to date and in an ethnically matched control sample. In addition, we assessed the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) V66M polymorphism in our sample, given the recent positive finding of its involvement in OCD (Hall et al, 2003). We first validated our multiplexed SLC6A4 genotyping method (Wendland et al, 2006b) in light of a recent report showing magnesium chloride-dependent preferential amplification of the S allele (Yonan et al, 2006), and then performed a number of single locus, expression grouping, haplotype, and combined genotype analyses. Moreover, we conducted separate exploratory analyses of hypothesized OCD sub-phenotypes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Human Subjects
We genotyped a total of 347 OCD probands and 749 healthy control individuals. Among these, we selected 295 self-reported Caucasian adult OCD probands and 657 ethnically matched Caucasian controls for statistical comparisons. Probands were recruited through an on-going, IRB-approved adult outpatient OCD program at the NIMH Intramural Research Program in Bethesda, MD, with nationwide and international recruitment. Inclusion criteria for participation included being at least 18 years old and having a primary OCD diagnosis based on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). Exclusion criteria included active schizophrenia or psychosis, severe mental retardation that does not permit an evaluation to characterize OCD, or OCD symptoms that occur exclusively in the context of depression (LaSalle et al, 2004). Peripheral blood was collected by venipuncture after written informed consent. DNA was extracted by standard procedures.
Control genomic DNA originated from three independent sources: (1) human variation panel purchased from Coriell cell repository (N=200 self-declared healthy US Caucasians); (2) human random control, panels 1 and 2 (N=192 apparently healthy, randomly selected UK Caucasian blood donors) purchased from the European Collection of Cell Cultures (Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA); and (3) undergraduate students (N=357 total, of which N=265 were self-declared healthy Caucasians and were used in this study) from a large Southeastern university which attracts a diverse student body from the entire US as well as ∼10% international students; these students participated in a separate study of genes and personality in return for partial course credit. Since none of these three control groups was clinically evaluated, we cannot rule out the possibility of individuals present in the control sample having OCD or OC symptoms, although this fraction is unlikely to be higher than the general population prevalence of 2–3% (Kessler et al, 2005; Weissman et al, 1994). Allelic and genotypic frequencies did not significantly differ between these three control groups (data not shown).
OCD Sub-Phenotypes
The current report assessed seven distinct OCD sub-phenotypes within the clinical sample. The magnitude of obsessions and compulsions was measured with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS), a frequently used assessment tool for the severity of obsessive–compulsive symptoms (Goodman et al, 1989). The average symptom severity for the sample as a whole, as measured by the Y-BOCS, was 21.63 (SD=9.34). We next classified the sample into either childhood or adult OCD onset groups. Consistent with the literature, those individuals with an onset younger than 18 years of age were classified as childhood onset (Samuels et al, 2006). The third sub-phenotype we assessed was familial history of OCD. The sample was dichotomized into either a familial group, which included those with a first-degree relative with OCD, or a non-familial group. Consistent with the literature (Cromer et al, in press; Hasler et al, 2005), we furthermore derived factor scores for the symptom dimensions of OCD using the Y-BOCS symptom checklist. Specifically, principal component analysis was applied to the 13 a priori Y-BOCS categories and initial factor solutions were then rotated using the Varimax procedure (Hasler et al, 2005; Leckman et al, 1997). The factor analysis generated four factor scores for each subject representing the correlation of the symptom profile of the subject with each factor. The four factors included obsessions/checking, symmetry/ordering, contamination/cleaning, and hoarding. With regard to comorbidity features, 90% of participants were diagnosed with at least one additional lifetime Axis I psychological disorder and the number of comorbid Axis I disorders ranged from 0 to 8 (M=2.46, SD=1.79). Based on this information we calculated a variable for each participant representing a count of the total number of Axis I disorders, mood disorders, and anxiety disorders. The presence of past traumatic life events was assessed via diagnostic interview. Specifically, the information provided in the ‘Traumatic Events List’ contained in the PTSD module of the SCID was used to classify individuals into either a trauma or non-trauma group (Cromer et al, in press). The seventh sub-phenotype that we assessed was the presence or absence of suicidality. This information was obtained via a thorough review of the SCID and the participant's chart for evidence of suicidal ideation or suicide attempts. Statistical differences in these phenotypes per genotype were ascertained via χ2-tests (for dichotomous phenotype definitions) and one-way analysis of variance (for continuous phenotype definitions), as appropriate. All statistical tests were performed using the Software Package for Social Sciences version 13.0.
Genotyping
The BDNF V66M polymorphism (dbSNP rs6265) was genotyped by 5′-exonuclease assay (TaqMan SNP genotyping assay-on-demand; Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) using oligonucleotide primers GCCCAAGGCAGGTTCAAGAG and AACTTTCTGGTCCTCATCCAACAG as well as fluorescent probes VIC-ACTTTCGAACACgTGATAG-MGB and FAM-CTTTCGAACACaTGATAG-MGB for Val66 and Met66, respectively. In a total reaction volume of 8 μL, 5–20 ng of genomic DNA were mixed with TaqMan Universal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) master mix (Applied Biosystems) and genotyping assay to 1 × final concentrations. Thermocycling and fluorescence acquisition conditions were as recommended using an MJ Chromo4 continuous fluorescence detector (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) connected to a PC running Opticon Monitor software version 3.1. Genotypes were scored by end point fluorescence analysis using global minimum baseline subtraction. The overall genotype completion exceeded 98%; no-template controls and randomly chosen 15% of all samples run in duplicates consistently yielded expected results.
