Treatment outcomes of depression: the pharmacogenomic research network antidepressant medication pharmacogenomic study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mrazek DA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3992481 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Treatment outcomes of depression: the pharmacogenomic research network antidepressant medication pharmacogenomic study.
Mrazek David A DA Biernacka Joanna M JM McAlpine Donald E DE Benitez Joachim J Karpyak Victor M VM Williams Mark D MD Hall-Flavin Daniel K DK Netzel Pamela J PJ Passov Victoria V Rohland Barbara M BM Shinozaki Gen G Hoberg Astrid A AA Snyder Karen A KA Drews Maureen S MS Skime Michelle K MK Sagen Jessica A JA Schaid Daniel J DJ Weinshilboum Richard R Katzelnick David J DJ
Journal of clinical psychopharmacology 20140601 3
<h4>Background</h4>The effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) is controversial.<h4>Aims</h4>The clinical outcomes of subjects with nonpsychotic MDD were reported and compared with the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study outcomes to provide guidance on the effectiveness of SSRIs.<h4>Methods</h4>Subjects were treated with citalopram/escitalopram for up to 8 weeks. Depression was measured us ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Obesity and major depressive disorder often co-occur. However, differences between obese and normal-weight depressed patients and the moderating effect of obesity on antidepressant treatment outcome are not well studied.Adults (n = 662) with major depressive disorder in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes study were randomized to treatment with escitalopram plus placebo, bupropion plus escitalopram, or venlafaxine plus mirtazapine for a 12-week primary treatment phase and 16-week follow-up. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated at baseline and categorized according to World Health Organization criteria: normal or low weight (NW), overweight, Obese I and Obese II+. A repeated-effects model, unadjusted and adjusted for baseline variables, assessed outcomes.Obesity was common (46.2%), only 25.5% were NW. Higher BMI was associated with greater medical illness (p < .001), social phobia (p = .003), and bulimia (p = .026). Lower BMI was associated with more frequent post-traumatic stress disorder (p = .002) and drug abuse (p < .001). Treatment outcomes did not differ including Week 12 remission rates (NW 36%, overweight 40%, Obese I 43%, Obese II+ 37%; p = .69). Lower BMI was associated with more frequent (p = .024 [unadjusted] and .053 [adjusted]) and more severe (p = .008 [unadjusted] and .053 [adjusted]) adverse effects.BMI was related to clinical presentation and prevalence of comorbidities, but not antidepressant outcomes. Lower BMI classes had more psychiatric comorbidities, potentially obscuring the relationship between BMI and antidepressant effects. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00590863.
| S-EPMC3905462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is increasing interest in individualizing treatment selection for more than 25 regulatory approved treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). Despite an inconclusive efficacy evidence base, antidepressants (ADs) are prescribed for the depressive phase of bipolar disorder (BD) with oftentimes, an inadequate treatment response and or clinical concern for mood destabilization. This study explored the relationship between antidepressant response in MDD and antidepressant-associated treatment emergent mania (TEM) in BD. We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) and polygenic score analysis of TEM and tested its association in a subset of BD-type I patients treated with SSRIs or SNRIs. Our results did not identify any genome-wide significant variants although, we found that a higher polygenic score (PGS) for antidepressant response in MDD was associated with higher odds of TEM in BD. Future studies with larger transdiagnostic depressed cohorts treated with antidepressants are encouraged to identify a neurobiological mechanism associated with a spectrum of depression improvement from response to emergent mania.
| S-EPMC10864308 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the relationship between frailty and treatment response to antidepressant medications in adults with late life depression (LLD).MethodsData were evaluated from 100 individuals over age 60 years (34 men, 66 women) with a depressive diagnosis, who were assessed for frailty at baseline (characteristics include gait speed, grip strength, activity levels, fatigue, and weight loss) and enrolled in an 8-week trial of antidepressant medication followed by 10 months of open-treatment.ResultsFrail individuals (n = 49 with ≥3 deficits in frailty characteristics) did not differ at baseline from the non/intermediate frail (n = 51 with 0-2 deficits) on demographic, medical comorbidity, cognitive, or depression variables. On average, frail individuals experienced 2.82 fewer Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) points of improvement (t = 2.12, df 89, p = 0.037) than the non/intermediate frail over acute treatment, with this difference persisting over 10 months of open-treatment. Weak grip strength and low physical activity levels were each associated with decreased HRSD improvement, and lower response and remission rates over the course of the study. Despite their poorer outcomes, frail individuals received more antidepressant medication trials than the non/intermediate frail.ConclusionAdults with LLD and frailty have an attenuated response to antidepressant medication and a greater degree of disability compared to non/intermediate frail individuals. This disability and attenuated response remain even after receiving a greater number of antidepressant medication trials. Future research must focus on understanding the specific pathophysiology associated with the frail-depressed phenotype to permit the design and implementation of precision medicine interventions for this high-risk population.
