Search

Introduction Little is known about the interplay between genetics and epigenetics on antidepressant treatment (1) response and remission, (2) side effects, and (3) serum levels. This study explored the relationship among single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), DNA methylation (DNAm), and mRNA levels of four pharmacokinetic genes, CYP2C19 , CYP2D6 , CYP3A4 , and ABCB1 , and its effect on these outcomes. Methods The Canadian Biomarker Integration Network for Depression-1 dataset consisted of 177 individuals with major depressive disorder treated for 8 weeks with escitalopram (ESC) followed by 8 weeks with ESC monotherapy or augmentation with aripiprazole. DNAm quantitative trait loci (mQTL), identified by SNP-CpG associations between 20 SNPs and 60 CpG sites in whole blood, were tested for associations with our outcomes, followed by causal inference tests (CITs) to identify methylation-mediated genetic effects. Results Eleven cis- SNP-CpG pairs (q<0.05) constituting four unique SNPs were identified. Although no significant associations were observed between mQTLs and response/remission, CYP2C19 rs4244285 was associated with treatment-related weight gain (q =0.027) and serum concentrations of ESCadj (q <0.001). Between weeks 2-4, 6.7% and 14.9% of those with *1/*1 (normal metabolizers) and *1/*2 (intermediate metabolizers) genotypes, respectively, reported ≥2 lbs of weight gain. In contrast, the *2/*2 genotype (poor metabolizers) did not report weight gain during this period and demonstrated the highest ESCadj concentrations. CITs did not indicate that these effects were epigenetically mediated. Discussion These results elucidate functional mechanisms underlying the established associations between CYP2C19 rs4244285 and ESC pharmacokinetics. This mQTL SNP as a marker for antidepressant-related weight gain needs to be further explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Psychiatry is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The P‐glycoprotein efflux pump, encoded by the ABCB1 gene, has been shown to alter concentrations of various antidepressants in the brain. In this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to investigate the association between six ABCB1 single‐nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; rs1045642, rs2032582, rs1128503, rs2032583, rs2235015, and rs2235040) and antidepressant treatment outcomes in individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD), including new data from the Canadian Biomarker and Integration Network for Depression (CAN‐BIND‐1) cohort. For the CAN‐BIND‐1 sample, we applied regression models to investigate the association between ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant treatment response, remission, tolerability, and antidepressant serum levels. For the meta‐analysis, we systematically summarized pharmacogenetic evidence of the association between ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant treatment outcomes. Studies were included in the meta‐analysis if they investigated at least one ABCB1 SNP in individuals with MDD treated with at least one antidepressant. We did not find a significant association between ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant treatment outcomes in the CAN‐BIND‐1 sample. A total of 39 studies were included in the systematic review. In the meta‐analysis, we observed a significant association between rs1128503 and treatment response (T vs. C‐allele, odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval = 1.15–1.48, P value (adjusted) = 0.024, n = 2,526). We did not find associations among the six SNPs and treatment remission nor tolerability. Our findings provide limited evidence for an association between common ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant outcomes, which do not support the implementation of ABCB1 genotyping to inform antidepressant treatment at this time. Future research, especially on rs1128503, is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(DID) project is to develop a comprehensive and psychometrically sound rating scale for major depressive disorder (MDD) that reflects current diagnostic criteria and conceptualizations of depression. We report here the evaluation of the current DID item bank using Classical Test Theory (CTT), Item Response Theory (IRT) and Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT). Methods: The present study was part of a larger multisite, open-label study conducted by the Canadian Biomarker Integration Network in Depression (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01655706). Trained raters administered the 32 DID items at each of two visits (MDD: baseline, n=211 and Week 8, n=177; healthy participants: baseline, n=112 and Week 8, n=104). The DID's "grid" structure operationalizes intensity and frequency of each item, with clear symptom definitions and a structured interview guide, with the current iteration assessing symptoms related to anhedonia, cognition, fatigue, general malaise, motivation, anxiety, negative thinking, pain, and appetite. Participants were also administered the Montgomery-- Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR) that allowed DID items to be evaluated against existing "benchmark" items. CTT was used to assess data quality/reliability (i.e., missing data, skewness, scoring frequency, internal consistency), IRT to assess individual item performance by modelling an item's ability to discriminate levels of depressive severity (as assessed by the MADRS), and RMT to assess how the items