# Genetics and Epigenetics of Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder

## TL;DR

This review summarizes recent genetic and epigenetic findings in obsessive–compulsive disorder, highlighting complex biological pathways involved in its development.

## Contribution

The paper integrates recent multi-omic studies to propose an integrative model of OCD biology combining polygenic, rare variant, and epigenetic influences.

## Key findings

- Large-scale genomic studies show OCD is highly polygenic with contributions from common and rare variants.
- Epigenomic studies reveal replicable methylation patterns and sex-dependent effects in OCD.
- Biological domains like synaptic plasticity and chromatin regulation are increasingly linked to OCD risk.

## Abstract

Background: Obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is a heterogeneous psychiatric condition with substantial heritability. Early genetic studies were often underpowered and produced limited reproducibility, but recent large-scale genomic and multi-omic approaches are beginning to elucidate the genetic architecture of OCD. Objectives: This review aims to synthesise current evidence from recent genomic and epigenomic studies on OCD and their implications for molecular pathways of pathogenesis, including endophenotypes. Methods: We reviewed peer-reviewed literature and preprints published in recent years, focusing on multiple genetic approaches, including genome-wide association studies (GWAS), whole exome sequencing (WES), whole genome sequencing (WGS), and methylome-wide association studies (MWAS). We then integrated the results with endophenotypic evidence at the biochemical, physiological, structural, functional, and executive/cognitive levels. Results: Recent large-scale genomic studies provide strong evidence of a highly polygenic contribution from common variants, while rare coding and structural variants also contribute measurably, with enriched signals in pathways relevant to neurodevelopment and, in some cohorts, early-onset presentations. Epigenomic studies have moved from scattered findings to more replicable methylation patterns, including loci influenced by nearby genetic variation and indications of sex-dependent effects. Although convergence at the single-gene level remains limited, cross-study and cross-omics signals increasingly point to biological domains involving synaptic organisation and plasticity, neurological development and chromatin regulation, immune/stress pathways, and cellular homeostasis. Conclusions: The biology of OCD risk is best represented by an integrative model combining polygenic load, contributions from rare variants, and regulatory (epigenetic) mechanisms that influence intermediate phenotypes at the circuit and cognitive levels. The current findings are not yet clinically applicable for individual diagnosis; however, they may inform future multidisciplinary research frameworks and, in the longer term, contribute to the development of more personalised approaches in OCD.