Genotyping for SLC6A4 5-HTTLPR, rs25531, STin2, and I425V/I425L polymorphisms was performed by PCR/restriction enzyme digestion in duplicate for all samples: one time exactly as described previously (Wendland et al, 2006b), and a second time with a modified protocol scoring the loss-of-function P339L polymorphism (Glatt et al, 2001; Prasad et al, 2005) in addition to the above mentioned loci. Oligonucleotide primer sequences for P339L were CCCCTGCTGTGTTCCAGGTGTGG and CGAGGCCGTCGGTCCAATCACC; primers were diluted to 200 nM final concentration each and amplified a 211 bp large fragment (Figure 1), which was digested during the subsequent double restriction endonuclease incubation into 60 and 151 bp fragments by HpaII for the Pro339 allele, but not for Leu339. Thermocycling for the expanded multiplex PCR assay consisted of 15 min initial denaturation/Taq polymerase activation at 95°C followed by 38 cycles of 96.5°C for 10 s and 71°C for 90 s; all other PCR and subsequent restriction enzyme digestion conditions were as described previously (Wendland et al, 2006b). Agreement between the genotyping results for SLC6A4 5-HTTLPR, rs25531, STin2, and I425V/I425L for the previously published and the expanded genotyping protocol exceeded 98%; moreover, no-template controls consistently showed no amplification. We did not observe a single undigested P339L band, supporting the notion that the Leu339 allele is extremely rare or might even have occurred as a private mutation. Results for I425V in OCD and Coriell populations analyzed here and for 5-HTTLPR, rs25531, STin2, and I425 in the Coriell controls have been reported previously (Wendland et al, in press; Wendland et al, 2006a), data for I425V/L are not described here.
Magnesium chloride and dNTP titration experiments were carried out as follows: 20 ng of genomic DNA were mixed in a total reaction volume of 20 μL with Qiagen multiplex mix (1 × final concentration with 3 mM MgCl2; Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA) and oligonucleotide primers at previously reported concentrations for 5-HTTLPR, STin2, and Ile425 plus 200 nM of P339L primers. A total of 12 samples (four SL, LL, and SS each) were run with seven different protocols: with added MgCl2 (+0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mM added to the 3 mM MgCl2 of the multiplex master mix), with added dNTPs (+125, 250 and 375 μM each; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), and without supplemented MgCl2 or dNTPs. All genotyping and titration experiments were carried out in hard-shell PCR plates (Bio-Rad, part number HSP9655) sealed with optical film (Bio-Rad, part number MSB1001). Two-step thermocycling was as described above, PCR products were mixed with 6 × loading dye (Fermentas, Hanover, MD, USA), separated by 3% TBE agarose gel electrophoresis at 140 V for 75 min and visualized by ethidium bromide staining. An example for each 5-HTTLPR genotype is given in Figure 1.
Statistical Analyses
Genotype data were analyzed for Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) using the Pearson's and log likelihood ratio χ2 as well as exact test with the de Finetti program (http://ihg.gsf.de/cgi-bin/hw/hwa1.pl (Cannings and Edwards, 1968). We treated 5-HTTLPR and rs25531 as two independent biallelic loci and used only 10 and 12 allele genotypes for STin2 for HWE testing. All loci did not significantly deviate from HWE either in cases or in controls with any of the three statistical tests. For the haplotype analysis of triallelic 5-HTTLPR (which our genotyping protocol scores in a phase-certain manner) and the 16 kbp downstream located STin2, phase ambiguity (double heterozygotes such as LgSa and STin2.10/12) was addressed by treating each possible haplotype as equally likely, as these two loci have been shown to not be in LD (Kim et al, 2002; Mynett-Johnson et al, 2000). Association analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 4.03 (GraphPad software, San Diego, CA) for contingency tables with more than two columns and with Haploview 3.32 (Barrett et al, 2005) for 2 × 2 tables; Haploview was also used to address multiple testing bias by performing 50 000 permutations in the ‘single markers only’ mode with the four loci rs25531, biallelic 5-HTTLPR, STin2 (10 and 12 repeat alleles only), and BDNF V66M. For power calculations, we used the genetic power calculator (Purcell et al, 2003) under the assumption of LA being the risk allele with 50% frequency, 2.5% disease prevalence, the genotype relative risk being 1.4 for heterozygotes, and 1.8 for homozygote risk allele carriers (based on the recent report by Hu et al (2006) who reported an 1.8-fold effect of the LALA genotype on risk of OCD) and using ‘unselected’ controls. We estimate the loss of power in the permutation analyses to be at most 10% points on the basis of a recent simulation study analyzing the effects of resampling on power in case–control association studies (Rosenberg et al, 2006).
