Search

BackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly heterogenous disease, both in terms of clinical profiles and pathobiological alterations. Recently, immunometabolic dysregulations were shown to be correlated with atypical, energy-related symptoms but less so with the Melancholic or Anxious distress symptom dimensions of depression in The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA) study. In this study, we aimed to replicate these immunometabolic associations and to characterize the metabolomic correlates of each of the three MDD dimensions.MethodsUsing three clinical rating scales, Melancholic, and Anxious distress, and Immunometabolic (IMD) dimensions were characterized in 158 patients who participated in the Predictors of Remission to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study and from whom plasma and serum samples were available. The NESDA-defined inflammatory index, a composite measure of interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein, was measured from pre-treatment plasma samples and a metabolomic profile was defined using serum samples analyzed on three metabolomics platforms targeting fatty acids and complex lipids, amino acids, acylcarnitines, and gut microbiome-derived metabolites among other metabolites of central metabolism.ResultsThe IMD clinical dimension and the inflammatory index were positively correlated (r = 0.19, p = 0.019) after controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, whereas the Melancholic and Anxious distress dimensions were not, replicating the previous NESDA findings. The three symptom dimensions had distinct metabolomic signatures using both univariate and set enrichment statistics. IMD severity correlated mainly with gut-derived metabolites and a few acylcarnitines and long chain saturated free fatty acids. Melancholia severity was significantly correlated with several phosphatidylcholines, primarily the ether-linked variety, lysophosphatidylcholines, as well as several amino acids. Anxious distress severity correlated with several medium and long chain free fatty acids, both saturated and polyunsaturated ones, sphingomyelins, as well as several amino acids and bile acids.ConclusionThe IMD dimension of depression appears reliably associated with markers of inflammation. Metabolomics provides powerful tools to inform about depression heterogeneity and molecular mechanisms related to clinical dimensions in MDD, which include a link to gut microbiome and lipids implicated in membrane structure and function.

BackgroundThe gut microbiome may play a role in the pathogenesis of neuropsychiatric diseases including major depressive disorder (MDD). Bile acids (BAs) are steroid acids that are synthesized in the liver from cholesterol and further processed by gut-bacterial enzymes, thus requiring both human and gut microbiome enzymatic processes in their metabolism. BAs participate in a range of important host functions such as lipid transport and metabolism, cellular signaling and regulation of energy homeostasis. BAs have recently been implicated in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's and several other neuropsychiatric diseases, but the biochemical underpinnings of these gut microbiome-linked metabolites in the pathophysiology of depression and anxiety remains largely unknown.MethodUsing targeted metabolomics, we profiled primary and secondary BAs in the baseline serum samples of 208 untreated outpatients with MDD. We assessed the relationship of BA concentrations and the severity of depressive and anxiety symptoms as defined by the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD17) and the 14-item Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HRSA-Total), respectively. We also evaluated whether the baseline metabolic profile of BA informs about treatment outcomes.ResultsThe concentration of the primary BA chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA) was significantly lower at baseline in both severely depressed (log2 fold difference (LFD) = -0.48; p = 0.021) and highly anxious (LFD = -0.43; p = 0.021) participants compared to participants with less severe symptoms. The gut bacteria-derived secondary BAs produced from CDCA such as lithocholic acid (LCA) and several of its metabolites, and their ratios to primary BAs, were significantly higher in the more anxious participants (LFD's range = [0.23, 1.36]; p's range = [6.85E-6, 1.86E-2]). The interaction analysis of HRSD17 and HRSA-Total suggested that the BA concentration differences were more strongly correlated to the symptoms of anxiety than depression. Significant differences in baseline CDCA (LFD = -0.87, p = 0.0009), isoLCA (LFD = -1.08, p = 0.016) and several BA ratios (LFD's range [0.46, 1.66], p's range [0.0003, 0.049]) differentiated treatment failures from remitters.ConclusionIn patients with MDD, BA profiles representing changes in gut microbiome compositions are associated with higher levels of anxiety and increased probability of first-line treatment failure. If confirmed, these findings suggest the possibility of developing gut microbiome-directed therapies for MDD characterized by gut dysbiosis.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the first-line treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), yet their mechanisms of action are not fully understood and their therapeutic benefit varies among individuals. We used a targeted metabolomics approach utilizing a panel of 180 metabolites to gain insights into mechanisms of action and response to citalopram/escitalopram. Plasma samples from 136 participants with MDD enrolled into the Mayo Pharmacogenomics Research Network Antidepressant Medication Pharmacogenomic Study (PGRN-AMPS) were profiled at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment. After treatment, we saw increased levels of short-chain acylcarnitines and decreased levels of medium-chain and long-chain acylcarnitines, suggesting an SSRI effect on β-oxidation and mitochondrial function. Amines-including arginine, proline, and methionine sulfoxide-were upregulated while serotonin and sarcosine were downregulated, suggesting an SSRI effect on urea cycle, one-carbon metabolism, and serotonin uptake. Eighteen lipids within the phosphatidylcholine (PC aa and ae) classes were upregulated. Changes in several lipid and amine levels correlated with changes in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores (HRSD17). Differences in metabolic profiles at baseline and post-treatment were noted between participants who remitted (HRSD17 ≤ 7) and those who gained no meaningful benefits (

