DNA methylation in interleukin-11 predicts clinical response to antidepressants in GENDEP

Transcriptional differences in interleukin-11 (IL11) after antidepressant treatment have been found to correspond to clinical response in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients. Expression differences were partly mediated by a single-nucleotide polymorphism (rs1126757), identified as a predictor of antidepressant response as part of a genome-wide association study. Here we attempt to identify whether DNA methylation, another baseline factor known to affect transcription factor binding, might also predict antidepressant response, using samples collected from the Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression project (GENDEP). DNA samples from 113 MDD individuals from the GENDEP project, who were treated with either escitalopram (n=80) or nortriptyline (n=33) for 12 weeks, were randomly selected. Percentage change in Montgomery-� sberg Depression Rating Scale scores between baseline and week 12 were utilized as our measure of antidepressant response. The Sequenom EpiTYPER platform was used to assess DNA methylation across the only CpG island located in the IL11 gene. Regression analyses were then used to explore the relationship between CpG unit methylation and antidepressant response. We identified a CpG unit predictor of general antidepressant response, a drug by CpG unit interaction predictor of response, and a CpG unit by rs1126757 interaction predictor of antidepressant response. The current study is the first to investigate the potential utility of pharmaco-epigenetic biomarkers for the prediction of antidepressant response. Our results suggest that DNA methylation in IL11 might be useful in identifying those patients likely to respond to antidepressants, and if so, the best drug suited to each individual

A Survey of Genomic Studies Supports Association of Circadian Clock Genes with Bipolar Disorder Spectrum Illnesses and Lithium Response

Circadian rhythm abnormalities in bipolar disorder (BD) have led to a search for genetic abnormalities in circadian “clock genes” associated with BD. However, no significant clock gene findings have emerged from genome-wide association studies (GWAS). At least three factors could account for this discrepancy: complex traits are polygenic, the organization of the clock is more complex than previously recognized, and/or genetic risk for BD may be shared across multiple illnesses. To investigate these issues, we considered the clock gene network at three levels: essential “core” clock genes, upstream circadian clock modulators, and downstream clock controlled genes. Using relaxed thresholds for GWAS statistical significance, we determined the rates of clock vs. control genetic associations with BD, and four additional illnesses that share clinical features and/or genetic risk with BD (major depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit/hyperactivity). Then we compared the results to a set of lithium-responsive genes. Associations with BD-spectrum illnesses and lithium-responsiveness were both enriched among core clock genes but not among upstream clock modulators. Associations with BD-spectrum illnesses and lithium-responsiveness were also enriched among pervasively rhythmic clock-controlled genes but not among genes that were less pervasively rhythmic or non-rhythmic. Our analysis reveals previously unrecognized associations between clock genes and BD-spectrum illnesses, partly reconciling previously discordant results from past GWAS and candidate gene studies

Towards the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics in bipolar disorder.

BackgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is a psychiatric illness defined by pathological alterations between the mood states of mania and depression, causing disability, imposing healthcare costs and elevating the risk of suicide. Although effective treatments for BD exist, variability in outcomes leads to a large number of treatment failures, typically followed by a trial and error process of medication switches that can take years. Pharmacogenetic testing (PGT), by tailoring drug choice to an individual, may personalize and expedite treatment so as to identify more rapidly medications well suited to individual BD patients.DiscussionA number of associations have been made in BD between medication response phenotypes and specific genetic markers. However, to date clinical adoption of PGT has been limited, often citing questions that must be answered before it can be widely utilized. These include: What are the requirements of supporting evidence? How large is a clinically relevant effect? What degree of specificity and sensitivity are required? Does a given marker influence decision making and have clinical utility? In many cases, the answers to these questions remain unknown, and ultimately, the question of whether PGT is valid and useful must be determined empirically. Towards this aim, we have reviewed the literature and selected drug-genotype associations with the strongest evidence for utility in BD.SummaryBased upon these findings, we propose a preliminary panel for use in PGT, and a method by which the results of a PGT panel can be integrated for clinical interpretation. Finally, we argue that based on the sufficiency of accumulated evidence, PGT implementation studies are now warranted. We propose and discuss the design for a randomized clinical trial to test the use of PGT in the treatment of BD