| S-EPMC8225710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Understanding individual differences in susceptibility to antidepressant therapy side-effects is essential to optimize the treatment of depression.We performed genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to search for genetic variation affecting the susceptibility to side-effects. The analysis sample consisted of 1439 depression patients, successfully genotyped for 421K single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study. Outcomes included four indicators of side-effects: general side-effect burden, sexual side-effects, dizziness and vision/hearing-related side-effects. Our criterion for genome-wide significance was a prespecified threshold ensuring that, on average, only 10% of the significant findings are false discoveries.Thirty-four SNPs satisfied this criterion. The top finding indicated that 10 SNPs in SACM1L mediated the effects of bupropion on sexual side-effects (p = 4.98 × 10(-7), q = 0.023). Suggestive findings were also found for SNPs in MAGI2, DTWD1, WDFY4 and CHL1.Although our findings require replication and functional validation, this study demonstrates the potential of GWAS to discover genes and pathways that could mediate adverse effects of antidepressant medication.
| S-EPMC3627503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSelective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) use during pregnancy incurs a low absolute risk for major malformations; however, other adverse outcomes have been reported. Major depression also affects reproductive outcomes. This study examined whether 1) minor physical anomalies, 2) maternal weight gain and infant birth weight, 3) preterm birth, and 4) neonatal adaptation are affected by SSRI or depression exposure.MethodThis prospective observational investigation included maternal assessments at 20, 30, and 36 weeks of gestation. Neonatal outcomes were obtained by blinded review of delivery records and infant examinations. Pregnant women (N=238) were categorized into three mutually exclusive exposure groups: 1) no SSRI, no depression (N=131); 2) SSRI exposure (N=71), either continuous (N=48) or partial (N=23); and 3) major depressive disorder (N=36), either continuous (N=14) or partial (N=22). The mean depressive symptom level of the group with continuous depression and no SSRI exposure was significantly greater than for all other groups, demonstrating the expected treatment effect of SSRIs. Main outcomes were minor physical anomalies, maternal weight gain, infant birth weight, pregnancy duration, and neonatal characteristics.ResultsInfants exposed to either SSRIs or depression continuously across gestation were more likely to be born preterm than infants with partial or no exposure. Neither SSRI nor depression exposure increased risk for minor physical anomalies or reduced maternal weight gain. Mean infant birth weights were equivalent. Other neonatal outcomes were similar, except 5-minute Apgar scores.ConclusionsFor depressed pregnant women, both continuous SSRI exposure and continuous untreated depression were associated with preterm birth rates exceeding 20%.
| S-EPMC4426499 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Hippocampal atrophy has been consistently reported in major depressive disorder with more recent focus on subfields. However, literature on hippocampal volume changes after antidepressant treatment has been limited. The first-line treatments for depression include antidepressant medication (ADM) or cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT). To understand the differential effects of CBT and ADM on the hippocampus, we investigated the volume alterations of hippocampal subfields with treatment, outcome, and chronicity in treatment-naïve depression patients. Methods: Treatment-naïve depressed patients from the PReDICT study were included in this analysis. A total of 172 patients who completed 12 weeks of randomized treatment with CBT (n = 45) or ADM (n = 127) were included for hippocampal subfield volume analysis. Forty healthy controls were also included for the baseline comparison. Freesurfer 6.0 was used to segment 26 hippocampal substructures and bilateral whole hippocampus from baseline and week 12 structural MRI scans. A generalized linear model with covariates of age and gender was used for group statistical tests. A linear mixed model for the repeated measures with covariates of age and gender was used to examine volumetric changes over time and the contributing effects of treatment type, outcome, and illness chronicity. Results: Of the 172 patients, 85 achieved remission (63/127 ADM, 22/45 CBT). MDD patients showed smaller baseline volumes than healthy controls in CA1, CA3, CA4, parasubiculum, GC-ML-DG, Hippocampal Amygdala Transition Area (HATA), and fimbria. Over 12 weeks of treatment, further declines in the volumes of CA1, fimbria, subiculum, and HATA were observed regardless of treatment type or outcome. CBT remitters, but not ADM remitters, showed volume reduction in the right hippocampal tail. Unlike ADM remitters, ADM non-responders had a decline in volume in the bilateral hippocampal tails. Baseline volume of left presubiculum (regardless of treatment type) and right fimbria and HATA in CBT patients were correlated with a continuous measure of clinical improvement. Chronicity of depression had no effect on any measures of hippocampal subfield volumes. Conclusion: Two first-line antidepressant treatments, CBT and ADM, have different effects on hippocampal tail after 12 weeks. This finding suggests that remission achieved via ADM may protect against progressive hippocampal atrophy by altering neuronal plasticity or supporting neurogenesis. Studies with multimodal neuroimaging, including functional and structural analysis, are needed to assess further the impact of two different antidepressant treatments on hippocampal subfields.