RESULTS
Given a recent report about MgCl2-dependent preferential amplification of specific 5-HTTLPR alleles (Yonan et al, 2006) and the well-known overall difficulty to amplify this locus (Sutcliffe et al, 2005), we first performed a set of MgCl2 and dNTP titration experiments to validate the robustness and reliability of our multiplex amplification of SLC6A4. As Figure 1 shows, the concentration of MgCl2 used here for genotyping (3 mM) fell within a broad range where no preferential amplification of any 5-HTTLPR allele could be detected. At the highest MgCl2 concentration, however, we observed the same phenomenon of preferential S allele amplification as Yonan et al (2006) recently described. Moreover, we detected a similar effect at the STin2 locus, although here the preferential amplification of the smaller amplicon (STin2.10) occurred at the lowest concentration (Figure 1).
We then genotyped a total of 347 OCD probands and 749 controls for three common, reported functional SLC6A4 polymorphisms (rs25531, 5-HTTLPR, and STin2) and the BDNF V66M coding SNP. We present data for Caucasian probands (N=295) and ethnically matched controls (N=657) here, as overall numbers and diversity for non-Caucasian probands and controls provided too little power for statistical analyses. These probands comprised an independent sample not previously reported on. Our sample had more than 82% power at the α=0.05 level. Allelic frequencies are presented in Table 1; complete absolute and relative genotype and allele frequencies including data for males and females separately are available in Supplementary Table 2. We analyzed the classic biallelic 5-HTTLPR (S and L alleles) and rs25531 both as two independent biallelic loci and, given that our genotyping assays score both polymorphisms in a phase-certain manner, as one triallelic locus as well (SA, LA, and LG; two control samples carrying an SG allele were excluded from this analysis). Overall, only rs25531 reached a moderate level of significance when tested as single biallelic locus, including a 1.7-fold greater LG allele ratio in OCD probands vs controls, but this did not survive when multiple testing bias was accounted for by permutation testing (Table 1). Moreover, we did not observe significant allelic or genotypic frequency differences between males and females nor between gender-stratified cases and controls (Supplementary Table 1).
We next analyzed whether grouping alleles and genotypes at the triallelic 5-HTTLPR locus by low and high expression (Hu et al, 2006) might uncover an association between 5-HTTLPR and OCD. We also performed a haplotype analysis for triallelic 5-HTTLPR and STin2. As Table 2 shows, neither of these approaches revealed a significant association between haplotypes or expression-grouped alleles or genotypes and OCD. Subsequently, combined BDNF and SLC6A4 genotypes were investigated with the rationale that recent data from human (Kaufman et al, 2006) and mouse genetic (Ren-Patterson et al, 2005, 2006) studies support the notion of functional interaction between these two genes. Combined genotype frequencies are presented in Supplementary Table 2. We did not observe significant differences between probands and controls within each combined genotype group.
Finally, we conducted exploratory analyses assessing the association between gene variants and a number of OCD sub-phenotypes. Sub-types considered included (1) OCD symptom severity, (2) childhood vs adult onset OCD, (3) positive familial history of OCD, (4) factor analyzed symptom dimensions, (5) total number of comorbid disorders, (6) total number of comorbid mood disorders, (7) total number of comorbid anxiety disorders, (8) suicidality, and (9) the experience of trauma. Results revealed that gene variants were associated with the total number of comorbid anxiety disorders. Specifically, the total number of comorbid anxiety disorders was significantly associated with biallelic 5HTTLPR (F=3.33, P=0.037), rs25531 (F=8.96, P=0.003), and the combined 5-HTTLPR and rs25531 genotype (F=3.62, P=0.007). All other analyses were nonsignificant.
DISCUSSION
The objective of the present work was to analyze common functional polymorphisms of two psychiatric disorder candidate genes, SLC6A4 and BDNF, for possible involvement in OCD. Earlier investigations have evaluated the functional 5-HTTLPR polymorphism of SLC6A4 in generally small OCD proband case–control and trio samples (and thus with low power to detect association of OCD to gene variants of small effects) with mixed results, although a recent larger study suggested that an associated promotor region SNP, rs25531, near 5-HTTLPR might have led to some of the variability (Hu et al, 2006). The only known functional BDNF variant, V66M, has been evaluated in two studies with differing results (Hall et al, 2003; Mossner et al, 2005). We addressed the lack of consistent findings by considering (1) genotyping difficulties, (2) sample size, (3) functional variants of the 5-HTTLPR L allele, (4) the combination of BDNF V66M with SLC6A4 genotypes, and (5) clinical heterogeneity. Overall, our analyses do not support the notion of a major involvement of these common functional gene variants in OCD.
