Joint polygenic and environmental risks for childhood attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and ADHD symptom dimensions

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundattention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with both polygenic liability and environmental exposures, both intrinsic to the family, such as family conflict, and extrinsic, such as air pollution. However, much less is known about the interplay between environmental and genetic risks relevant to ADHD—a better understanding of which could inform both mechanistic models and clinical prediction algorithms.MethodsTwo independent data sets, the population‐based Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (ABCD) (N = 11,876) and the case‐control Oregon‐ADHD‐1000 (N = 1449), were used to examine additive (G + E) and interactive (GxE) effects of selected polygenic risk scores (PRS) and environmental factors in a cross‐sectional design. Genetic risk was measured using PRS for nine mental health disorders/traits. Exposures included family income, family conflict/negative sentiment, and geocoded measures of area deprivation, lead exposure risk, and air pollution exposure (nitrogen dioxide and fine particulate matter).ResultsADHD PRS and family conflict jointly predicted concurrent ADHD symptoms in both cohorts. Additive‐effects models, including both genetic and environmental factors, explained significantly more variation in symptoms than any individual factor alone (joint R2 = .091 for total symptoms in ABCD; joint R2 = .173 in Oregon‐ADHD‐1000; all delta‐R2 p‐values <2e‐7). Significant effect size heterogeneity across ancestry groups was observed for genetic and environmental factors (e.g., Q = 9.01, p = .011 for major depressive disorder PRS; Q = 13.34, p = .001 for area deprivation). GxE interactions observed in the full ABCD cohort suggested stronger environmental effects when genetic risk is low, though they did not replicate.ConclusionsReproducible additive effects of PRS and family environment on ADHD symptoms were found, but GxE interaction effects were not replicated and appeared confounded by ancestry. Results highlight the potential value of combining exposures and PRS in clinical prediction algorithms. The observed differences in risks across ancestry groups warrant further study to avoid health care disparities.