| S-EPMC8739262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess the effects of depression and antidepressant medication use during pregnancy on the risk of preeclampsia.We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study that linked automated clinical and pharmacy databases including comprehensive electronic medical records of 21,589 pregnant Kaiser Permanente Northern California members between 2010 and 2012.The overall risk of preeclampsia was 4.5%. The timing of antidepressant medication exposure was an important factor. A significant increase in the risk of preeclampsia emerged for women with a depression diagnosis who took antidepressant medications during the second trimester compared to women with untreated depression (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.06, 2.39) and to women without depression (aRR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.30, 2.23). Similar associations existed for women who took antidepressant medications, but without depression. In contrast, depressed women with psychotherapy showed no increased risk of preeclampsia compared to women with untreated depression or no depression. There was also a statistically significant relationship between the duration of antidepressant medication use and preeclampsia. The observed association appeared stronger for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) use, although a nonsignificant trend was also noted for use of norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitors (NDRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs).Study findings suggest that antidepressant use during pregnancy may increase the risk of preeclampsia, especially use during the second trimester.
| S-EPMC5889130 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential benefit of utilizing a pharmacogenomic testing report to guide the selection and dosing of psychotropic medications in an outpatient psychiatric practice. The non-randomized, open label, prospective cohort study was conducted from September 2009 to July 2010. In the first cohort, depressed patients were treated without the benefit of pharmacogenomic testing (the unguided group). A DNA sample was obtained from patients in the unguided group, but the results were not shared with either the physicians or patients until the end of the 8-week study period. In the second cohort (the guided group), testing results were provided at the beginning of the 8-week treatment period. Depression ratings were collected at baseline and after 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 8 weeks of treatment using the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Clinician Rated (QIDS-C16) and the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17). Clinician and patient satisfaction was also assessed. The reduction in depressive symptoms achieved within the guided treatment group was greater than the reduction of depressive symptoms in the unguided treatment group using either the QIDS-C16 (P=0.002) or HAM-D17 (P=0.04). We concluded that a rapidly available pharmacogenomic interpretive report provided clinical guidance that was associated with improved clinical outcomes for depressed patients treated in an outpatient psychiatric clinic setting.
| S-EPMC3565829 | biostudies-other
Project description:<p>This pharmacogenomic study focused on the response of patients with MDD to an 8-week course of treatment with citalopram or escitalopram.</p> <p>Briefly, clinical assessments and research assessments were performed at each study visit as summarized in Table 1. Many patients continued on antidepressant medication after the 8 week study.</p> <p><b>Table 1</b>: Study timeline and patient contacts.</p> <p> <table border="1"> <tr> <th>Week</th> <th>Consent/Med Hx</th> <th>Write Rx</th> <th>SI Qx</th> <th>SCID</th> <th>HRS-D17</th> <th>QIDSC16</th> <th>CGI-I</th> </tr> <tr> <td>0</td> <td>SC</td> <td>RC</td> <td>RC</td> <td>SC</td> <td>SC</td> <td>SC</td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td>4</td> <td></td> <td>RC</td> <td>RC</td> <td></td> <td>SC</td> <td>SC</td> <td>RC</td> </tr> <tr> <td>8</td> <td></td> <td>RC</td> <td>RC</td> <td></td> <td>SC</td> <td>SC</td> <td>RC</td> </tr> </table> </p> <p>HRS-D17=Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, QIDS-C16=Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, CGI-I=Clinical Global Impression-Improvement, SCID=Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, SC=Study Coordinator, RC=Research Clinician.</p> <p><b><u>Enrollment and baseline assessment.</u></b> Upon initial intake, the Study Coordinator (SC) obtained informed consent as well as clinical and demographic information, including history of bone marrow or liver transplant or blood transfusion within the previous 6 weeks, and prior history of treatment during the current major depressive episode. The SC completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), the HRS-D17 (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) and the QIDS-C16 (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology) and reviewed the inclusion/exclusion criteria. After review with the Research Clinician (RC) and when appropriate, after a negative pregnancy test, the SC invited the subject to participate in the study if entry criteria were met. If the subject agreed, he/she received treatment according to the study protocol.</p> <p><b><u>Treatment schedule.