Preferential amplification of specific alleles at size-polymorphic genomic loci is long known (Deka et al, 1992) and has recently been reported for SLC6A4 5-HTTLPR and STin2 (Kaiser et al, 2002; Yonan et al, 2006). Both of the latter studies have shown that the concentration of MgCl2 can strongly affect genotype scoring and may thus influence the outcome of genetic analyses. This caveat prompted us to use a PCR master mix specifically optimized for size-polymorphic markers and to perform MgCl2 and dNTP titration experiments, which confirmed the robustness and validity of our multiplexed assay (Figure 1). In addition to these titration experiments, we confirmed that all of our genotyped biallelic markers were in HWE. This test is frequently employed to screen for genotyping errors, and although it is neither overly sensitive nor powerful (Leal, 2005), deviation from HWE has been observed in several 5-HTTLPR genotyping studies (Greenberg et al, 1998; Munafo et al, 2005; Yonan et al, 2006). That being said, lack of deviation from HWE does not rule out genotyping errors, and the MgCl2-dependent preferential amplification discussed above emphasizes the necessity to validate genotyping assays in future analyses of SLC6A4 5-HTTLPR, STin2, and other size-polymorphic loci.
We then analyzed the largest OCD sample available to date and an adequate, more than twofold larger number of matched controls for the BDNF V66M and SLC6A4 STin2 and 5-HTTLPR/rs25531 polymorphisms and, overall, found no evidence of association. This proband sample constituted a new, not previously reported collection of OCD patients. Neither single locus analyses, where only the greater expressing A allele of rs25531 was moderately significantly associated with OCD and only so when multiple testing bias was not corrected for, nor haplotypes of 5-HTTLPR/rs25531 and STin2 conferred statistically significant susceptibility to, or protection against, OCD (Tables 1 and 2). Regrouping 5-HTTLPR/rs25531 alleles and genotypes on the basis of recent functional data showing functional heterogeneity of L alleles (Hu et al, 2006) also failed to replicate the initial positive association by these authors of the gain-of-function LA allele and LALA genotype with OCD (Table 2), even though our study was adequately powered. Superficially, it can be acknowledged that the OCD probands in our study had more LA and fewer LG alleles than the controls and thus were in accord with the direction of the findings of the study by Hu et al (2006); these differences, however, were minute and far from statistically significant. Finally, on the basis of emerging evidence from human (Kaufman et al, 2006) and mouse behavior genetics (Ren-Patterson et al, 2005, 2006) that points toward gene × gene interactions of SLC6A4 and BDNF, we investigated combined genotypes for these two genes but found no support for a combined, epistatic involvement of these two genes considered together in OCD (Supplementary Table 2).
The rationales behind the analyses discussed above can be subsumed under the category of differential or interacting gene function, but they do not take into consideration an increasing awareness of phenotypical heterogeneity in OCD (Baer, 1994; Leckman et al, 1997; Mataix-Cols et al, 2002; Pato et al, 2002). Both categorical subtypes and dimensional approaches have been proposed to more narrowly define homogeneous populations within the larger construct of OCD (Taylor, 2005). These sub-phenotype definitions are based on an etiopathological hypothesis, which states that specific, and not necessarily overlapping, constellations of susceptibility genes, each of moderate effect size, will result in distinct phenotypes. Thus far, the overall success in genetic studies with specific OCD subtypes has been modest, which could be due to the overall small sample sizes in conjunction with the further loss of power that accompanies each stratification (Miguel et al, 2005).
It should also be noted that the single most strongly associated variant with OCD, SLC6A4 I425V (‘OCD 1’ in OMIM), results in a clinical phenotype marked by multiple neuropsychiatric symptoms rather than a highly specific subtype, although OCD is the single most frequent diagnosis in individuals with the I425V variant (Delorme et al, 2005; Ozaki et al, 2003; Wendland et al, in press). Whereas initial discussions focused on the possible co-occurrence of the greater-expressing 5-HTTLPR/rs25531 alleles and related genotypes with the gain-of-function SLC6A4 I425V variant, the presence or absence of this co-occurrence does not diminish the importance of one or another alone, especially given the nature of the different molecular mechanisms involved in their consequences for transporter function (Hu et al, 2006; Kilic et al, 2003; Lesch et al, 1996). We view the genetic analyses of OCD subphenotypes conducted herein as exploratory and regard the evidence for a relationship between 5-HTTLPR/rs25531 genotypes and the overall number of comorbid anxiety disorders as preliminary. More detailed analyses with larger proband samples and more specifically formulated hypotheses are required to further explore this finding.
In addition, the co-occurrence of other psychiatric disorders, and possible genes associated with them, has only uncommonly been evaluated. High comorbidity between OCD and other anxiety disorders, which was notable in an earlier study in a smaller sample of this cohort of OCD patients (LaSalle et al, 2004), was found in the present study to be significantly associated with both SLC6A4 promotor–region variants, alone and together, with the strongest statistical association being driven by rs25531. Since these two variants interact functionally, this raises the question of whether previous observations of variability in associations between OCD and 5-HTTLPR alone might have been contributed to by different frequencies of comorbid disorders in the diverse OCD populations investigated. As rs25531 has only been previously evaluated in the single study by Hu et al (2006), which did not consider the question of comorbidity, it might be that rs25531 covertly influenced OCD-5-HTTLPR associations in earlier studies. Likewise, with regard to a possible SLC6A4-BDNF interaction in OCD, comorbidity in particular with major depressive disorder, might also help explain the lack of replication in our study with the previous strong finding of a protective effect of the BDNF Met66 allele in OCD by Hall et al (2003). TheV66M polymorphism has been reported in several studies as significantly associated with different depressive disorders (Angelucci et al, 2005), and well as with schizophrenia (Neves-Pereira et al, 2005), and anorexia nervosa (Ribases et al, 2004).