perform together as a scale to capture a range of depressive severity (item targeting). These analyses together provided empirical evidence to base decisions on which DID items to remove, modify, or advance. Results: Of the 32 DID items evaluated, eight items were identified by CTT as problematic, displaying low variability in the range of responses, floor eflects, and/or skewness; and four items were identified by IRT to show poor discriminative properties that would limit their clinical utility. Five additional items were deemed to be redundant. The remaining 15 DID items all fit the Rasch model, with person and item difficulty estimates indicating satisfactory item targeting, with lower precision in participants with mild levels of depression. These 15 DID items also showed good internal consistency (alpha=0.95 and inter-item correlations ranging from r=0.49 to r=0.84) and all items were sensitive to change following antidepressant treatment (baseline vs. Week 8). RMT revealed problematic item targeting for the MADRS and QIDSSR, including an absence of MADRS items targeting participants with mild/moderate depression and an absence of QIDS-SR items targeting participants with mild or severe depression. Conclusion: The present study applied CTT, IRT, and RMT to assess the measurement properties of the DID items and identify those that should be advanced, modified, or removed. Of the 32 items evaluated, 15 items showed good measurement properties. These items (along with previously evaluated items) will provide the basis for validation of a penultimate DID scale assessing anhedonia, cognitive slowing, concentration, executive function, recent memory, drive, emotional fatigue, guilt, self-esteem, hopelessness, tension, rumination, irritability, reduced appetite, insomnia, sadness, worry, suicidality, and depressed mood. The strategies adopted by the DID process provide a framework for rating scale development and validation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent evidence underscores the utility of rapid-acting antidepressant interventions, such as ketamine, in alleviating symptoms of major depressive episodes (MDE). However, to date, there have been limited head-to-head comparisons of intravenous (IV) ketamine infusions with other antidepressant treatment strategies in large randomized trials. This study protocol describes an ongoing multi-centre, prospective, randomized, crossover, non-inferiority trial comparing acute treatment of individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for a major depressive episode (MDE) with ketamine and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) on efficacy, speed of therapeutic effects, side effects, and health care resource utilization. A secondary aim is to compare a 6-month maintenance strategy for ketamine responders to standard of care ECT maintenance. Finally, through the measurement of clinical, cognitive, neuroimaging, and molecular markers we aim to establish predictors and moderators of treatment response as well as treatment-elicited effects on these outcomes. Methods: Across four participating Canadian institutions, 240 patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder experiencing a MDE are randomized (1:1) to a course of ECT or racemic IV ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) administered 3 times/week for 3 or 4 weeks. Non-responders (< 50% improvement in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] scores) crossover to receive the alternate treatment. Responders during the randomization or crossover phases then enter the 6-month maintenance phase during which time they receive clinical assessments at identical intervals regardless of treatment arm. ECT maintenance follows standard of care while ketamine maintenance involves: weekly infusions for 1 month, then bi-weekly infusions for 2 months, and finally monthly infusions for 3 months (returning to bi-weekly in case of relapse). The primary outcome measure is change in MADRS scores after randomized treatment as assessed by raters blind to treatment modality. Discussion: This multi-centre study will help identify molecular, imaging, and clinical characteristics of patients with treatment-resistant and/or severe MDEs who would benefit most from either type of therapeutic strategy. In addition to informing clinical practice and influencing health care delivery, this trial will add to the robust platform and database of CAN-BIND studies for future research and biomarker discovery. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03674671. Registered September 17, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Depression Inventory Development project is an initiative of the International Society for CNS Drug Development whose goal is to develop a comprehensive and psychometrically sound measurement tool to be utilized as a primary endpoint in clinical trials for major depressive disorder. Using an iterative process between field testing and psychometric analysis and drawing upon expertise of international researchers in depression, the Depression Inventory Development team has established an empirically driven and collaborative protocol for the creation of items to assess symptoms in major depressive disorder. Depression-relevant symptom clusters were identified based on expert clinical and patient input. In addition, as an aid for symptom identification and item construction, the psychometric properties of existing clinical scales (assessing depression and related indications) were evaluated using blinded datasets from