Within the study period, 88 children with tic disorders (n = 64, 72.7% male) and 111 control children (n = 74, 66.7% male) were enrolled. The mean ages of children with tic disorders and control children were 11.2 (SD = 3.1) and 12.0 (SD = 3.2) years, respectively. The groups did not differ significantly in terms of gender (χ2 = 0.6, p = 0.444, Yates’ correction) or mean age (t [197] =-1.9, p = 0.063, Student’s t test for independent groups). Other sociodemographic and familial variables of children with tic disorders and control children are illustrated in Table 1.
Table 1
Sociodemographic and familial features of children with tic disorders and control children
N (%) | Tic Disorder (n = 88) | Control (n = 111) | χ 2/dF or t | P* | E.S.** |
Educational status | Not attending school | 1 (1.1) | 3 (2.7) | 12.7/4 | 0.013 | 0.25 |
Kindergarten/preschool | 6 (6.8) | 1 (0.9) |
Primary school | 34 (38.6) | 26 (23.4) |
Secondary school | 28 (31.8) | 51 (45.9) |
High school | 19 (21.6) | 30 (27.0) |
Maternal age (years) | 37.9 (6.7) | 38.7 (7.1) | -0.8/197 | 0.419 | - |
Maternal education | Primary school or lower | 47 (53.4) | 47 (42.7) | 4.0/3 | 0.266 | - |
Secondary school | 10 (11.4) | 9 (8.2) |
High school | 14 (15.9) | 23 (20.9) |
University or higher | 17 (19.3) | 31 (28.2) |
Maternal vocation | Housewife | 70 (79.5) | 75 (67.6) | 7.8/4 | 0.167 | - |
Worker | 2 (2.3) | 5 (4.5) |
Civil servant | 12 (13.6) | 25 (22.5) |
Artisan | 3 (3.4) | 4 (3.6) |
Retired | 1 (1.1) | 0 (0.0) |
Paternal age (years) | 42.0 (6.5) | 41.3 (10.2) | 0.6/197 | 0.581 | - |
Paternal education | Primary school or lower | 29 (33.0) | 32 (28.8) | 0.8/3 | 0.841 | - |
Secondary school | 9 (10.2) | 9 (8.1) |
High school | 23 (26.1) | 32 (28.8) |
University or higher | 27 (30.7) | 38 (34.2) |
Paternal vocation | Jobless | 3 (3.4) | 1 (0.9) | 7.0/4 | 0.222 | - |
Worker | 23 (26.1) | 23 (20.7) |
Civil servant | 27 (30.7) | 36 (32.4) |
Artisan | 30 (34.1) | 40 (36.0) |
Retired | 5 (5.7) | 7 (6.3) |
Family status | Intact/Nuclear | 85 (96.6) | 97 (87.4) | 5.3/1 | 0.023 | 0.16 |
Separated/widowed/divorced | 3 (3.4) | 14 (12.6) |
Maternal psychopathology present | 14 (15.9) | 11 (9.9) | 1.1/1 | 0.292 | - |
Paternal psychopathology present | 7 (8.0) | 6 (5.4) | 0.2/1 | 0.664 | - |
*Chi square test with likelihood ratio, Yates’ corrections, Fisher’s exact test and t test for independent groups, **Phi and Cramer’s V.
Control healthy children were significantly more likely to attend secondary and high schools than children with tic disorders, while they were less likely to live in intact, nuclear families. Apart from those, no significant differences emerged between groups. Most children with tic disorders were diagnosed with Tourette’s disorder (n = 47, 53.4%) or persistent motor tic disorder (n = 39, 44.3%), while the remainder (n = 2, 2.3%) were diagnosed with persistent vocal tic disorder. According to evaluations with the Yale Global Tic Disorder Severity Scale, mean scores for motor and vocal tics were 13.7 (SD = 4.9) and 5.2 (SD = 6.2), respectively. The mean global impairment and total scores were 29.2 (SD = 11.4) and 48.1 (SD = 18.6), respectively. Most children were classified as having either moderate (n = 40, 45.5%) or significant (n = 32, 36.4%) tics, while children with mild (n = 9, 10.2%) and severe (n = 7, 8.0%) tics were rarer.
Additionally, most of the children had either one (n = 47, 53.4%) or two (n = 9, 10.2%) comorbid diagnoses (Median = 1.0, IQR = 1.0). The most common comorbid diagnoses were attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD, n = 38, 43.2%), anxiety disorder (n = 13, 14.8%) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD, n = 8, 9.1%). Of note, one child each (1.1%) was diagnosed with trichotillomania, childhood onset speech fluency disorder, enuresis, and oppositional defiant disorder. Most children were receiving pharmacological treatment (n = 72, 81.8%) with either one (n = 41, 46.6%) or two (n = 31, 35.2%) agents. The most common psychopharmacological treatments were aripiprazole (n = 42, 48.9%), methylphenidate (n = 15, 17.0%) and atomoxetine/risperidone/haloperidol (n = 12, 13.6%, each). Eight of the children (9.1%) were treated with SSRIs, while only one (1.1%) received olanzapine treatment. Self-reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder among children with tic disorders and control children are listed in Table 2.