BackgroundThe use of naltrexone plus bupropion to treat methamphetamine use disorder has not been well studied.MethodsWe conducted this multisite, double-blind, two-stage, placebo-controlled trial with the use of a sequential parallel comparison design to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended-release injectable naltrexone (380 mg every 3 weeks) plus oral extended-release bupropion (450 mg per day) in adults with moderate or severe methamphetamine use disorder. In the first stage of the trial, participants were randomly assigned in a 0.26:0.74 ratio to receive naltrexone-bupropion or matching injectable and oral placebo for 6 weeks. Those in the placebo group who did not have a response in stage 1 underwent rerandomization in stage 2 and were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive naltrexone-bupropion or placebo for an additional 6 weeks. Urine samples were obtained from participants twice weekly. The primary outcome was a response, defined as at least three methamphetamine-negative urine samples out of four samples obtained at the end of stage 1 or stage 2, and the weighted average of the responses in the two stages is reported. The treatment effect was defined as the between-group difference in the overall weighted responses.ResultsA total of 403 participants were enrolled in stage 1, and 225 in stage 2. In the first stage, 18 of 109 participants (16.5%) in the naltrexone-bupropion group and 10 of 294 (3.4%) in the placebo group had a response. In the second stage, 13 of 114 (11.4%) in the naltrexone-bupropion group and 2 of 111 (1.8%) in the placebo group had a response. The weighted average response across the two stages was 13.6% with naltrexone-bupropion and 2.5% with placebo, for an overall treatment effect of 11.1 percentage points (Wald z-test statistic, 4.53; P

It is unknown whether indoles, metabolites of tryptophan that are derived entirely from bacterial metabolism in the gut, are associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Serum samples (baseline, 12 weeks) were drawn from participants (n = 196) randomized to treatment with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), escitalopram, or duloxetine for major depressive disorder. Baseline indoxyl sulfate abundance was positively correlated with severity of psychic anxiety and total anxiety and with resting state functional connectivity to a network that processes aversive stimuli (which includes the subcallosal cingulate cortex (SCC-FC), bilateral anterior insula, right anterior midcingulate cortex, and the right premotor areas). The relation between indoxyl sulfate and psychic anxiety was mediated only through the metabolite's effect on the SCC-FC with the premotor area. Baseline indole abundances were unrelated to post-treatment outcome measures, and changes in symptoms were not correlated with changes in indole concentrations. These results suggest that CBT and antidepressant medications relieve anxiety via mechanisms unrelated to modulation of indoles derived from gut microbiota; it remains possible that treatment-related improvement stems from their impact on other aspects of the gut microbiome. A peripheral gut microbiome-derived metabolite was associated with altered neural processing and with psychiatric symptom (anxiety) in humans, which provides further evidence that gut microbiome disruption can contribute to neuropsychiatric disorders that may require different therapeutic approaches. Given the exploratory nature of this study, findings should be replicated in confirmatory studies.Clinical trial NCT00360399 "Predictors of Antidepressant Treatment Response: The Emory CIDAR" https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00360399 .

Background: The 9-item Concise Health Risk Tracking – Self-Report (CHRT-SR9) is a widely used patient-reported outcome measure of suicidal risk. The goal of this article is to provide an evidence-based interpretation of the CHRT-SR9 total score in terms of four clinically actionable categories of suicidal risk (none, mild, moderate, and severe). Methods: Data from two large programs involving adolescents and adults were combined in this paper. In these studies, the CHRT-SR9 was anchored against an independent measure of suicidal risk, the suicide item (Item #9) in the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), with categories 0 (none), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), and 3 (severe). In the combined data (n = 1945), we calculated the cumulative percentage of data across these four categories and the percentile score of the CHRT-SR9 total score that corresponded to these percentages; from this, we developed ranges of the CHRT-SR9 total score that corresponded to the four categories of Item #9 of PHQ-9. We also calculated similar ranges for two broad subscales of the CHRT-SR9 total score; Propensity and Suicidal Thoughts. To assess the robustness of our findings, we repeated the analysis at another timepoint across studies. Results: Findings indicated that the CHRT-SR9 total score (range: 0–36) can be categorized as none (0–14), mild (15–21), moderate (22–26), and severe (27–36). Similar categories were calculated for the Propensity and Suicidal Thoughts subscales. The findings were the same when repeated at another timepoint. Conclusion: This categorization of the CHRT-SR9 total score can place patients into clinically meaningful and actionable categories of suicidal risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mental health research funding priorities in high-income countries must balance longer-term investment in identifying neurobiological mechanisms of disease with shorter-term funding of novel prevention and treatment strategies to alleviate the current burden of mental illness. Prioritising one area of science over others risks reduced returns on the entire scientific portfolio.

