Daniel Souery

Treatment resistant depression: methodological overview and operational criteria

A wide variety of definitions are used for Treatment Resistant Depression (TRD), considering various criteria and different concepts. Some of the key issues are: the diagnosis, the treatment adequacy in terms of dose and duration, the treatment response assessment and the number of failed therapeutic trials required. Systematic research has been characterizing the concept and criteria to define the different variables involved. Lack of consensus on these issues limits comparison across clinical trials and interpretation of treatment efficacy in the management of treatment resistant patients. Through reanalyzes of available data, we point out the limits of TRD definitions and propose conceptual and operational criteria for a collaborative research project on TRD. It appears that a number of variables commonly associated to treatment resistance are independent of patients characteristics and mainly refer to misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment. The proposed criteria are intended for therapeutic trials in TRD, combining the evaluation of treatment efficiency and the validation of the concept of TRD itself. Major depression with poor response to two adequate trials of different classes of antidepressants is proposed for an operational definition of TRD. Rationale for this definition is discussed in contrast to alternative definitions.

Genetic predictors of response to antidepressants in the GENDEP project.

The objective of the Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression study is to investigate the function of variations in genes encoding key proteins in serotonin, norepinephrine, neurotrophic and glucocorticoid signaling in determining the response to serotonin-reuptake-inhibiting and norepinephrine-reuptake-inhibiting antidepressants. A total of 116 single nucleotide polymorphisms in 10 candidate genes were genotyped in 760 adult patients with moderate-to-severe depression, treated with escitalopram (a serotonin reuptake inhibitor) or nortriptyline (a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor) for 12 weeks in an open-label part-randomized multicenter study. The effect of genetic variants on change in depressive symptoms was evaluated using mixed linear models. Several variants in a serotonin receptor gene (HTR2A) predicted response to escitalopram with one marker (rs9316233) explaining 1.1% of variance (P=0.0016). Variants in the norepinephrine transporter gene (SLC6A2) predicted response to nortriptyline, and variants in the glucocorticoid receptor gene (NR3C1) predicted response to both antidepressants. Two HTR2A markers remained significant after hypothesis-wide correction for multiple testing. A false discovery rate of 0.106 for the three strongest associations indicated that the multiple findings are unlikely to be false positives. The pattern of associations indicated a degree of specificity with variants in genes encoding proteins in serotonin signaling influencing response to the serotonin-reuptake-inhibiting escitalopram, genes encoding proteins in norepinephrine signaling influencing response to the norepinephrine-reuptake-inhibiting nortriptyline and a common pathway gene influencing response to both antidepressants. The single marker associations explained only a small proportion of variance in response to antidepressants, indicating a need for a multivariate approach to prediction.

Shortened onset of action of antidepressants in major depression using acetylsalicylic acid augmentation: a pilot open-label study.

Based on our preclinical data showing a potential accelerating effect of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in combination with fluoxetine in an animal model of depression, we examined the effect of ASA augmentation therapy on selective reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) in major depressed non-responder patients. Twenty-four non-responder patients having received at least 4 weeks of an adequate SSRI treatment were included in a pilot open-label study. Participants were treated openly during 4 weeks with 160 mg/day ASA in addition to their current antidepressant treatment. The combination SSRI–ASA was associated with a response rate of 52.4%. Remission was achieved in 43% of the total sample and 82% of the responder sample. In the responder group, a significant improvement was observed within week 1 (mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-21 items at day 0=29.3±4.5, at day 7=14.0±4.1; P<0.0001) and remained sustained until day 28. Despite limitations due to the open nature of this study, our preliminary results confirm our preclinical findings and are in favour of an accelerating effect of ASA in combination with SSRIs in the treatment of major depression. Potential physiological and biochemical mechanisms may involve an anti-inflammatory and/or neurotrophic effect.

Association between COMT (Val158Met) functional polymorphism and early onset in patients with major depressive disorder in a European multicenter genetic association study.

The available data from preclinical and pharmacological studies on the role of the C-O-methyl transferase (COMT) support the hypothesis that abnormal catecholamine transmission has been implicated in the pathogenesis of mood disorders (MD). We examined the relationship of a common functional polymorphism (Val108/158Met) in the COMT gene, which accounts for four-fold variation in enzyme activity, with ‘early-onset’ (EO) forms (less than or equal to 25 years) of MD, including patients with major depressive disorder (EO-MDD) and bipolar patients (EO-BPD), in a European multicenter case–control sample. Our sample includes 378 MDD (120 EO-MDD), 506 BPD (222 EO-BPD) and 628 controls. An association was found between the high-activity COMT Val allele, particularly the COMT Val/Val genotype and EO-MDD. These findings suggest that the COMT Val/Val genotype may be involved in EO-MDD or may be in linkage disequilibrium with a different causative polymorphism in the vicinity. The COMT gene may have complex and pleiotropic effects on susceptibility and symptomatology of neuropsychiatric disorders.

