Neven Henigsberg

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.

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.

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.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 8-week trial of the efficacy and tolerability of multiple doses of Lu AA21004 in adults with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE Lu AA21004 is an investigational multimodal antidepressant. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of multiple doses of Lu AA21004 versus placebo in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD Adults diagnosed with MDD (based on DSM-IV-TR criteria) with a Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score ≥ 26 were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive Lu AA21004 1 mg, 5 mg, or 10 mg or placebo for 8 weeks (between August 2008 and August 2009). The primary endpoint was reduction in 24-Item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-24) total score after 8 weeks of treatment compared with placebo for Lu AA21004 10 mg. Additional outcomes included response and remission rates, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), Clinical Global Impressions-Global Improvement scale (CGI-I), MADRS total score, and HDRS-24 total score in subjects with baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) score ≥ 20. Adverse events were assessed throughout the study. RESULTS A total of 560 subjects (mean age = 46.4 years) were randomized. There was a statistically significant reduction from baseline in HDRS-24 total score at week 8 for Lu AA21004 10 mg vs placebo (P < .001). There were improvements (nominal P values < .05 with no adjustment for multiplicity) in HDRS-24 total score, response and remission rates, CGI-I score, MADRS total score, and HDRS-24 total score in subjects with baseline HARS score ≥ 20 at week 8 for all Lu AA21004 treatment groups vs placebo. No significant differences were seen in SDS scores between any dose of Lu AA21004 and placebo. The most common adverse events were nausea, headache, and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS After 8 weeks of treatment with Lu AA21004 10 mg, there was a significant reduction in HDRS-24 total score compared with placebo in adults with MDD. Lu AA21004 was well tolerated in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00735709.

Genetic Predictors of Increase in Suicidal Ideation During Antidepressant Treatment in the GENDEP Project

The aim of this study was to investigate genetic predictors of an increase in suicidal ideation during treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or a tricyclic antidepressant. A total of 796 adult patients with major depressive disorder who were treated with a flexible dosage of escitalopram or nortriptyline in Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) were included in the sample and provided data on suicidal ideation. Nine candidate genes involved in neurotrophic, serotonergic, and noradrenergic pathways were selected based on previous association studies with suicidal ideation or behavior. Using a logistic regression model, 123 polymorphisms in these genes were compared between subjects with an increase in suicidal ideation and those without any increase in suicidal ideation. Polymorphisms in BDNF, the gene encoding the brain-derived neurotrophic factor, were significantly associated with an increase in suicidal ideation. The strongest association was observed for rs962369 in BDNF (p=0.0015). Moreover, a significant interaction was found between variants in BDNF and NTRK2, the gene encoding the BNDF receptor (p=0.0003). Among men taking nortriptyline, suicidality was also associated with rs11195419 SNP in the alpha2A-adrenergic receptor gene (ADRA2A) (p=0.007). The associations observed with polymorphisms in BDNF suggest the involvement of the neurotrophic system in vulnerability to suicidality. Epistasis between BDNF and NTRK2 suggests that genetic variations in the two genes are involved in the same causal mechanisms leading to suicidality during antidepressant treatment. Among men, genetic variation in noradrenergic signaling may interact with norepinephrine reuptake-inhibiting antidepressants, thereby contributing to suicidality.

Genetic predictors of response to serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants in major depressive disorder: a genome-wide analysis of individual-level data and a meta-analysis

Testing whether genetic information could inform the selection of the best drug for patients with depression, Rudolf Uher and colleagues searched for genetic variants that could predict clinically meaningful responses to two major groups of antidepressants.

Trajectories of change in depression severity during treatment with antidepressants

BACKGROUND Response and remission defined by cut-off values on the last observed depression severity score are commonly used as outcome criteria in clinical trials, but ignore the time course of symptomatic change and may lead to inefficient analyses. We explore alternative categorization of outcome by naturally occurring trajectories of symptom change. METHOD Growth mixture models were applied to repeated measurements of depression severity in 807 participants with major depression treated for 12 weeks with escitalopram or nortriptyline in the part-randomized Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression study. Latent trajectory classes were validated as outcomes in drug efficacy comparison and pharmacogenetic analyses. RESULTS The final two-piece growth mixture model categorized participants into a majority (75%) following a gradual improvement trajectory and the remainder following a trajectory with rapid initial improvement. The rapid improvement trajectory was over-represented among nortriptyline-treated participants and showed an antidepressant-specific pattern of pharmacogenetic associations. In contrast, conventional response and remission favoured escitalopram and produced chance results in pharmacogenetic analyses. Controlling for drop-out reduced drug differences on response and remission but did not affect latent trajectory results. CONCLUSIONS Latent trajectory mixture models capture heterogeneity in the development of clinical response after the initiation of antidepressants and provide an outcome that is distinct from traditional endpoint measures. It differentiates between antidepressants with different modes of action and is robust against bias due to differential discontinuation.

Early and delayed onset of response to antidepressants in individual trajectories of change during treatment of major depression: A secondary analysis of data from the genome-based therapeutic drugs for depression (GENDEP) study

OBJECTIVE The timing and rate of improvement after the initiation of an antidepressant has implications for establishing the mechanism of antidepressant action and for answering the clinically relevant question of how long an appropriate trial of antidepressant medication should be. We explore the individual trajectories of relative change in depression severity to establish what proportion of individuals experience early and late onset of improvement. METHOD Longitudinal latent class analysis was applied in a secondary analysis of data obtained from the Genome-Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) study. In the GENDEP trial, conducted in 9 European academic psychiatry centers from July 2004 to June 2008, 811 treatment-seeking adult subjects with DSM-IV major depression received escitalopram or nortriptyline for 12 weeks. Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale measurements were taken weekly. The secondary analysis reported in this article was conducted in 2010. RESULTS A model with 9 latent classes provided a good description of the individual trajectories of symptom change over time. These classes included 3 nonresponder classes, 3 classes with varying degrees of improvement concentrated in the first 3 weeks (early improvement), and 3 classes with varying degrees of improvement that was more prominent in the second 3 weeks than in the first 3 weeks (delayed improvement). More than half of the subjects who eventually reached remission showed a pattern of delayed improvement, and their eventual outcome could not be predicted from early time points. Early marked response occurred more frequently in subjects treated with nortriptyline than in those treated with escitalopram (12.9% vs 7.5%, χ² = 6.29, P = .01). Delayed complete remission occurred more frequently in subjects treated with escitalopram than in those treated with nortriptyline (13.6% vs 6.1%, χ² = 11.52, P = .0007). CONCLUSIONS Both early and delayed improvement are common. Although early changes are maintained, the eventual outcome of 12-week antidepressant treatment can be accurately predicted only after 8 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION http://www.controlled-trials.com Identifier: ISRCTN03693000.