Mojca Zvezdana Dernovšek

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.

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.

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.

Melancholic, atypical and anxious depression subtypes and outcome of treatment with escitalopram and nortriptyline

OBJECTIVE To investigate whether subtypes of depression predict differential outcomes of treatment with selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and a tricyclic antidepressant in major depression. METHOD Among 811 adults with moderate-to-severe depression, melancholic, atypical, anxious and anxious-somatizing depression subtypes established at baseline were evaluated as predictors of outcome of treatment with flexible dosage of the SSRI escitalopram or the tricyclic antidepressant nortriptyline. The primary outcome measure was the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Secondary outcome measures were the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). RESULTS Melancholic depression was associated with slightly worse outcomes among individuals treated with escitalopram, but did not affect outcome of treatment with nortriptyline. The interaction between melancholic depression and drug did not reach statistical significance for the primary outcome measure and significant results for secondary outcome measures were not robust in sensitivity analyses. Atypical depression was unrelated to outcome of treatment with either antidepressant. Anxious and anxious-somatizing depression did not predict outcome on the primary measure, but inconsistently predicted worse outcome in some secondary analyses. LIMITATIONS Some participants were non-randomly allocated to drug. Therefore, drug-by-predictor interactions had to be validated in sensitivity analyses restricted to the 468 randomly allocated individuals. CONCLUSIONS Melancholic, atypical or anxious depression, are not sufficiently robust differential predictors of outcome to help clinician choose between SSRI and tricyclic antidepressants. There is a need to investigate other predictors of outcome.

Genome-wide association study of increasing suicidal ideation during antidepressant treatment in the GENDEP project.

Suicidal thoughts during antidepressant treatment have been the focus of several candidate gene association studies. The aim of the present genome-wide association study was to identify additional genetic variants involved in increasing suicidal ideation during escitalopram and nortriptyline treatment. A total of 706 adult participants of European ancestry, treated for major depression with escitalopram or nortriptyline over 12 weeks in the Genome-Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) study were genotyped with Illumina Human 610-Quad Beadchips (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). A total of 244 subjects experienced an increase in suicidal ideation during follow-up. The genetic marker most significantly associated with increasing suicidality (8.28 × 10−7) was a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP; rs11143230) located 30 kb downstream of a gene encoding guanine deaminase (GDA) on chromosome 9q21.13. Two suggestive drug-specific associations within KCNIP4 (Kv channel-interacting protein 4; chromosome 4p15.31) and near ELP3 (elongation protein 3 homolog; chromosome 8p21.1) were found in subjects treated with escitalopram. Suggestive drug by gene interactions for two SNPs near structural variants on chromosome 4q12, one SNP in the apolipoprotein O (APOO) gene on chromosome Xp22.11 and one on chromosome 11q24.3 were found. The most significant association within a set of 33 candidate genes was in the neurotrophic tyrosine kinase receptor type 2 (NTRK2) gene. Finally, we also found trend for an association within genes previously associated with psychiatric phenotypes indirectly linked to suicidal behavior, that is, GRIP1, NXPH1 and ANK3. The results suggest novel pathways involved in increasing suicidal ideation during antidepressant treatment and should help to target treatment to reduce the risk of this dramatic adverse event. Limited power precludes definitive conclusions and replication in larger sample is warranted.

Self-report and clinician-rated measures of depression severity: can one replace the other?

It has been suggested that clinician‐rated scales and self‐report questionnaires may be interchangeable in the measurement of depression severity, but it has not been tested whether clinically significant information is lost when assessment is restricted to either clinician‐rated or self‐report instruments. The aim of this study is to test whether self‐report provides information relevant to short‐term treatment outcomes that is not captured by clinician‐rating and vice versa.

Genetic differences in cytochrome P450 enzymes and antidepressant treatment response

Aims: Antidepressant response varies between patients, possibly due to differences in the rate cytochrome P450 enzymes metabolise antidepressants into inactive compounds. Drug metabolism rates are influenced by common variants in the genes encoding these enzymes. However, it remains unclear whether treatment outcomes can be predicted by either CYP450 genotype or antidepressant serum concentration. Methods: In GENDEP (a pharmacogenetic study of depressed individuals treated with either escitalopram or nortriptyline), serum concentrations of antidepressants and their primary metabolite were measured after eight weeks treatment and variants in CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 were genotyped. Results: Amongst patients taking escitalopram (n=223), the genotype CYP2C19 was significantly associated with escitalopram serum concentrations and desmethylescitalopram:escitalopram ratio. For those taking nortriptyline (n=161), the CYP2D6 genotype was significantly associated with nortriptyline and 10-hydroxynortriptyline serum concentrations and 10-hydroxynortriptyline:nortrip-tyline ratio. CYP450 genotypes conferring greater enzyme activity were linked to lower drug serum concentrations and higher metabolite:drug ratios. Nonetheless, no significant association was found between either CYP450 genotype or antidepressant serum concentration and treatment response. Conclusions: While there is a significant relationship between the CYP450 genotype and serum concentrations of escitalopram and nortriptyline, the genotypes are not predictive of differences in treatment response for either drug. Furthermore, differences in antidepressant serum concentrations are not associated with variability in treatment response.