pharmaceutical antidepressant drug trials. A series of field tests in patients with major depressive disorder provided the team with data to inform the iterative process of scale development. We report here an overview of the Depression Inventory Development initiative, including results of the third iteration of items assessing symptoms related to anhedonia, cognition, fatigue, general malaise, motivation, anxiety, negative thinking, pain and appetite. The strategies adopted from the Depression Inventory Development program, as an empirically driven and collaborative process for scale development, have provided the foundation to develop and validate measurement tools in other therapeutic areas as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To report the symptomatic and functional outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) during a 2-phase treatment trial and to estimate the value of early improvement after 2 weeks in predicting clinical response to escitalopram and subsequently to adjunctive treatment with aripiprazole., Methods: Participants with MDD (N = 211) identified with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and confirmed with the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview were recruited from 6 outpatient centers across Canada (August 2013 through December 2016) and treated with open-label escitalopram (10-20 mg) for 8 weeks (Phase 1). Clinical and functional outcomes were evaluated using the MADRS, Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Rated (QIDS-SR), Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and Lam Employment Absence and Productivity Scale (LEAPS). Participants were evaluated at 8 and 16 weeks for clinical and functional response and remission. Phase 1 responders continued escitalopram while nonresponders received adjunctive aripiprazole (2-10 mg) for a further 8 weeks (Phase 2)., Results: After Phase 1, MADRS response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline) and remission (score ≤ 10) were, respectively, 47% and 31%, and SDS response (score ≤ 12) and remission (score ≤ 6) were, respectively, 53% and 24%. Response to escitalopram was maintained in 91% of participants at week 16, while 61% of the adjunctive aripiprazole group achieved MADRS response during Phase 2. Response and remission rates with the QIDS-SR were lower than with the MADRS. The LEAPS demonstrated significant occupational improvement (P < .05). Early symptomatic improvement predicted outcomes with modest accuracy., Conclusions: This study demonstrates comparable symptomatic and functional outcomes to those of other large practical-design studies. There was a high response rate with the adjunctive use of aripiprazole in escitalopram nonresponders. Given the limited value of early clinical improvement to predict outcome, integration of clinical and biological markers deserves further exploration., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01655706., (© Copyright 2019 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is among the most prevalent and disabling medical conditions worldwide. Identification of clinical and biological markers ("biomarkers") of treatment response could personalize clinical decisions and lead to better outcomes. This paper describes the aims, design, and methods of a discovery study of biomarkers in antidepressant treatment response, conducted by the Canadian Biomarker Integration Network in Depression (CAN-BIND). The CAN-BIND research program investigates and identifies biomarkers that help to predict outcomes in patients with MDD treated with antidepressant medication. The primary objective of this initial study (known as CAN-BIND-1) is to identify individual and integrated neuroimaging, electrophysiological, molecular, and clinical predictors of response to sequential antidepressant monotherapy and adjunctive therapy in MDD., Methods: CAN-BIND-1 is a multisite initiative involving 6 academic health centres working collaboratively with other universities and research centres. In the 16-week protocol, patients with MDD are treated with a first-line antidepressant (escitalopram 10-20 mg/d) that, if clinically warranted after eight weeks, is augmented with an evidence-based, add-on medication (aripiprazole 2-10 mg/d). Comprehensive datasets are obtained using clinical rating scales; behavioural, dimensional, and functioning/quality of life measures; neurocognitive testing; genomic, genetic, and proteomic profiling from blood samples; combined structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging; and electroencephalography. De-identified data from all sites are aggregated within a secure neuroinformatics platform for data integration, management, storage, and analyses. Statistical analyses will include multivariate and machine-learning techniques to identify predictors, moderators, and mediators of treatment response., Discussion: From June 2013 to February 2015, a cohort of 134 participants (85 outpatients with MDD and 49 healthy participants) has been evaluated at baseline. The clinical characteristics of this cohort are similar to other studies of MDD. Recruitment at all sites is ongoing to a target sample of 290 participants. CAN-BIND will identify biomarkers of treatment response in MDD through extensive clinical, molecular, and imaging assessments, in order to improve treatment practice and clinical outcomes. It will also create an innovative, robust platform and database for future research., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01655706 . Registered July 27, 2012.