Variability of 5-HT2C receptor cys23ser polymorphism among European populations and vulnerability to affective disorder.

Substantial evidence supports a role for dysfunction of brain serotonergic (5-HT) systems in the pathogenesis of major affective disorder, both unipolar (recurrent major depression) and bipolar.1 Modification of serotonergic neurotransmission is pivotally implicated in the mechanism of action of antidepressant drugs2 and also in the action of mood stabilizing agents, particularly lithium carbonate.3 Accordingly, genes that code for the multiple subtypes of serotonin receptors that have been cloned and are expressed in brain,4 are strong candidates for a role in the genetic etiology of affective illness. We examined a structural variant of the serotonin 2C (5-HT2C) receptor gene (HTR2C) that gives rise to a cysteine to serine substitution in the N terminal extracellular domain of the receptor protein (cys23ser),5 in 513 patients with recurrent major depression (MDD-R), 649 patients with bipolar (BP) affective disorder and 901 normal controls. The subjects were drawn from nine European countries participating in the European Collaborative Project on Affective Disorders. There was significant variation in the frequency of the HT2CR ser23 allele among the 10 population groups included in the sample (from 24.6% in Greek control subjects to 9.2% in Scots, χ2 = 20.9, df 9, P = 0.01). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that over and above this inter-population variability, there was a significant excess of HT2CR ser23 allele carriers in patients compared to normal controls that was demonstrable for both the MDD (χ2 = 7.34, df 1, P = 0.006) and BP (χ2 = 5.45, df 1, P = 0.02) patients. These findings support a possible role for genetically based structural variation in 5-HT2C receptors in the pathogenesis of major affective disorder.

Differential efficacy of escitalopram and nortriptyline on dimensional measures of depression

BACKGROUND Tricyclic antidepressants and serotonin reuptake inhibitors are considered to be equally effective, but differences may have been obscured by internally inconsistent measurement scales and inefficient statistical analyses. AIMS To test the hypothesis that escitalopram and nortriptyline differ in their effects on observed mood, cognitive and neurovegetative symptoms of depression. METHOD In a multicentre part-randomised open-label design (the Genome Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) study) 811 adults with moderate to severe unipolar depression were allocated to flexible dosage escitalopram or nortriptyline for 12 weeks. The weekly Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and Beck Depression Inventory were scored both conventionally and in a more novel way according to dimensions of observed mood, cognitive symptoms and neurovegetative symptoms. RESULTS Mixed-effect linear regression showed no difference between escitalopram and nortriptyline on the three original scales, but symptom dimensions revealed drug-specific advantages. Observed mood and cognitive symptoms improved more with escitalopram than with nortriptyline. Neurovegetative symptoms improved more with nortriptyline than with escitalopram. CONCLUSIONS The three symptom dimensions provided sensitive descriptors of differential antidepressant response and enabled identification of drug-specific effects.

An Inflammatory Biomarker as a Differential Predictor of Outcome of Depression Treatment With Escitalopram and Nortriptyline

OBJECTIVE Major depressive disorder has been linked with inflammatory processes, but it is unclear whether individual differences in levels of inflammatory biomarkers could help match patients to treatments that are most likely to be beneficial. The authors tested the hypothesis that C-reactive protein (CRP), a commonly available marker of systemic inflammation, predicts differential response to escitalopram (a serotonin reuptake inhibitor) and nortriptyline (a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor). METHOD The hypothesis was tested in the Genome-Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) study, a multicenter open-label randomized clinical trial. CRP was measured with a high-sensitivity method in serum samples from 241 adult men and women with major depressive disorder randomly allocated to 12-week treatment with escitalopram (N=115) or nortriptyline (N=126). The primary outcome measure was the score on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), administered weekly. RESULTS CRP level at baseline differentially predicted treatment outcome with the two antidepressants (CRP-drug interaction: β=3.27, 95% CI=1.65, 4.89). For patients with low levels of CRP (<1 mg/L), improvement on the MADRS score was 3 points higher with escitalopram than with nortriptyline. For patients with higher CRP levels, improvement on the MADRS score was 3 points higher with nortriptyline than with escitalopram. CRP and its interaction with medication explained more than 10% of individual-level variance in treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS An easily accessible peripheral blood biomarker may contribute to improvement in outcomes of major depressive disorder by personalizing treatment choice.