The case–control association study design employed here is generally susceptible to population stratification. Although it has greater statistical power than family studies, its results can be spurious for loci that differ in their allelic frequencies between ethnicities. The 5-HTTLPR polymorphism is known to vary strongly between ethnicities (Gelernter et al, 1999; Greenberg et al, 2000; Kunugi et al, 1997), and we addressed this issue by only analyzing ethnically matched probands and three control groups. Our three control groups were derived from three different geographical locations, and we thus cannot completely rule out some degree of remaining hidden population stratification (despite lack of differences in allelic and genotypic frequencies among these samples), given the recent report by Hu et al (2006) that showed marked differences in allelic frequencies at the 5-HTTLPR locus between Caucasian populations, even though these were partially comprised of individuals with psychiatric diagnoses. It should also be noted that the recent association between 5-HTTLPR and OCD by Hu et al was observed in a case–control as well as in a family-based association study, the latter of which is not susceptible to hidden population stratification. Thus, the lack of association in our study warrants further analyses in large family-based OCD samples such as the OCD Collaborative Genetics Study (Samuels et al, 2006) before it will point toward the need to analyze other candidate regions such as 9p, 3q, 7p, 1q, 15q, 6q, and 13q (Hanna et al, 2002; Shugart et al, 2006; Willour et al, 2004) and polymorphisms involved in other neurotransmitters such as glutamate (Arnold et al, 2006; Dickel et al, 2006; Rosenberg and Keshavan, 1998), neuromodulators, and developmental signals potentially of importance in OCD such as glutamate.
Accession codes
References
Angelucci F, Brene S, Mathe AA (2005). BDNF in schizophrenia, depression and corresponding animal models. Mol Psychiatry 10: 345–352.
Arnold PD, Sicard T, Burroughs E, Richter MA, Kennedy JL (2006). Glutamate transporter gene SLC1A1 associated with obsessive–compulsive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 63: 769–776.
Baer L (1994). Factor analysis of symptom subtypes of obsessive compulsive disorder and their relation to personality and tic disorders. J Clin Psychiatry 55 (Suppl): 18–23.
Barrett JC, Fry B, Maller J, Daly MJ (2005). Haploview: analysis and visualization of LD and haplotype maps. Bioinformatics 21: 263–265.
Bengel D, Greenberg BD, Cora-Locatelli G, Altemus M, Heils A, Li Q et al (1999). Association of the serotonin transporter promoter regulatory region polymorphism and obsessive–compulsive disorder. Mol Psychiatry 4: 463–466.
Camarena B, Rinetti G, Cruz C, Hernandez S, de la Fuente JR, Nicolini H (2001). Association study of the serotonin transporter gene polymorphism in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 4: 269–272.
Cannings C, Edwards AW (1968). Natural selection and the de Finetti diagram. Ann Hum Genet 31: 421–428.
Cavallini MC, Di Bella D, Siliprandi F, Malchiodi F, Bellodi L (2002). Exploratory factor analysis of obsessive–compulsive patients and association with 5-HTTLPR polymorphism. Am J Med Genet 114: 347–353.
Chabane N, Millet B, Delorme R, Lichtermann D, Mathieu F, Laplanche JL et al (2004). Lack of evidence for association between serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR) and obsessive–compulsive disorder by case control and family association study in humans. Neurosci Lett 363: 154–156.
Cromer KR, Schmidt NB, Murphy DL (in press). An investigation of traumatic life events and obsessive–compulsive disorder. Behav Res Ther [E-pub ahead of print].
Deka R, De Croo S, Yu LM, Ferrell RE (1992). Variable number of tandem repeat (VNTR) polymorphism at locus D17S5 (YNZ22) in four ethnically defined human populations. Hum Genet 90: 86–90.
Delorme R, Betancur C, Wagner M, Krebs MO, Gorwood P, Pearl P et al (2005). Support for the association between the rare functional variant I425V of the serotonin transporter gene and susceptibility to obsessive compulsive disorder. Mol Psychiatry 10: 1059–1061.
Denys D, Van Nieuwerburgh F, Deforce D, Westenberg HG (2006). Association between serotonergic candidate genes and specific phenotypes of obsessive compulsive disorder. J Affect Disord 91: 39–44.
Dickel DE, Veenstra-VanderWeele J, Cox NJ, Wu X, Fischer DJ, Van Etten-Lee M et al (2006). Association testing of the positional and functional candidate gene SLC1A1/EAAC1 in early-onset obsessive–compulsive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 63: 778–785.
Frisch A, Michaelovsky E, Rockah R, Amir I, Hermesh H, Laor N et al (2000). Association between obsessive–compulsive disorder and polymorphisms of genes encoding components of the serotonergic and dopaminergic pathways. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 10: 205–209.