Changes in body weight during pharmacological treatment of depression

The risk of weight gain is an important determinant of the acceptability and tolerability of antidepressant medication. To compare changes in body weight during treatment with different antidepressants, body weight and height were measured at baseline and after 6, 8, 12 and 26 wk treatment with escitalopram or nortriptyline in 630 adults with moderate-to-severe unipolar depression participating in GENDEP, a part-randomized open-label study. Weight increased significantly more during treatment with nortriptyline compared to escitalopram. The weight gain commenced during the first 6 wk of nortriptyline treatment, reached on average 1.2 kg at 12 wk (0.44-point BMI increase), and continued throughout the 6-month follow-up period. Participants who were underweight at baseline gained most weight. Participants who were obese at baseline did not gain more weight during treatment. Weight gain occurred irrespective of whether weight loss was a symptom of current depressive episode and was identified as an undesired effect of the antidepressant by most participants who gained weight. There was little weight change during treatment with escitalopram, with an average increase of 0.14 kg (0.05-point BMI increase) over 12 wk of treatment. In conclusion, treatment with the tricyclic antidepressant nortriptyline was associated with moderate weight gain, which cannot be explained as a reversal of symptomatic weight loss and is usually perceived as an undesired adverse effect. While treatment with nortriptyline may be recommended in underweight subjects with typical neurovegetative symptoms, escitalopram is a suitable alternative for subjects at risk of weight gain.

Sexual dysfunction during treatment with serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants: Clinical description and the role of the 5-HTTLPR

Abstract Objectives. Sexual dysfunction (SD) is a frequently reported side-effect of antidepressant treatment, particularly of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). In the multicentre clinical and pharmacogenetic GENDEP study (Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression), the effect of the serotonin transporter gene promoter polymorphism 5-HTTLPR on sexual function was investigated during treatment with escitalopram (SSRI) and nortriptyline (tricyclic antidepressant). Methods. A total of 494 subjects with an episode of DSM-IV major depression were randomly assigned to treatment with escitalopram or nortriptyline. Over 12 weeks, depressive symptoms and SD were measured weekly with the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale, the Antidepressant Side-Effect Checklist, the UKU Side Effect Rating Scale, and the Sexual Functioning Questionnaire. Results. The incidence of reported SD after 12 weeks of treatment was relatively low, and did not differ significantly between antidepressants (14.9% escitalopram, 19.7% nortriptyline). There was no significant interaction between the 5-HTTLPR and antidepressant on SD. Improvement in depressive symptoms and younger age were both associated with lower SD. The effect of age on SD may have been moderated by the 5-HTTLPR. Conclusions. In GENDEP, rates of reported SD during treatment were lower than those described in previous reports. There was no apparent effect of the 5-HTTLPR on the observed decline in SD.

Combining clinical variables to optimize prediction of antidepressant treatment outcomes

The outcome of treatment with antidepressants varies markedly across people with the same diagnosis. A clinically significant prediction of outcomes could spare the frustration of trial and error approach and improve the outcomes of major depressive disorder through individualized treatment selection. It is likely that a combination of multiple predictors is needed to achieve such prediction. We used elastic net regularized regression to optimize prediction of symptom improvement and remission during treatment with escitalopram or nortriptyline and to identify contributing predictors from a range of demographic and clinical variables in 793 adults with major depressive disorder. A combination of demographic and clinical variables, with strong contributions from symptoms of depressed mood, reduced interest, decreased activity, indecisiveness, pessimism and anxiety significantly predicted treatment outcomes, explaining 5-10% of variance in symptom improvement with escitalopram. Similar combinations of variables predicted remission with area under the curve 0.72, explaining approximately 15% of variance (pseudo R(2)) in who achieves remission, with strong contributions from body mass index, appetite, interest-activity symptom dimension and anxious-somatizing depression subtype. Escitalopram-specific outcome prediction was more accurate than generic outcome prediction, and reached effect sizes that were near or above a previously established benchmark for clinical significance. Outcome prediction on the nortriptyline arm did not significantly differ from chance. These results suggest that easily obtained demographic and clinical variables can predict therapeutic response to escitalopram with clinically meaningful accuracy, suggesting a potential for individualized prescription of this antidepressant drug.