Early changes in emotional processing as a marker of clinical response to SSRI treatment in depression

Antidepressant treatment reduces behavioural and neural markers of negative emotional bias early in treatment and has been proposed as a mechanism of antidepressant drug action. Here, we provide a critical test of this hypothesis by assessing whether neural markers of early emotional processing changes predict later clinical response in depression. Thirty-five unmedicated patients with major depression took the serotonin re-uptake inhibitor (SSRI), escitalopram (10 mg), over 6 weeks, and were classified as responders (22 patients) versus non-responders (13 patients), based on at least a 50% reduction in symptoms by the end of treatment. The neural response to fearful and happy emotional facial expressions was assessed before and after 7 days of treatment using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Changes in the neural response to these facial cues after 7 days of escitalopram were compared in patients as a function of later clinical response. A sample of healthy controls was also assessed. At baseline, depressed patients showed greater activation to fear versus happy faces than controls in the insula and dorsal anterior cingulate. Depressed patients who went on to respond to the SSRI had a greater reduction in neural activity to fearful versus happy facial expressions after just 7 days of escitalopram across a network of regions including the anterior cingulate, insula, amygdala and thalamus. Mediation analysis confirmed that the direct effect of neural change on symptom response was not mediated by initial changes in depressive symptoms. These results support the hypothesis that early changes in emotional processing with antidepressant treatment are the basis of later clinical improvement. As such, early correction of negative bias may be a key mechanism of antidepressant drug action and a potentially useful predictor of therapeutic response

The serotonin 1A (5-HT1A) receptor as a pharmacological target in depression

Clinical depression is a common, debilitating and heterogenous disorder. Existing treatments for depression are inadequate for a significant minority of patients and new approaches are urgently needed. A wealth of evidence implicates the serotonin 1A (5-HT1A) receptor in the pathophysiology of depression. Stimulation of the 5-HT1A receptor is an existing therapeutic target for treating depression and anxiety, using drugs such as buspirone and tandospirone. However, activation of 5-HT1A raphe autoreceptors has also been suggested to be responsible for the delay in the therapeutic action of conventional antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). This narrative review provides a brief overview of the 5-HT1A receptor, the evidence implicating it in depression and in the effects of conventional antidepressant treatment. We highlight that pre- and post-synaptic 5-HT1A receptors may have divergent roles in the pathophysiology and treatment of depression. To date, developing this understanding to progress therapeutic discovery has been limited, partly due to a paucity of specific pharmacological probes suitable for use in humans. The development of 5-HT1A ‘biased agonism’, using compounds such as NLX-101, offers the opportunity to further elucidate the roles of pre- and post-synaptic 5-HT1A receptors. We describe how experimental medicine approaches can be helpful in profiling the effects of 5-HT1A receptor modulation on the different clinical domains of depression, and outline some potential neurocognitive models that could be used to test the effects of 5-HT1A biased agonists

Real-world outcomes of concomitant antidepressant and statin use in primary care patients with depression: a population-based cohort study

Background Antidepressants are licensed for use in depressive disorders, but non-response and poor adherence to treatment affect a considerable number of patients. Pre-clinical and clinical evidence suggest that statins can augment the effects of antidepressants. However, the acceptability and tolerability of combining statins with antidepressants are unclear, and their add-on efficacy has only been shown in small, short-term clinical trials. Observational data can provide complementary information about treatment effects on larger samples over longer follow-ups. In this study, we therefore assessed the real-world acceptability, tolerability, and efficacy of concomitant antidepressant and statin treatment in depression. Methods We conducted a population-based cohort study investigating QResearch primary care research database, which comprises the anonymised electronic healthcare records of 35 + million patients over 1574 English general practices. Patients aged 18–100 years, registered between January 1998 and August 2020, diagnosed with a new episode of depression, and commencing an antidepressant were included. Using a between-subject design, we identified two study groups: antidepressant + statin versus antidepressant-only prescriptions. Outcomes of interest included the following: antidepressant treatment discontinuations due to any cause (acceptability) and due to any adverse event (tolerability) and effects on depressive symptoms (efficacy) measured as response, remission, and change in depression score on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. All outcomes were assessed at 2, 6, and 12 months using multivariable regression analyses, adjusted for relevant confounders, to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) or mean differences (aMDs) with 99% confidence intervals (99% CIs). Results Compared to antidepressant-only (N 626,335), antidepressant + statin (N 46,482) was associated with higher antidepressant treatment acceptability (aOR2months 0.88, 99% CI 0.85 to 0.91; aOR6months 0.81, 99% CI 0.79 to 0.84; aOR12months 0.78, 99% CI 0.75 to 0.81) and tolerability (aOR2months 0.92, 99% CI 0.87 to 0.98; aOR6months 0.94, 99% CI 0.89 to 0.99, though not long term aOR12 months 1.02, 99% CI 0.97 to 1.06). Efficacy did not differ between groups (range aOR2-12 months 1.00 and 1.02 for response and remission, range aOR2-12 months − 0.01 and − 0.02 for change in depression score). Conclusions On real-world data, there is a positive correlation between antidepressant treatment adherence and statin use, partly explained by fewer dropouts due to adverse events. The main limitation of our study is its observational design, which restricts the potential to make causal inferences

