F. Peeters

Emotional reactivity to daily life stress in psychosis and affective disorder: an experience sampling study.

Objective:u2002 To investigate the emotional reactivity to small disturbances in daily life in patients with non‐affective psychosis (NAP), bipolar disorder (BD) and major depression [major depressive disorder (MDD)].

How psychotic are individuals with non-psychotic disorders?

Abstract.Background: The objective of this study was to compare, using a self-report questionnaire, the dimensions of psychosis across different patient groups in a community mental health service (CMHS) and in non-patients in the general population. Methods: The Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) is a 40-item self-report instrument with positive, negative and depressive symptom dimensions. Seven hundred and sixty-two patients and 647 subjects in the general population filled in the CAPE. In 555 of the 762 patients, a DSM-IV diagnosis was made. The following DSM-IV categories were used in the analyses: 1. Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders (n = 72), 2. Mood Disorders (n = 214), 3. Anxiety Disorders (n = 129). The patient and non-patient groups were compared on the three dimensions of the CAPE using multivariate regression analysis. Results: The patient groups scored significantly higher on the positive, negative and depressive dimensions than the non-patients. Patients with psychotic disorders had the greatest difference in positive psychosis items compared to non-patients (β = 0.94, 95 % CI: 0.7–1.18), whereas patients with mood and anxiety disorders had the highest depressive symptom scores, and positive symptom scores that were intermediate to that of non-patients and patients with psychotic disorders (mood disorders: β = 0.53, 95 % CI: 0.39–0.68; anxiety disorders: β = 0.22, 95 % CI: 0.04–0.39). The CAPE distress score adjusted for the corresponding frequency score was not significantly different between the patient groups, but compared to the general population, patient status did contribute significantly to the level of distress. Discussion: Patients with anxiety and mood disorders had elevated scores on positive psychosis items, indicating that expression of psychosis in non-psychotic disorders is common. The finding of elevated scores of the patient groups on all three dimensions compared to non-patients suggests that the psychopathology associated with psychotic disorders varies quantitatively across DSM-IV categories.

Reduced Stress-Sensitivity or Increased Reward Experience: The Psychological Mechanism of Response to Antidepressant Medication

Depression has often been associated with increased negative affect reactivity to stress (Stress-Sensitivity) and reduced capacity to experience pleasure or positive affect (Reward Experience). To date, no studies have prospectively examined changes in Stress-Sensitivity and Reward Experience following antidepressant treatment. The sample included 83 depressed patients and 22 healthy controls. A randomized controlled trial was carried out with patients receiving either imipramine or placebo for 6 weeks. At baseline and 6 weeks, patients and controls participated in an Experience Sampling procedure, prospectively measuring ecologically valid daily life appraisals of activities and mood states. The course of depression was assessed with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Multilevel linear regression analyses showed that patients had higher negative and lower positive appraisals of activities than controls. In addition, patients showed increased Stress-Sensitivity (negative affect reactivity to negatively appraised activities). Treatment with imipramine decreased Stress-Sensitivity and increased Reward Experience (positive affect reactivity to positively appraised activities). Changes in Stress-Sensitivity and Reward Experience were in part reducible to changes in the process of activity appraisal itself. However, increase in Reward Experience, but not decrease in Stress-Sensitivity, discriminated between patients who responded and those who did not, independent of changes in the process of activity appraisal itself. Response to treatment in depression may be conditional on restoration of hedonic capacity, the cerebral substrate of which requires further study in relation to antidepressant response. A search for (synergistic) antidepressant therapies specifically targeting ability to experience reward may be warranted.

Mechanisms of gene–environment interactions in depression: evidence that genes potentiate multiple sources of adversity

BACKGROUNDnPrevious work suggests that daily life stress-sensitivity may be an intermediary phenotype associated with both genetic risk for depression and developmental stress exposures. In the current analysis we hypothesized that genetic risk for depression and three environmental exposures over the course of development [prenatal stress, childhood adversity and adult negative life events (NLEs)] combine synergistically to produce the phenotype of stress-sensitivity.nnnMETHODnTwin pairs (n=279) participated in a momentary assessment study using the Experience Sampling Method (ESM), collecting appraisals of stress and negative affect (NA) in the flow of daily life. Prospective data on birthweight and gestational age, questionnaire data on childhood adversity and recent NLEs, and interview data on depression were used in the analyses. Daily life stress-sensitivity was modelled as the effect of ESM daily life stress appraisals on ESM NA.nnnRESULTSnAll three developmental stress exposures were moderated by genetic vulnerability, modelled as dizygotic (DZ) or monozygotic (MZ) co-twin depression status, in their effect on daily life stress-sensitivity. Effects were much stronger in participants with MZ co-twin depression and a little stronger in participants with DZ co-twin depression status, compared to those without co-twin depression. NLE main effects and NLE genetic moderation were reducible to birthweight and childhood adversity.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThe findings are consistent with the hypothesis that adult daily life stress-sensitivity is the result of sensitization processes initiated by developmental stress exposures. Genes associated with depression may act by accelerating the process of stress-induced sensitization.

Scars in depression: is a conceptual shift necessary to solve the puzzle?

Although clinical findings suggest that in the aftermath of depression a process of scarring may ensue, research examining the issue of scars (including biological, psychological and cognitive changes) has remained largely inconclusive. This paper proposes a new approach to the concept of scars that is (i) based on a dimensional view of depression, (ii) uses methods that take into account the dynamic interplay between the person and his context, (iii) differentiates between scars following depression and scars following the factor that actually caused the depression such as stress and (iv) introduces a dynamic view of the concept of scars in that it hypothesizes that scars can wax and wane. This approach may stimulate the discovery of new entries in the puzzle underlying the ontogenesis of vulnerability and resilience. Furthermore, it may provide insights that help to develop new therapies for depression.

Therapygenetics in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy: do genes have an impact on therapy-induced change in real-life positive affective experiences?

Positive affect (PA) has an important role in resilience against depression and has been shown to increase with mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT). To elucidate the underlying mechanisms of change in PA as well as develop insights that may benefit personalized medicine, the current study examined the contribution of genetic variation to individual differences in change in PA in response to MBCT. Individuals (n=126) with residual depressive symptoms were randomized to either an MBCT group or treatment as usual. PA was assessed using experience sampling methodology (ESM). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes known to be involved in reward functioning were selected. SNPs in the genes for brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M2 (CHRM2), the dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) and the μ1 opioid receptor (OPRM1) significantly moderated the impact of treatment condition over time on PA. Genetic variation in the genes for CHRM2 and OPRM1 specifically had an impact on the level of PA following MBCT. The current study shows that variation in response to MBCT may be contingent on genetic factors associated with the regulation of PA. These findings contribute to our understanding of the processes moderating response to treatment and prediction of treatment outcome.

Meeting risk with resilience: high daily life reward experience preserves mental health: Meeting risk with resilience

Geschwind N, Peeters F, Jacobs N, Delespaul P, Derom C, Thiery E, van Os J, Wichers M. Meeting risk with resilience: high daily life reward experience preserves mental health.