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) contributes to suicide risk. Treating MDD effectively is considered a key suicide prevention intervention. Yet many patients with MDD do not respond to their initial medication and require a 'next-step'. The relationship between next-step treatments and suicidal thoughts and behaviors is uncharted. Method: The VA Augmentation and Switching Treatments for Depression trial randomized 1522 participants to one of three next-step treatments: Switching to Bupropion, combining with Bupropion, and augmenting with Aripiprazole. In this secondary analysis, features associated with lifetime suicidal ideation (SI) and attempts (SA) at baseline and current SI during treatment were explored. Results: Compared to those with SI only, those with lifetime SI + SA were more likely to be female, divorced, or separated, unemployed; and to have experienced more childhood adversity. They had a more severe depressive episode and were more likely to respond to 'next-step' treatment. The prevalence of SI decreased from 46.5% (694/1492) at baseline to 21.1% (315/1492) at end-of-treatment. SI during treatment was associated with baseline SI; low positive mental health, more anxiety, greater severity and longer duration of current MDD episode; being male and White; and treatment with S-BUP or C-BUP as compared to A-ARI. Conclusion: SI declines for most patients during next-step medication treatments. But about 1 in 5 experienced emergent or worsening SI during treatment, so vigilance for suicide risk through the entire 12-week acute treatment period is necessary. Treatment selection may affect the risk of SI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Profiling patients on a proposed 'immunometabolic depression' (IMD) dimension, described as a cluster of atypical depressive symptoms related to energy regulation and immunometabolic dysregulations, may optimise personalised treatment. Aims: To test the hypothesis that baseline IMD features predict poorer treatment outcomes with antidepressants. Method: Data on 2551 individuals with depression across the iSPOT-D (n = 967), CO-MED (n = 665), GENDEP (n = 773) and EMBARC (n = 146) clinical trials were used. Predictors included baseline severity of atypical energy-related symptoms (AES), body mass index (BMI) and C-reactive protein levels (CRP, three trials only) separately and aggregated into an IMD index. Mixed models on the primary outcome (change in depressive symptom severity) and logistic regressions on secondary outcomes (response and remission) were conducted for the individual trial data-sets and pooled using random-effects meta-analyses. Results: Although AES severity and BMI did not predict changes in depressive symptom severity, higher baseline CRP predicted smaller reductions in depressive symptoms (n = 376, βpooled = 0.06, P = 0.049, 95% CI 0.0001–0.12, I 2 = 3.61%); this was also found for an IMD index combining these features (n = 372, βpooled = 0.12, s.e. = 0.12, P = 0.031, 95% CI 0.01–0.22, I 2 = 23.91%), with a higher – but still small – effect size compared with CRP. Confining analyses to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor users indicated larger effects of CRP (βpooled = 0.16) and the IMD index (βpooled = 0.20). Baseline IMD features, both separately and combined, did not predict response or remission. Conclusions: Depressive symptoms of people with more IMD features improved less when treated with antidepressants. However, clinical relevance is limited owing to small effect sizes in inconsistent associations. Whether these patients would benefit more from treatments targeting immunometabolic pathways remains to be investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Characteristics of difficult-to-treat depression (DTD), including infrequent symptom remission and poor durability of benefit, compel reconsideration of the outcome metrics historically used to gauge the effectiveness of antidepressant interventions. Methods: Self-report and clinician assessments of depression symptom severity were obtained regularly over a 2-year period in a difficult-to-treat depression registry sample receiving treatment as usual (TAU), with or without vagus nerve stimulation (VNS). Alternative outcome metrics for characterizing symptom change were compared in effect size and discriminating power in distinguishing the vagus nerve stimulation + treatment as usual and treatment as usual treatment groups. We expected metrics based on remission status to produce weaker between-group separation than those based on the classifications of partial response or response and metrics that integrate information over time to produce greater separation than those based on single endpoint assessment. Results: Metrics based on remission status had smaller effect size and poorer discrimination in separating the treatment groups than metrics based on partial response or response classifications. Metrics that integrated information over the 2-year observation period had stronger performance characteristics than those based on symptom scores at single endpoint assessment. For both the clinician-rated and self-report depression ratings, the metrics with the strongest performance characteristics were the median percentage change in symptom scores over the observation period and the proportion of the observation period in partial response or better. Conclusion: In difficult-to-treat depression, integrative symptom severity-based and time-based measures are sensitive and informative outcomes for assessing between-group treatment effects, while metrics based on remission status are not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]