Highly neurotic never-depressed students have negative biases in information processing

BACKGROUND: Cognitive theories associate depression with negative biases in information processing. Although negatively biased cognitions are well documented in depressed patients and to some extent in recovered patients, it remains unclear whether these abnormalities are present before the first depressive episode. METHOD: High neuroticism (N) is a well-recognized risk factor for depression. The current study therefore compared different aspects of emotional processing in 33 high-N never-depressed and 32 low-N matched volunteers. Awakening salivary cortisol, which is often elevated in severely depressed patients, was measured to explore the neurobiological substrate of neuroticism. RESULTS: High-N volunteers showed increased processing of negative and/or decreased processing of positive information in emotional categorization and memory, facial expression recognition and emotion-potentiated startle (EPS), in the absence of global memory or executive deficits. By contrast, there was no evidence for effects of neuroticism on attentional bias (as measured with the dot-probe task), over-general autobiographical memory, or awakening cortisol levels. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that certain negative processing biases precede depression rather than arising as a result of depressive experience per se and as such could in part mediate the vulnerability of high-N subjects to depression. Longitudinal studies are required to confirm that such cognitive vulnerabilities predict subsequent depression in individual subjects

Faces and Facets:Variability of Emotion Recognition in Psychopathy Reflect its Affective and Antisocial Features

Psychopathy consists of a constellation of affective-interpersonal features including lack of empathy, callousness, manipulativeness and interpersonal charm, impulsiveness and irresponsibility. Despite its theoretical and predictive value in forensic contexts, the relationships between the psychometric dimensions of psychopathy, including its antisocial features, and the construct’s neuropsychological characteristics remain uncertain. In this study, 685 personality-disordered prisoners with histories of serious violent or sexual offenses were assessed for psychopathy before completing a computerized and well-validated assessment of the ability to recognize emotional expressions in the face. Prisoners with more of the affective features of psychopathy, and prisoners with more of its antisocial manifestations, showed relatively poor recognition accuracy of fearfulness and disgust. These relationships were independent and modest but were still evident following correction for demographic features (e.g., ethnicity and socioeconomic status), mental illness (e.g., substance and alcohol misuse), personality disorders (other than antisocial personality disorder) and treatment status. By contrast, the associations between these dimensions of psychopathy and emotion recognition were diminished by controlling for cognitive ability. These findings demonstrate that variability in the ability of high-risk personality-disordered prisoners to recognize emotional expressions in the face—in particular, fear and disgust—reflects both the affective and antisocial aspects of psychopathy, and is moderated by cognitive ability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved

Associations between statin use and negative affective bias during COVID-19: an observational, longitudinal UK study investigating depression vulnerability

Background There is growing interest in the antidepressant potential of statins. We tested whether statin use is associated with cognitive markers previously found to indicate psychological vulnerability to depression within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Between April 2020 and February 2021, we conducted an observational online study of 2043 adults in the United Kingdom. Participants completed cognitive tasks assessing processes related to depression vulnerability, including affective bias and reward processing. We also measured working memory, medication use, and current psychiatric symptoms. Using mixed analysis of covariance and regression models, we compared participants on statins alone (n = 81), antihypertensive medication alone (n = 126), both medications (n = 111), and on neither medication (n = 1725). Results Statin use was associated with reduced recognition of angry and fearful faces (F1 = 9.19, p = .002; F1 = 6.9, p = .009) and with increased misclassification of these expressions as positive. Increased recognition of angry faces at baseline predicted increased levels of depression and anxiety 10 months later (β = 3.61, p = .027; β = 2.37, p = .002). Statin use was also associated with reduced learning about stimuli associated with loss (F1,1418 = 9.90, p = .002). These indicators of reduced negative bias were not seen in participants taking antihypertensive medication alone, suggesting that they were related to statin use in particular rather than nonspecific demographic factors. In addition, we found no evidence of an association between statin use and impairment in working memory. Conclusions Statin use was associated with cognitive markers indicative of reduced psychological vulnerability to depression, supporting their potential use as a prophylactic treatment for depression

