To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Multimorbidity may impose an overwhelming burden on patients with psychosis and is affected by gender and age. Our aim is to study the independent role of familial liability to psychosis as a risk factor for multimorbidity.
We performed the study within the framework of the Genetic Risk and Outcome of Psychosis (GROUP) project. Overall, we compared 1024 psychotic patients, 994 unaffected siblings and 566 controls on the prevalence of 125 lifetime diseases, and 19 self-reported somatic complaints. Multimorbidity was defined as the presence of two or more complaints/diseases in the same individual. Generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) were used to investigate the effects of gender, age (adolescent, young, older) and familial liability (patients, siblings, controls) and their interactions on multimorbidity.
Familial liability had a significant effect on multimorbidity of either complaints or diseases. Patients had a higher prevalence of multimorbidity of complaints compared to siblings (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.79–2.69, P < 0.001) and to controls (3.05, 2.35–3.96, P < 0.001). In physical health multimorbidity, patients (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05–1.75, P = 0.018), but not siblings, had significantly higher prevalence than controls. Similar finding were observed for multimorbidity of lifetime diseases, including psychiatric diseases. Significant results were observed for complaints and disease multimorbidity across gender and age groups.
Multimorbidity is a common burden, significantly more prevalent in patients and their unaffected siblings. Familial liability to psychosis showed an independent effect on multimorbidity; gender and age are also important factors determining multimorbidity.
Although cognitive subtypes have been suggested in schizophrenia patients, similar analyses have not been carried out in their non-affected siblings. Subtype classification may provide more insight into genetically driven variation in cognitive function. We investigated cognitive subtypes in siblings.
Cluster analyses were performed in 654 non-affected siblings, on a cognitive battery that included tests of attention, intellectual function and episodic memory. Resulting subtypes in the siblings were analyzed for cognitive, demographic and clinical characteristics and compared with those of their probands.
Three sibling subtypes of cognitive function were distinguished: ‘normal’, ‘mixed’ and ‘impaired’. Normal profile siblings (n = 192) were unimpaired on cognitive tests, in contrast to their proband (n = 184). Mixed profile siblings (n = 228) and their probands (n = 222) had a more similar performance pattern. Impaired profile siblings had poorer functional outcomes (n = 234) and their profile was almost identical to that of their proband (n = 223). Probands with cognitively impaired siblings could be distinguished from other schizophrenia patients by their own cognitive performance. They also had poorer clinical characteristics, including achievement of symptomatic remission.
Unaffected siblings of patients with schizophrenia are heterogeneous with respect to cognitive function. The poorer the cognitive profile of the sibling, the higher the level of correspondence with the proband. The sibling's cognitive subtype was predictive for disease course in the proband. Distinguishing cognitive subtypes of unaffected siblings may be of relevance for genetic studies.
The relationship between cannabis use and cognitive functioning in patients with psychosis has yielded contradictory findings. In individuals at genetic high risk for psychosis, information is sparse. The aim of this study was to assess the association between recency and frequency of cannabis use and cognitive functioning in patients with psychosis and their unaffected siblings.
We conducted a cross-sectional study in 956 patients with non-affective psychosis, 953 unaffected siblings, and 554 control subjects. Participants completed a cognitive test battery including assessments of verbal learning, set shifting, sustained attention, processing speed, working memory, acquired knowledge, reasoning and problem solving and social cognition. Cannabis use was assessed by urinalysis and by the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Using random-effect regression models the main effects of cannabis (recency and frequency) and the interaction with status (patient, sibling, control) on cognitive functioning were assessed.
Current cannabis use was associated with poorer performance on immediate verbal learning, processing speed and working memory (Cohen's d −0.20 to −0.33, p<0.005). Lifetime cannabis use was associated with better performance on acquired knowledge, facial affect recognition and face identity recognition (Cohen's d+0.17 to +0.33, p<0.005). There was no significant interaction between cannabis and status on cognitive functioning.
Lifetime cannabis-using individuals might constitute a subgroup with a higher cognitive potential. The residual effects of cannabis may impair short-term memory and processing speed.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.