Gelernter J, Cubells JF, Kidd JR, Pakstis AJ, Kidd KK (1999). Population studies of polymorphisms of the serotonin transporter protein gene. Am J Med Genet 88: 61–66.
Glatt CE, DeYoung JA, Delgado S, Service SK, Giacomini KM, Edwards RH et al (2001). Screening a large reference sample to identify very low frequency sequence variants: comparisons between two genes. Nat Genet 27: 435–438.
Goodman WK, Price LH, Rasmussen SA, Mazure C, Fleischmann RL, Hill CL et al (1989). The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry 46: 1006–1011.
Greenberg BD, Li Q, Lucas FR, Hu S, Sirota LA, Benjamin J et al (2000). Association between the serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism and personality traits in a primarily female population sample. Am J Med Genet 96: 202–216.
Greenberg BD, McMahon FJ, Murphy DL (1998). Serotonin transporter candidate gene studies in affective disorders and personality: promises and potential pitfalls. Mol Psychiatry 3: 186–189.
Hall D, Dhilla A, Charalambous A, Gogos JA, Karayiorgou M (2003). Sequence variants of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene are strongly associated with obsessive–compulsive disorder. Am J Hum Genet 73: 370–376.
Hanna GL, Veenstra-VanderWeele J, Cox NJ, Boehnke M, Himle JA, Curtis GC et al (2002). Genome-wide linkage analysis of families with obsessive–compulsive disorder ascertained through pediatric probands. Am J Med Genet 114: 541–552.
Hasler G, Kazuba D, Murphy DL (2006). Factor analysis of obsessive–compulsive disorder YBOCS-SC symptoms and association with 5-HTTLPR SERT polymorphism. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 141: 403–408.
Hasler G, LaSalle-Ricci VH, Ronquillo JG, Crawley SA, Cochran LW, Kazuba D et al (2005). Obsessive–compulsive disorder symptom dimensions show specific relationships to psychiatric comorbidity. Psychiatry Res 135: 121–132.
Heils A, Teufel A, Petri S, Seemann M, Bengel D, Balling U et al (1995). Functional promoter and polyadenylation site mapping of the human serotonin (5-HT) transporter gene. J Neural Transm Gen Sect 102: 247–254.
Hemmings SM, Stein DJ (2006). The current status of association studies in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Psychiatr Clin North Am 29: 411–444.
Hettema JM, Neale MC, Kendler KS (2001). A review and meta-analysis of the genetic epidemiology of anxiety disorders. Am J Psychiatry 158: 1568–1578.
Hranilovic D, Stefulj J, Schwab S, Borrmann-Hassenbach M, Albus M, Jernej B et al (2004). Serotonin transporter promoter and intron 2 polymorphisms: relationship between allelic variants and gene expression. Biol Psychiatry 55: 1090–1094.
Hu XZ, Lipsky RH, Zhu G, Akhtar LA, Taubman J, Greenberg BD et al (2006). Serotonin transporter promoter gain-of-function genotypes are linked to obsessive–compulsive disorder. Am J Hum Genet 78: 815–826.
Kaiser R, Tremblay PB, Roots I, Brockmoller J (2002). Validity of PCR with emphasis on variable number of tandem repeat analysis. Clin Biochem 35: 49–56.
Kaufman J, Yang BZ, Douglas-Palumberi H, Grasso D, Lipschitz D, Houshyar S et al (2006). Brain-derived neurotrophic factor-5-HTTLPR gene interactions and environmental modifiers of depression in children. Biol Psychiatry 59: 673–680.
Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O, Jin R, Merikangas KR, Walters EE (2005). Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62: 593–602.
Kilic F, Murphy DL, Rudnick G (2003). A human serotonin transporter mutation causes constitutive activation of transport activity. Mol Pharmacol 64: 440–446.
Kim SJ, Cox N, Courchesne R, Lord C, Corsello C, Akshoomoff N et al (2002). Transmission disequilibrium mapping at the serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4) region in autistic disorder. Mol Psychiatry 7: 278–288.
Kinnear CJ, Niehaus DJ, Moolman-Smook JC, du Toit PL, van Kradenberg J, Weyers JB et al (2000). Obsessive–compulsive disorder and the promoter region polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) in the serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4): a negative association study in the Afrikaner population. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 3: 327–331.
Kunugi H, Hattori M, Kato T, Tatsumi M, Sakai T, Sasaki T et al (1997). Serotonin transporter gene polymorphisms: ethnic difference and possible association with bipolar affective disorder. Mol Psychiatry 2: 457–462.
LaSalle VH, Cromer KR, Nelson KN, Kazuba D, Justement L, Murphy DL (2004). Diagnostic interview assessed neuropsychiatric disorder comorbidity in 334 individuals with obsessive–compulsive disorder. Depress Anxiety 19: 163–173.
Leal SM (2005). Detection of genotyping errors and pseudo-SNPs via deviations from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Genet Epidemiol 29: 204–214.