Glucocorticoid receptor gene-based SNP analysis in patients with recurrent major depression

Dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, one of the stress-response systems, is one of the key neurobiological features of major depression (MDD). Data supporting the notion that glucocorticoid-mediated feedback inhibition is impaired in MDD come from a multitude of studies demonstrating nonsuppression of cortisol secretion following administration of the synthetic glucocorticoid dexamethasone. We examined whether genetic variations in the glucocorticoid receptor gene (Nuclear Receptor Subfamily 3, Group C, Member 1; NR3C1) could be associated with increased susceptibility for MDD using a whole gene-based association analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Four SNPs were identified in NR3C1 and genotyped in two well-diagnosed samples of patients with MDD ascertained in Belgium and northern Sweden, and matched control samples. In total, 314 MDD patients and 354 control individuals were included in the study. In the Belgian sample, we observed significant allele (p=0.02) and genotype (p=0.02) association with an SNP in the promoter region (NR3C1-1); in the Swedish sample, we observed significant allele (p=0.02) and genotype (p=0.02) association with the R23K SNP. The haplotype association studies showed modest evidence for an involvement of the 5′ region of the NR3C1 gene in the genetic vulnerability for MDD. This study suggests that polymorphisms in the 5′ region of the NR3C1 gene may play a role in the genetic vulnerability for MDD.

Common genetic variation and antidepressant efficacy in major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of three genome-wide pharmacogenetic studies.

OBJECTIVE Indirect evidence suggests that common genetic variation contributes to individual differences in antidepressant efficacy among individuals with major depressive disorder, but previous studies may have been underpowered to detect these effects. METHOD A meta-analysis was performed on data from three genome-wide pharmacogenetic studies (the Genome-Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression [GENDEP] project, the Munich Antidepressant Response Signature [MARS] project, and the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression [STAR*D] study), which included 2,256 individuals of Northern European descent with major depressive disorder, and antidepressant treatment outcomes were prospectively collected. After imputation, 1.2 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms were tested, capturing common variation for association with symptomatic improvement and remission after up to 12 weeks of antidepressant treatment. RESULTS No individual association met a genome-wide threshold for statistical significance in the primary analyses. A polygenic score derived from a meta-analysis of GENDEP and MARS participants accounted for up to approximately 1.2% of the variance in outcomes in STAR*D, suggesting a weakly concordant signal distributed over many polymorphisms. An analysis restricted to 1,354 individuals treated with citalopram (STAR*D) or escitalopram (GENDEP) identified an intergenic region on chromosome 5 associated with early improvement after 2 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSIONS Despite increased statistical power accorded by meta-analysis, the authors identified no reliable predictors of antidepressant treatment outcome, although they did identify modest, direct evidence that common genetic variation contributes to individual differences in antidepressant response.

Depression symptom dimensions as predictors of antidepressant treatment outcome: replicable evidence for interest-activity symptoms

BACKGROUND Symptom dimensions have not yet been comprehensively tested as predictors of the substantial heterogeneity in outcomes of antidepressant treatment in major depressive disorder. METHOD We tested nine symptom dimensions derived from a previously published factor analysis of depression rating scales as predictors of outcome in 811 adults with moderate to severe depression treated with flexibly dosed escitalopram or nortriptyline in Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP). The effects of symptom dimensions were tested in mixed-effect regression models that controlled for overall initial depression severity, age, sex and recruitment centre. Significant results were tested for replicability in 3637 adult out-patients with non-psychotic major depression treated with citalopram in level I of Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D). RESULTS The interest-activity symptom dimension (reflecting low interest, reduced activity, indecisiveness and lack of enjoyment) at baseline strongly predicted poor treatment outcome in GENDEP, irrespective of overall depression severity, antidepressant type and outcome measure used. The prediction of poor treatment outcome by the interest-activity dimension was robustly replicated in STAR*D, independent of a comprehensive list of baseline covariates. CONCLUSIONS Loss of interest, diminished activity and inability to make decisions predict poor outcome of antidepressant treatment even after adjustment for overall depression severity and other clinical covariates. The prominence of such symptoms may require additional treatment strategies and should be accounted for in future investigations of antidepressant response.