Inflammatory Markers May Predict Antidepressant Response

July 15, 2013 · Posted in Current Treatments, Risk Factors · Comment 

depressed woman

There appears to be a link between inflammation and depression. In the journal Neuropsychopharmacology, Cattanes et al. reported in 2013 that compared to controls, depressed patients had significantly higher baseline levels of inflammatory cytokines, less glucocorticoid receptor function, less neuroplasticity, and fewer neuroprotective factors. Certain variables predicted response to treatment, others were seen only in responders, and still others changed in everyone with antidepressant treatment.

Higher baseline levels of inflammatory markers interleukin IB, macrophage inhibitory factor (MIF), and tumor necrosis factor TNF? were each associated with nonresponse to antidepressant treatment, and the three combined accounted for 50% of the variance in response­—that is, they were the major predictor of whether a patient responded to treatment.

Levels of other factors changed in only those patients who responded well to antidepressants. The biggest changes were the normalization in levels of the neurotrophic factors BDNF and VEGF.

Several other markers normalized with antidepressant treatment regardless of whether the patients responded to treatment, and these included decreases in cytokines interleukin-IB and MIF and improved glucocorticoid receptor function.

The three different kinds of findings about these biomarkers were observed regardless of what type of antidepressant was used—SSRI versus tricyclic nortriptyline (which blocks norepinephrine reuptake).

Editor’s Note: This study replicates other studies in depression where signs of inflammation have been observed, including increases in inflammatory cytokines, decreases in glucocorticoid receptor function (needed to suppress high levels of the stress hormone cortisol) and lower levels of neuroplasticity and neuroprotection markers. This, however, is one of the first studies to show that levels of these markers at baseline may predict response to antidepressant treatment.

Also novel are the findings that while some high interleukin levels at baseline predicted antidepressant non-response, other ones normalized only in responders, and still others changed with treatment independent of whether the patients’ depression improved. These exciting findings require replication, but suggest the future possibility of personalized medicine, that is, choosing medications based on an individual biochemical marker profile. Eventually direct use of anti-inflammatory agents may be necessary in those with the highest levels of cytokines (predicting non-response to conventional antidepressant treatment). The same types of studies are needed in bipolar depression to determine the relationship between these inflammatory markers and treatment response.

How Illness Progresses In The Recurrent Affective Disorders

December 12, 2012 · Posted in Peer-Reviewed Published Data, Risk Factors · Comment 

depressed man with woman

This editor (RM Post) in collaboration with Jacqueline Fleming and Flavio Kapczinski published the article “Neurobiological mechanisms of illness progression in the recurrent affective disorders” in the Journal of Psychiatric Research this year. The article built on several themes about the progression of bipolar illness that had been explored in previous research.

These themes include:

  1. The likely acceleration of repeated episodes as a function of the number of prior episodes (episode sensitization)
  2. The increased responsivity of the illness to repeated stressors (stress sensitization)
  3. The increased behavioral reactivity to repeated use of psychomotor stimulants such as cocaine (stimulant-induced behavioral sensitization)

Not only are these observations well documented in the scientific literature, but recent observations also suggest that each type of sensitization can show cross-sensitization to the other two types. That is, individuals exposed to repeated stressors are more likely both to experience affective illness episodes and to adopt comorbid substance abuse. In a similar way, episodes of an affective disorder and stressors may also be associated with the relapse into drug administration in those who have been abstinent.

In addition to these mechanisms of illness progression in the recurrent affective disorders, the new article reviews the literature showing that the number of affective episodes or the duration of the illness appear to be associated with a variety of other clinical and neurobiological variables.

The number of affective episodes a patient experiences is associated with the degree of cognitive dysfunction present in their bipolar illness, and experiencing more than 4 episodes of unipolar or bipolar depression is a risk factor for dementia in late life. A relative lack of response to most treatments is also correlated with the number of prior episodes, and this holds true for response to naturalistic treatment in general. While most of these data are correlational and the direction of causality cannot be ascertained for certain, it is likely that the number of affective episodes and/or their duration could account for and drive difficulties with treatment and with cognitive function.

If this were the case, one would expect to see a variety of neurobiological correlates with the number of prior episodes or duration of illness, and in the article we summarize those that have been found in unipolar and bipolar disorder. Considerable data indicate that cortical volume and degrees of prefrontal cortical dysfunction can vary as a function of number of prior episodes. There is evidence that increased activity of the amygdala and the nucleus accumbens are also related to episodes or duration of illness. In those with unipolar depression, the volume of the hippocampus is decreased with longer duration of illness. Read more