Leckman JF, Grice DE, Boardman J, Zhang H, Vitale A, Bondi C et al (1997). Symptoms of obsessive–compulsive disorder. Am J Psychiatry 154: 911–917.
Leckman JF, Pauls DL, Zhang H, Rosario-Campos MC, Katsovich L, Kidd KK et al (2003). Obsessive–compulsive symptom dimensions in affected sibling pairs diagnosed with Gilles de la Tourette syndrome. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 116: 60–68.
Lesch KP, Bengel D, Heils A, Sabol SZ, Greenberg BD, Petri S et al (1996). Association of anxiety-related traits with a polymorphism in the serotonin transporter gene regulatory region. Science 274: 1527–1531.
Lesch KP, Gross J, Franzek E, Wolozin BL, Riederer P, Murphy DL (1995). Primary structure of the serotonin transporter in unipolar depression and bipolar disorder. Biol Psychiatry 37: 215–223.
Lovejoy EA, Scott AC, Fiskerstrand CE, Bubb VJ, Quinn JP (2003). The serotonin transporter intronic VNTR enhancer correlated with a predisposition to affective disorders has distinct regulatory elements within the domain based on the primary DNA sequence of the repeat unit. Eur J Neurosci 17: 417–420.
MacKenzie A, Quinn J (1999). A serotonin transporter gene intron 2 polymorphic region, correlated with affective disorders, has allele-dependent differential enhancer-like properties in the mouse embryo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: 15251–15255.
Mataix-Cols D, Marks IM, Greist JH, Kobak KA, Baer L (2002). Obsessive–compulsive symptom dimensions as predictors of compliance with and response to behaviour therapy: results from a controlled trial. Psychother Psychosom 71: 255–262.
McDougle CJ, Epperson CN, Price LH, Gelernter J (1998). Evidence for linkage disequilibrium between serotonin transporter protein gene (SLC6A4) and obsessive compulsive disorder. Mol Psychiatry 3: 270–273.
Meira-Lima I, Shavitt RG, Miguita K, Ikenaga E, Miguel EC, Vallada H (2004). Association analysis of the catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT), serotonin transporter (5-HTT) and serotonin 2A receptor (5HT2A) gene polymorphisms with obsessive–compulsive disorder. Genes Brain Behav 3: 75–79.
Miguel EC, Leckman JF, Rauch S, do Rosario-Campos MC, Hounie AG, Mercadante MT et al (2005). Obsessive–compulsive disorder phenotypes: implications for genetic studies. Mol Psychiatry 10: 258–275.
Mossner R, Walitza S, Lesch KP, Geller F, Barth N, Remschmidt H et al (2005). Brain-derived neurotrophic factor V66M polymorphism in childhood-onset obsessive–compulsive disorder. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 8: 133–136.
Munafo MR, Clark T, Flint J (2005). Does measurement instrument moderate the association between the serotonin transporter gene and anxiety-related personality traits? A meta-analysis. Mol Psychiatry 10: 415–419.
Mynett-Johnson L, Kealey C, Claffey E, Curtis D, Bouchier-Hayes L, Powell C et al (2000). Multimarkerhaplotypes within the serotonin transporter gene suggest evidence of an association with bipolar disorder. Am J Med Genet 96: 845–849.
Nakamura M, Ueno S, Sano A, Tanabe H (2000). The human serotonin transporter gene linked polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) shows ten novel allelic variants. Mol Psychiatry 5: 32–38.
Neves-Pereira M, Cheung JK, Pasdar A, Zhang F, Breen G, Yates P et al (2005). BDNF gene is a risk factor for schizophrenia in a Scottish population. Mol Psychiatry 10: 208–212.
Ohara K, Suzuki Y, Ochiai M, Tsukamoto T, Tani K, Ohara K (1999). A variable-number-tandem-repeat of the serotonin transporter gene and anxiety disorders. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 23: 55–65.
Ozaki N, Goldman D, Kaye WH, Plotnicov K, Greenberg BD, Lappalainen J et al (2003). Serotonin transporter missense mutation associated with a complex neuropsychiatric phenotype. Mol Psychiatry 8: 933–936.
Pato MT, Pato CN, Pauls DL (2002). Recent findings in the genetics of OCD. J Clin Psychiatry 63 (Suppl 6): 30–33.
Prasad HC, Zhu CB, McCauley JL, Samuvel DJ, Ramamoorthy S, Shelton RC et al (2005). Human serotonin transporter variants display altered sensitivity to protein kinase G and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 11545–11550.
Purcell S, Cherny SS, Sham PC (2003). Genetic power calculator: design of linkage and association genetic mapping studies of complex traits. Bioinformatics 19: 149–150.
Rasmussen SA, Tsuang MT (1984). The epidemiology of obsessive compulsive disorder. J Clin Psychiatry 45: 450–457.
Ren-Patterson RF, Cochran LW, Holmes A, Lesch KP, Lu B, Murphy DL (2006). Gender-dependent modulation of brain monoamines and anxiety-like behaviors in mice with genetic serotonin transporter and BDNF deficiencies. Cell Mol Neurobiol 26: 753–778.
