OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the mode of inheritance for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in families ascertained through pediatric probands. METHODS: We ascertained 52 families (35 case and 17 control families) through probands between the ages of 10 and 17 years. Direct interviews were completed with 215 individuals. Family informant data were collected on another 450 individuals without direct interviews, forming two data sets with one contained within the other. Complex segregation analyses were performed using regressive models as programmed in REGTL in the S.A.G.E. package. All models used in the analyses included sex-specific age and type parameters. RESULTS: All models that excluded a residual effect of an affected parent were rejected. With that parameter included, the environmental and sporadic models were rejected in comparisons with the most general model in both data sets (all p < 0.005). With the direct interview data, the general codominant Mendelian model was not rejected when compared with the most general model (p = 0.140). We could not distinguish between any of the simple Mendelian models using either data set. However, the dominant Mendelian model provided a somewhat better fit than the other Mendelian models to the direct interview data. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence for a major susceptibility locus in families with OCD when age at onset is incorporated into the model. Mendelian factors at most partially explained the familial aggregation of the phenotype, and residual familial effects were necessary to fit the data adequately. The results support the importance of linkage efforts by suggesting that a major locus is segregating within a proportion of families with OCD ascertained through pediatric probands. Copyright 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the mode of inheritance for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in families ascertained through pediatric probands. METHODS: We ascertained 52 families (35 case and 17 control families) through probands between the ages of 10 and 17 years. Direct interviews were completed with 215 individuals. Family informant data were collected on another 450 individuals without direct interviews, forming two data sets with one contained within the other. Complex segregation analyses were performed using regressive models as programmed in REGTL in the S.A.G.E. package. All models used in the analyses included sex-specific age and type parameters. RESULTS: All models that excluded a residual effect of an affected parent were rejected. With that parameter included, the environmental and sporadic models were rejected in comparisons with the most general model in both data sets (all p < 0.005). With the direct interview data, the general codominant Mendelian model was not rejected when compared with the most general model (p = 0.140). We could not distinguish between any of the simple Mendelian models using either data set. However, the dominant Mendelian model provided a somewhat better fit than the other Mendelian models to the direct interview data. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide evidence for a major susceptibility locus in families with OCD when age at onset is incorporated into the model. Mendelian factors at most partially explained the familial aggregation of the phenotype, and residual familial effects were necessary to fit the data adequately. The results support the importance of linkage efforts by suggesting that a major locus is segregating within a proportion of families with OCD ascertained through pediatric probands. Copyright 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: Stephen Correia; Emily Hubbard; Jason Hassenstab; Agustin Yip; Josef Vymazal; Vit Herynek; Jay Giedd; Dennis L Murphy; Benjamin D Greenberg Journal: Brain Imaging Behav Date: 2009-12-12 Impact factor: 3.978
Authors: Sarah Hohmann; Nicoletta Adamo; Benjamin B Lahey; Stephen V Faraone; Tobias Banaschewski Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Josien Schuurmans; Anton J L M van Balkom; Harold J G M van Megen; Johannes H Smit; Merijn Eikelenboom; Danielle C Cath; Maarten Kaarsemaker; Desiree Oosterbaan; Gert-Jan Hendriks; Koen R J Schruers; Nic J A van der Wee; Gerrit Glas; Patricia van Oppen Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2012-11-12 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Gregory L Hanna; Joseph A Himle; Barbara S Hanna; Katherine J Gold; Brenda W Gillespie Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2011-04-27 Impact factor: 6.505
Authors: Carol A Mathews; Judith A Badner; J Michael Andresen; Brooke Sheppard; Joseph A Himle; Jon E Grant; Kyle A Williams; Denise A Chavira; Amin Azzam; Maxine Schwartz; Victor I Reus; Suck Won Kim; Edwin H Cook; Gregory L Hanna Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2012-05-25 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Jessica Ross; Judith Badner; Helena Garrido; Brooke Sheppard; Denise A Chavira; Marco Grados; Jonathan M Woo; Pamela Doo; Paula Umaña; Eduardo Fournier; Sarah Shaw Murray; Carol A Mathews Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2011-06-21 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Kevin L Delucchi; Hilga Katerberg; S Evelyn Stewart; Damiaan A J P Denys; Christine Lochner; Denise E Stack; Johan A den Boer; Anton J L M van Balkom; Michael A Jenike; Dan J Stein; Danielle C Cath; Carol A Mathews Journal: Compr Psychiatry Date: 2010-08-05 Impact factor: 3.735
Authors: Dennis L Murphy; Pablo R Moya; Meredith A Fox; Liza M Rubenstein; Jens R Wendland; Kiara R Timpano Journal: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 6.237