Schizophrenia is a heritable complex phenotype associated with a background risk involving multiple common genetic variants of small effect and a multitude of environmental exposures. Early twin and family studies using proxy‐genetic liability measures suggest gene‐environment interaction in the etiology of schizophrenia spectrum disorders, but the molecular evidence is scarce. Here, by analyzing the main and joint associations of polygenic risk score for schizophrenia (PRS‐SCZ) and environmental exposures in 1,699 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders and 1,542 unrelated controls with no lifetime history of a diagnosis of those disorders, we provide further evidence for gene‐environment interaction in schizophrenia. Evidence was found for additive interaction of molecular genetic risk state for schizophrenia (binary mode of PRS‐SCZ above 75% of the control distribution) with the presence of lifetime regular cannabis use and exposure to early‐life adversities (sexual abuse, emotional abuse, emotional neglect, and bullying), but not with the presence of hearing impairment, season of birth (winter birth), and exposure to physical abuse or physical neglect in childhood. The sensitivity analyses replacing the a priori PRS‐SCZ at 75% with alternative cut‐points (50% and 25%) confirmed the additive interaction. Our results suggest that the etiopathogenesis of schizophrenia involves genetic underpinnings that act by making individuals more sensitive to the effects of some environmental exposures.

Recent years have seen considerable progress in epidemiological and molecular genetic research into environmental and genetic factors in schizophrenia, but methodological uncertainties remain with regard to validating environmental exposures, and the population risk conferred by individual molecular genetic variants is small. There are now also a limited number of studies that have investigated molecular genetic candidate gene-environment interactions (G × E), however, so far, thorough replication of findings is rare and G × E research still faces several conceptual and methodological challenges. In this article, we aim to review these recent developments and illustrate how integrated, large-scale investigations may overcome contemporary challenges in G × E research, drawing on the example of a large, international, multi-center study into the identification and translational application of G × E in schizophrenia. While such investigations are now well underway, new challenges emerge for G × E research from late-breaking evidence that genetic variation and environmental exposures are, to a significant degree, shared across a range of psychiatric disorders, with potential overlap in phenotype.

Exposures constitute a dense network of the environment: exposome. Here, we argue for embracing the exposome paradigm to investigate the sum of nongenetic “risk” and show how predictive modeling approaches can be used to construct an exposome score (ES; an aggregated score of exposures) for schizophrenia. The training dataset consisted of patients with schizophrenia and controls, whereas the independent validation dataset consisted of patients, their unaffected siblings, and controls. Binary exposures were cannabis use, hearing impairment, winter birth, bullying, and emotional, physical, and sexual abuse along with physical and emotional neglect. We applied logistic regression (LR), Gaussian Naive Bayes (GNB), the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), and Ridge penalized classification models to the training dataset. ESs, the sum of weighted exposures based on coefficients from each model, were calculated in the validation dataset. In addition, we estimated ES based on meta-analyses and a simple sum score of exposures. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic, and Nagelkerke’s R2 were compared. The ESMeta-analyses performed the worst, whereas the sum score and the ESGNB were worse than the ESLR that performed similar to the ESLASSO and ESRIDGE. The ESLR distinguished patients from controls (odds ratio [OR] = 1.94, P < .001), patients from siblings (OR = 1.58, P < .001), and siblings from controls (OR = 1.21, P = .001). An increase in ESLR was associated with a gradient increase of schizophrenia risk. In reference to the remaining fractions, the ESLR at top 30%, 20%, and 10% of the control distribution yielded ORs of 3.72, 3.74, and 4.77, respectively. Our findings demonstrate that predictive modeling approaches can be harnessed to evaluate the exposome.

Background First-degree relatives of patients with psychotic disorder have higher levels of polygenic risk (PRS) for schizophrenia and higher levels of intermediate phenotypes. Methods We conducted, using two different samples for discovery (n = 336 controls and 649 siblings of patients with psychotic disorder) and replication (n = 1208 controls and 1106 siblings), an analysis of association between PRS on the one hand and psychopathological and cognitive intermediate phenotypes of schizophrenia on the other in a sample at average genetic risk (healthy controls) and a sample at higher than average risk (healthy siblings of patients). Two subthreshold psychosis phenotypes, as well as a standardised measure of cognitive ability, based on a short version of the WAIS-III short form, were used. In addition, a measure of jumping to conclusion bias (replication sample only) was tested for association with PRS. Results In both discovery and replication sample, evidence for an association between PRS and subthreshold psychosis phenotypes was observed in the relatives of patients, whereas in the controls no association was observed. Jumping to conclusion bias was similarly only associated with PRS in the sibling group. Cognitive ability was weakly negatively and non-significantly associated with PRS in both the sibling and the control group. Conclusions The degree of endophenotypic expression of schizophrenia polygenic risk depends on having a sibling with psychotic disorder, suggestive of underlying gene–environment interaction. Cognitive biases may better index genetic risk of disorder than traditional measures of neurocognition, which instead may reflect the population distribution of cognitive ability impacting the prognosis of psychotic disorder.