The pharmacological bases for repurposing statins in depression: a review of mechanistic studies

Statins are commonly prescribed medications widely investigated for their potential actions on the brain and mental health. Pre-clinical and clinical evidence suggests that statins may play a role in the treatment of depressive disorders, but only the latter has been systematically assessed. Thus, the physiopathological mechanisms underlying statins’ putative antidepressant or depressogenic effects have not been established. This review aims to gather available evidence from mechanistic studies to strengthen the pharmacological basis for repurposing statins in depression. We used a broad, well-validated search strategy over three major databases (Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO) to retrieve any mechanistic study investigating statins’ effects on depression. The systematic search yielded 8068 records, which were narrowed down to 77 relevant papers. The selected studies (some dealing with more than one bodily system) described several neuropsychopharmacological (44 studies), endocrine-metabolic (17 studies), cardiovascular (6 studies) and immunological (15 studies) mechanisms potentially contributing to the effects of statins on mood. Numerous articles highlighted the beneficial effect of statins on depression, particularly through positive actions on serotonergic neurotransmission, neurogenesis and neuroplasticity, hypothalamic-pituitary axis regulation and modulation of inflammation. The role of other mechanisms, especially the association between statins, lipid metabolism and worsening of depressive symptoms, appears more controversial. Overall, most mechanistic evidence supports an antidepressant activity for statins, likely mediated by a variety of intertwined processes involving several bodily systems. Further research in this area can benefit from measuring relevant biomarkers to inform the selection of patients most likely to respond to statins’ antidepressant effects while also improving our understanding of the physiopathological basis of depression

Effects of emotion recognition training on mood among individuals with high levels of depressive symptoms: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We have developed a new paradigm that targets the recognition of facial expression of emotions. Here we report the protocol of a randomised controlled trial of the effects of emotion recognition training on mood in a sample of individuals with depressive symptoms over a 6-week follow-up period. METHODS/DESIGN: We will recruit 190 adults from the general population who report high levels of depressive symptoms (defined as a score ≥ 14 on the Beck Depression Inventory-II). Participants will attend a screening session and will be randomised to intervention or control procedures, repeated five times over consecutive days (Monday to Friday). A follow-up session will take place at end-of -treatment, 2-weeks and 6-weeks after training. Our primary study outcome will be depressive symptoms, Beck Depression Inventory- II (rated over the past two weeks). Our secondary outcomes are: depressive symptoms, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; anxiety symptoms, Beck Anxiety Inventory (rated over the past month); positive affect, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (rated as 'how you feel right now'); negative affect, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (rated as 'how you feel right now'); emotion sensitivity, Emotion Recognition Task (test phase); approach motivation and persistence, the Fishing Game; and depressive interpretation bias, Scrambled Sentences Test. DISCUSSION: This study is of a novel cognitive bias modification technique that targets biases in emotional processing characteristic of depression, and can be delivered automatically via computer, Internet or Smartphone. It therefore has potential to be a valuable cost-effective adjunctive treatment for depression which may be used together with more traditional psychotherapy, cognitive-behavioural therapy and pharmacotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN17767674.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

Using an Experimental Medicine Model to Explore Combination Effects of Pharmacological and Cognitive Interventions for Depression and Anxiety

Selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and cognitive therapies are effective in the treatment of anxiety and depression. Previous research suggests that both forms of treatments may work by altering cognitive biases in the processing of affective information. The current study assessed the effects of combining an SSRI with a cognitive intervention on measures of affective processing bias and resilience to external challenge. A total of 62 healthy participants were randomly assigned to receive either 7 days of citalopram (20 mg) or placebo capsules while also completing either an active or a control version of a computerized cognitive bias training task. After treatment, standard measures of affective processing bias were collected. Participants' resilience to external stress was also tested by measuring the increase in negative symptoms induced by a negative mood induction. Participants who received both citalopram and the active cognitive bias training task showed a smaller alteration in emotional memory and categorization bias than did those who received either active intervention singly. The degree to which memory for negative information was altered by citalopram predicted participants' resistance to the negative mood induction. These results suggest that co-administration of an SSRI and a cognitive training intervention can reduce the effectiveness of either treatment alone in terms of anxiety- and depression-relevant emotional processing. More generally, the findings suggest that pinpointing the cognitive actions of treatments may inform future development of combination strategies in mental health