</u></b> Participants selected for inclusion in the study were seen at weeks 0, 4, and 8. The appropriate treatment antidepressant (citalopram or escitalopram) was determined following discussion between the patient and RC concerning medical, financial, and insurance considerations. The study medication citalopram was given in tablet or liquid form, depending on the patient's need. A fixed-flexible dose schedule was employed with the possibility of a dose escalation. In particular, the initial dose of citalopram was 20 mg and escitalopram was 10 mg. This dose was increased to 40 mg and 20 mg, respectively, after 4 weeks if the subject had a score of >/= 6 on the QIDS-C16 and the RC concluded that the subject could tolerate the increase. If necessary, dose was reduced at the discretion of the RC. The importance of medication compliance was discussed with the subject, and subjects were asked to bring in the medication at each visit for the purpose of counting remaining pills to assess compliance.</p> <p>Participants may have had an abbreviated course of therapy if they were clearly intolerant of the drug or failed to respond to a 40 mg dose of citalopram or a 20 mg dose of escitalopram. They then received standard treatment from a primary physician or psychiatrist with different medications and/or therapeutic modalities (e.g. psychotherapy). Special attention was given to subjects with suicidal ideation. Those subjects were offered additional appointments as needed to ensure their safety. Participants were also contacted by telephone at week 1 and week 2 by the Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS) or other study personnel to ensure medication compliance and patient safety. The CNS was supervised by the study psychiatrist and principal investigator and deferred to the physician's judgment as needed. The SC was trained to notify the RC at the time of the clinical visits or the phone interviews if the subject endorsed any suicidal ideation or plans. For those subjects who were unable to attend the follow-up visits as scheduled, the patient was contacted by phone to complete the HRS-D17/QIDS-C16. The participant was also asked to return to the clinic to complete a final blood draw for the study.</p> <p><b><u>Adjunctive and concurrent medications.</u></b> Adjunctive treatments were those used to manage transient associated symptoms (e.g., insomnia) or transient or longer-term medication side effects (e.g., sexual dysfunction). Adjunctive treatments that were not used to treat depression were allowed during the study. However, drugs in the exclusion criteria for this study were not used as adjunctive therapies. Subjects were allowed to participate in the study while receiving concurrent medications for general medical conditions as long as there was no contraindication to use while taking citalopram or escitalopram.</p> <p><b><u>Drug efficacy phenotype evaluation.</u></b> The change in QIDS-C16 score and change in HRS-D17 score were used as the major research outcome measures to assess drug response. At each clinical research visit, the RC also completed the Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) scale. For the primary genome-wide association analyses, dichotomous outcome variables, remission and response, were defined based on the QIDS-C16 last visit score. Remission was defined as a QIDS-C16 score of 5 or less, while response was defined as at least a 50% reduction in the QIDS-C16 score from baseline.</p> <p><b><u>Specimen collection.</u></b> Specimen collections were obtained by the General Clinical Research Center (GCRC) at St. Mary's Hospital (SMH). Subjects had blood drawn on an outpatient basis at GCRC-SMH on three separate occasions - baseline (0), week 4 and week 8 visits. Prior to sample collection, date and time of last dose of study medication was gathered at the 4 and 8 week visits. For those patients who were unable to complete the regularly scheduled visits, a dismissal blood draw was requested. GCRC then shipped samples to Mayo Clinic's Biospecimens Accessioning and Processing Lab.</p> <p><b><u>Genotyping and biomarker assays.</u></b> DNA from 529 patients was genotyped by the RIKEN Center for Genomic Medicine (Yokohama, Japan) using Illumina Human610-Quad BeadChips (Illumina, San Diego, CA). The study also included the determination of plasma drug levels at weeks 4 and 8, and metabolite levels at baseline and weeks 4 and 8 for a subset of subjects.</p> <p>The primary genome-wide association study based on these data, which includes a summary of the protocol, subject description, selection of subjects for genetic analyses, and definitions of clinical outcomes, was published in the Pharmacogenomics Journal (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22907730">Ji et al., 2012</a>).</p>
| phs000670 | dbGaP
Project description:Individuals with depression differ substantially in their response to treatment with antidepressants. Specific predictors explain only a small proportion of these differences. To meaningfully predict who will respond to which antidepressant, it may be necessary to combine multiple biomarkers and clinical variables. Using statistical learning on common genetic variants and clinical information in a training sample of 280 individuals randomly allocated to 12-week treatment with antidepressants escitalopram or nortriptyline, we derived models to predict remission with each antidepressant drug. We tested the reproducibility of each prediction in a validation set of 150 participants not used in model derivation. An elastic net logistic model based on eleven genetic and six clinical variables predicted remission with escitalopram in the validation dataset with area under the curve 0.77 (95%CI; 0.66-0.88; p?=?0.004), explaining approximately 30% of variance in who achieves remission. A model derived from 20 genetic variables predicted remission with nortriptyline in the validation dataset with an area under the curve 0.77 (95%CI; 0.65-0.90; p?<?0.001), explaining approximately 36% of variance in who achieves remission. The predictive models were antidepressant drug-specific. Validated drug-specific predictions suggest that a relatively small number of genetic and clinical variables can help select treatment between escitalopram and nortriptyline.
| S-EPMC5882876 | biostudies-literature