TPH2 Gene Polymorphisms and Major Depression – A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Tryptophan hydroxylase-2 (TPH2) is the rate-limiting enzyme in the synthetic pathway for brain serotonin and is considered key factor for maintaining normal serotonin transmission in the central neuron system (CNS). Gene-disease association studies have reported a relationship between TPH2 and major depressive disorder (MDD) in different populations, however subsequent studies have produced contradictory results. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic overview and a meta-analysis with all available data up-to-date. METHODS: We scrutinized PubMed, Embase, HuGNet and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI ) and last update was held on October 2011. We also searched the manuscripts and the supplementary documents of the published genome-wide association studies in the field. Effect sizes of independent loci that have been studied in more than 3 articles were synthesized using fixed and random effects models. RESULTS: We found 27 eligible articles that studied a total of 74 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Finally, 12 independent loci were included in the meta-analysis. The synthesis of the data shown that two SNPs (rs4570625 and rs17110747) were associated with MDD using fixed effects models. SNP rs4570625 had low heterogeneity and remained significant using the more conservative random effects calculations with a summary OR = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.73-0.96). CONCLUSION: The current study identified a SNP (rs4570625) with strong epidemiological credibility; however more studies are required to provide robust evidence for other weak associations

Therapygenetics: using genetic markers to predict response to psychological treatment for mood and anxiety disorders

Considerable variation is evident in response to psychological therapies for mood and anxiety disorders. Genetic factors alongside environmental variables and gene-environment interactions are implicated in the etiology of these disorders and it is plausible that these same factors may also be important in predicting individual differences in response to psychological treatment. In this article, we review the evidence that genetic variation influences psychological treatment outcomes with a primary focus on mood and anxiety disorders. Unlike most past work, which has considered prediction of response to pharmacotherapy, this article reviews recent work in the field of therapygenetics, namely the role of genes in predicting psychological treatment response. As this is a field in its infancy, methodological recommendations are made and opportunities for future research are identified

Evaluating genetic markers and neurobiochemical analytes for fluoxetine response using a panel of mouse inbred strains

RationaleIdentification of biomarkers that establish diagnosis or treatment response is critical to the advancement of research and management of patients with depression.ObjectiveOur goal was to identify biomarkers that can potentially assess fluoxetine response and risk to poor treatment outcome.MethodsWe measured behavior, gene expression, and the levels of 36 neurobiochemical analytes across a panel of genetically diverse mouse inbred lines after chronic treatment with water or fluoxetine.ResultsGlyoxylase 1 (GLO1) and guanine nucleotide-binding protein 1 (GNB1) mostly account for baseline anxiety-like and depressive-like behavior, indicating a common biological link between depression and anxiety. Fluoxetine-induced biochemical alterations discriminated positive responders, while baseline neurobiochemical differences differentiated negative responders (p < 0.006). Results show that glial fibrillary acidic protein, S100 beta protein, GLO1, and histone deacetylase 5 contributed most to fluoxetine response. These proteins are linked within a cellular growth/proliferation pathway, suggesting the involvement of cellular genesis in fluoxetine response. Furthermore, a candidate genetic locus that associates with baseline depressive-like behavior contains a gene that encodes for cellular proliferation/adhesion molecule (Cadm1), supporting a genetic basis for the role of neuro/gliogenesis in depression.ConclusionWe provided a comprehensive analysis of behavioral, neurobiochemical, and transcriptome data across 30 mouse inbred strains that has not been accomplished before. We identified biomarkers that influence fluoxetine response, which, altogether, implicate the importance of cellular genesis in fluoxetine treatment. More broadly, this approach can be used to assess a wide range of drug response phenotypes that are challenging to address in human samples.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00213-011-2574-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Mapping anhedonia onto reinforcement learning: A behavioural meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Depression is characterised partly by blunted reactions to reward. However, tasks probing this deficiency have not distinguished insensitivity to reward from insensitivity to the prediction errors for reward that determine learning and are putatively reported by the phasic activity of dopamine neurons. We attempted to disentangle these factors with respect to anhedonia in the context of stress, Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), Bipolar Disorder (BPD) and a dopaminergic challenge. METHODS: Six behavioural datasets involving 392 experimental sessions were subjected to a model-based, Bayesian meta-analysis. Participants across all six studies performed a probabilistic reward task that used an asymmetric reinforcement schedule to assess reward learning. Healthy controls were tested under baseline conditions, stress or after receiving the dopamine D2 agonist pramipexole. In addition, participants with current or past MDD or BPD were evaluated. Reinforcement learning models isolated the contributions of variation in reward sensitivity and learning rate. RESULTS: MDD and anhedonia reduced reward sensitivity more than they affected the learning rate, while a low dose of the dopamine D2 agonist pramipexole showed the opposite pattern. Stress led to a pattern consistent with a mixed effect on reward sensitivity and learning rate. CONCLUSION: Reward-related learning reflected at least two partially separable contributions. The first related to phasic prediction error signalling, and was preferentially modulated by a low dose of the dopamine agonist pramipexole. The second related directly to reward sensitivity, and was preferentially reduced in MDD and anhedonia. Stress altered both components. Collectively, these findings highlight the contribution of model-based reinforcement learning meta-analysis for dissecting anhedonic behavior