Table 2
Self-reported anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms among children with tic disorder and control children
Median (IQR) | Tic Disorder (n = 88) | Control (n = 111) | Z | P* | E.S. |
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children- State | 33.0 (10.3) | 31.0 (10.0) | -1.8 | 0.072 | 0.13 |
State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children- Trait | 36.0 (12.0) | 35.0 (10.0) | -1.3 | 0.189 | - |
Children’s Depression Inventory | 10.0 (10.0) | 8.0 (8.0) | -1.6 | 0.108 | - |
Maudsley Obsessive Compulsive Symptom Checklist | 16.0 (9.0) | 14.5 (10.0) | -2.1 | 0.036 | 14.9 |
*Mann‒Whitney U test, E.S.: Effect Size |
In bivariate comparisons, children with tic disorder tended to have elevated levels of state anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptom scores. Children with Tourette Disorder, Persistent Motor and Vocal tic disorders did not differ significantly in terms of self-reported symptoms (Mann‒Whitney U test, p > 0.05). Bivariate correlations of psychometric measures between the YGTSS- Total Tic Score and Global Impairment score revealed that only global impairment correlated significantly with the MoCA score (Spearman’s rank order correlation rho = 0.003, rho’= 0.021, Holm‒Bonferroni corrected). Less than half of the TD children had trait (n = 36, 40.9%) or state (n = 35, 39.8%) anxiety above the median, while only ten (11.4%) reported clinically significant depressive symptoms.
Finally, we compared children with tic disorders and control children in terms of the expression of cytokines (i.e., IL-1α, IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-6, TGF-β, IL-17, and IL-4) by means of qRT‒PCR. Apart from TNF-α (p = 0.159) and IL-6 (p = 0.198) among children with tics and IL-17 among controls (p = 0.129, Kolmogorov‒Smirnov test with Lilliefors correction), none of the cytokines conformed to assumptions of normality. Covariance matrices of dependent variables were not equal across groups (Box’s M = 218.0, F = 7.5, p = 0.000), and only the error variances for IL-17 were equal (p = 0.393, Levene’s test). Therefore, interleukin levels across groups were compared with multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with Pillai’s trace method. According to MANOVA, the groups differed significantly in terms of interleukin levels (F [7.0, 191.0] = 13.2, p = 0.000, partial η2 = 0.33). The results of univariate ANOVAs and interleukin levels across groups are illustrated in Table 3. In addition, we evaluated the serum levels of cytokines in children with tic disorders and healthy control children by using ELISA to evaluate the concordance of qPCR results with serum protein levels. As shown in Fig. S1, serum IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-4 levels were higher in children with tic disorders than in healthy controls, in line with the qRT‒PCR data. Furthermore, we could not detect any significant change in IL-1α and TGF-β levels in concordance with the qRT‒PCR results. These results may indicate that the increased expression of cytokines in children with tic disorders is a consequence of reprogrammed gene expression in PBMCs. Although we could not detect a significant alteration in IL-17 serum levels, we observed a trend for lower IL-17 serum levels in children with tic disorders (Fig. S1). Hence, this finding may suggest that cellular mechanisms other than transcriptional regulation could mediate the secretion and stability of IL-17.
Table 3
Interleukin levels in children with tic disorders and control children
Mean (SD) | Tic Disorder (n = 88) | Control (n = 111) | F | P* | Partial η2 |
IL-1α | 1.7 (0.8) | 1.8 (0.7) | 0.3 | 0.562 | 0.00 |
IL-1β | 2.1 (1.2) | 1.9 (0.8) | 4.2 | 0.042 | 0.02 |
TNF-α | 2.3 (1.1) | 1.7 (0.7) | 20.0 | 0.000 | 0.09 |
IL-6 | 3.1 (1.9) | 1.7 (0.6) | 55.2 | 0.000 | 0.22 |
TGF-β | 1.7 (1.0) | 1.7 (0.6) | 0.00 | 0.961 | 0.00 |
IL-17 | 1.8 (0.9) | 2.2 (0.8) | 10.4 | 0.001 | 0.05 |
IL-4 | 2.0 (1.1) | 1.6 (0.7) | 10.1 | 0.002 | 0.05 |
*ANOVA with Bonferroni correction, IL: interleukin, TNF: tumor necrosis factor, TGF: tumor growth factor.
According to univariate ANOVAs, children with tic disorders had significantly elevated levels of IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-4 expression, while controls had significantly elevated levels of IL-17 expression. The type of TD did not affect cytokine expression levels (Mann‒Whitney U test, p > 0.05). Among children with tic disorders, state anxiety scores correlated significantly and positively with IL-17 levels (rho = 0.32, p = 0.006), while among control children, state anxiety correlated significantly and negatively with IL-6 levels (rho=- 0.25, p = 0.026). Moreover, self-reported obsessive compulsive symptom scores correlated significantly and negatively with IL-4 levels (rho= -0.22, p = 0.049) among controls. Apart from those, no significant correlations emerged between interleukin levels and self-reported anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms. YGTSS-total tic and impairment scores did not correlate significantly with cytokine levels.