| Literature DB >> 24002086 |
T R Powell1, R G Smith, S Hackinger, L C Schalkwyk, R Uher, P McGuffin, J Mill, K E Tansey.
Abstract
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-Åsberg 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.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24002086 PMCID: PMC3784763 DOI: 10.1038/tp.2013.73
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Psychiatry ISSN: 2158-3188 Impact factor: 6.222
Figure 1Schematic diagram of interleukin-11 (IL11) in a 5′ to 3′ direction, with the grey box showing the CpG island our assay covers and black boxes representing exons (top). Pictogram representing the individual CpG units within the CpG island, with black lines noting the CpG units adequately detected by the Sequenom and grey lines showing CpG units not assessed by this method (bottom).
Figure 2Bar graph showing mean percentage DNA methylation in our total sample at each of the 11 CpG units spanning the interleukin-11 (IL11) CpG island. CpG unit location is shown on the x-axis and methylation (%) is shown on the y-axis.
A summary of the results from the univariate linear regressions
| P | q | P | q | P | q | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.002 | 1 | 0.965 | 0.966 | 0.097 | 1 | 0.757 | 0.961 | 0.784 | 2 | 0.459 | 0.854 |
| 2 | 0.784 | 1 | 0.378 | 0.854 | 1.672 | 1 | 0.199 | 0.854 | 0.742 | 2 | 0.479 | 0.854 |
| 3 | 0.058 | 1 | 0.810 | 0.966 | 0.051 | 1 | 0.821 | 0.966 | 0.080 | 2 | 0.924 | 0.966 |
| 4 | 1.438 | 1 | 0.234 | 0.854 | 8.412 | 1 | 0.363 | 2 | 0.697 | 0.961 | ||
| 5 | 8.429 | 1 | 2.477 | 1 | 0.119 | 0.854 | 0.135 | 2 | 0.874 | 0.966 | ||
| 6 | 0.853 | 1 | 0.358 | 0.854 | 0.109 | 1 | 0.742 | 0.961 | 0.034 | 2 | 0.966 | 0.966 |
| 7 | 0.327 | 1 | 0.569 | 0.854 | 0.327 | 1 | 0.569 | 0.854 | 0.711 | 2 | 0.494 | 0.854 |
| 8 | 0.407 | 1 | 0.525 | 0.854 | 0.407 | 1 | 0.525 | 0.854 | 1.911 | 2 | 0.154 | 0.854 |
| 9 | 0.566 | 1 | 0.454 | 0.854 | 1.533 | 1 | 0.219 | 0.854 | 0.594 | 2 | 0.554 | 0.854 |
| 10 | 0.525 | 1 | 0.470 | 0.854 | 0.525 | 1 | 0.470 | 0.854 | 0.756 | 2 | 0.472 | 0.854 |
| 11 | 0.010 | 1 | 0.920 | 0.966 | 0.131 | 1 | 0.718 | 0.961 | 6.821 | 2 | ||
Results include an F statistic, d.f., P-values and q-values.
A summary of the results from the univariate linear regressions in which we tested whether (from left to right) DNA methylation, drug by DNA methylation interactions, or rs1126757 genotype by DNA methylation interactions in each of the 11 CpG units could predict antidepressant response.
Significant P-values (P⩽0.005) are highlighted in bold.
Figure 3Scatter plot of the relationship between DNA methylation at CpG unit 5 (x-axis) and percentage Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) change (y-axis). Line represents the line of best fit. DNA methylation at CpG unit 5 significantly predicted percentage MADRS change in our model (P=0.005).
Figure 4Scatter plot of the relationship between percentage DNA methylation at CpG unit 4 (x-axis) and percentage Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) change (y-axis). Lines represent line of best fit for each drug group. DNA methylation at CpG unit 4 was found to significantly interact with the drug type to predict percentage MADRS change in our model (P=0.005).
Figure 5Scatter plot of the relationship between percentage DNA methylation at CpG unit 11 (x-axis) and percentage Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) change (y-axis). Data points and lines of best fit correspond to different genotypes of the genome-wide association study single-nucleotide polymorphism, rs1126757. DNA methylation at CpG unit 11 was found to significantly interact with rs1126757 to predict percentage MADRS change in our model (P=0.002).