Ren-Patterson RF, Cochran LW, Holmes A, Sherrill S, Huang SJ, Tolliver T et al (2005). Loss of brain-derived neurotrophic factor gene allele exacerbates brain monoamine deficiencies and increases stress abnormalities of serotonin transporter knockout mice. J Neurosci Res 79: 756–771.
Ribases M, Gratacos M, Fernandez-Aranda F, Bellodi L, Boni C, Anderluh M et al (2004). Association of BDNF with anorexia, bulimia and age of onset of weight loss in six European populations. Hum Mol Genet 13: 1205–1212.
Rosenberg DR, Keshavan MS (1998). A.E. Bennett Research Award. Toward a neurodevelopmental model of of obsessive–compulsive disorder. Biol Psychiatry 43: 623–640.
Rosenberg PS, Che A, Chen BE (2006). Multiple hypothesis testing strategies for genetic case–control association studies. Stat Med 25: 3134–3149.
Samuels JF, Riddle MA, Greenberg BD, Fyer AJ, McCracken JT, Rauch SL et al (2006). The OCD collaborative genetics study: methods and sample description. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 141: 201–207.
Shugart YY, Samuels J, Willour VL, Grados MA, Greenberg BD, Knowles JA et al (2006). Genomewide linkage scan for obsessive–compulsive disorder: evidence for susceptibility loci on chromosomes 3q, 7p, 1q, 15q, and 6q. Mol Psychiatry 11: 763–770.
Sutcliffe JS, Delahanty RJ, Prasad HC, McCauley JL, Han Q, Jiang L et al (2005). Allelic heterogeneity at the serotonin transporter locus (SLC6A4) confers susceptibility to autism and rigid-compulsive behaviors. Am J Hum Genet 77: 265–279.
Taylor S (2005). Dimensional and subtyped models of OCD. In: Abramowitz JS, Houts AC (eds). Concepts and Controversies in Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder. Springer: New York. pp 27–42.
Walitza S, Wewetzer C, Gerlach M, Klampfl K, Geller F, Barth N et al (2004). Transmission disequilibrium studies in children and adolescents with obsessive–compulsive disorders pertaining to polymorphisms of genes of the serotonergic pathway. J Neural Transm 111: 817–825.
Weissman MM, Bland RC, Canino GJ, Greenwald S, Hwu HG, Lee CK et al (1994). The cross national epidemiology of obsessive compulsive disorder. The Cross National Collaborative Group. J Clin Psychiatry 55 (Suppl): 5–10.
Wendland JR, DeGuzman TB, McMahon F, Rudnick G, Detera-Wadleigh S, Murphy DL (in press). SERT Ileu425Val in Autism, Asperger Syndrome and obsessive–compulsive disorder. Psychiatr Genet.
Wendland JR, Kruse MR, Murphy DL (2006a). Functional SLITRK1 var321, varCDfs and SLC6A4 G56A variants and susceptibility to obsessive–compulsive disorder. Mol Psychiatry 11: 802–804.
Wendland JR, Martin BJ, Kruse MR, Lesch KP, Murphy DL (2006b). Simultaneous genotyping of four functional loci of human SLC6A4, with a reappraisal of 5-HTTLPR and rs25531. Mol Psychiatry 11: 224–226.
Willour VL, Yao Shugart Y, Samuels J, Grados M, Cullen B, Bienvenu III OJ et al (2004). Replication study supports evidence for linkage to 9p24 in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Am J Hum Genet 75: 508–513.
Yonan AL, Palmer AA, Gilliam TC (2006). Hardy-Weinberg disequilibrium identified genotyping error of the serotonin transporter (SLC6A4) promoter polymorphism. Psychiatr Genet 16: 31–34.
Acknowledgements
We are indebted to Diane Kazuba and Brenda Justement for conducting proband interviews, to Teresa Tolliver and Su-Jan Huang for excellent technical assistance in DNA extraction and general lab maintenance, to Theresa DeGuzman for development of the OCD phenotype database, and to Holly Lasalle and Michael Wheaton for numerous contributions to updating the database. This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIMH, NIH.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Supplementary Information accompanies the paper on the Neuropsychopharmacology website (http://www.nature.com/npp)
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wendland, J., Kruse, M., Cromer, K. et al. A Large Case–Control Study of Common Functional SLC6A4 and BDNF Variants in Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder. Neuropsychopharmacol 32, 2543–2551 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.npp.1301394
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.npp.1301394
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Possible actions of cannabidiol in obsessive-compulsive disorder by targeting the WNT/β-catenin pathway
Molecular Psychiatry (2022)
-
Relevance of polymorphisms in MC4R and BDNF in short normal stature
BMC Pediatrics (2018)
-
Is serotonin transporter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) allele status a predictor for obsessive-compulsive disorder? A meta-analysis
Archives of Women's Mental Health (2015)
-
A review of the serotonin transporter and prenatal cortisol in the development of autism spectrum disorders
Molecular Autism (2013)
-
Molecular genetics of obsessive–compulsive disorder: a comprehensive meta-analysis of genetic association studies
Molecular Psychiatry (2013)