Ma-Li Wong1, Chuanhui Dong, Deborah L Flores, Monika Ehrhart-Bornstein, Stefan Bornstein, Mauricio Arcos-Burgos, Julio Licinio. 1. From the Mind and Brain Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, and the Department of Psychiatry, Flinders University School of Medicine, Adelaide, Australia; the Department of Neurology, Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami; the Department of Psychiatry, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, Calif.; Medical Clinic III, Carl Gustav Carus University Hospital, Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany; and the John Curtin School of Medical Research, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The authors compared the effectiveness of fluoxetine and desipramine treatment in a prospective double-blind pharmacogenetics study in first-generation Mexican Americans and examined the role of whole-exome functional gene variations in the patients' antidepressant response. METHOD: A total of 232 Mexican Americans who met DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with desipramine (50-200 mg/day) or fluoxetine (10-40 mg/day) after a 1-week placebo lead-in period. Outcome measures included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, and the Beck Depression Inventory. At week 8, whole-exome genotyping data were obtained for 36 participants who remitted and 29 who did not respond to treatment. RESULTS: Compared with desipramine treatment, fluoxetine treatment was associated with a greater reduction in HAM-D score, higher response and remission rates, shorter time to response and remission, and lower incidences of anticholinergic and cardiovascular side effects. Pharmacogenetics analysis showed that exm-rs1321744 achieved exome-wide significance for treatment remission. This variant is located in a brain methylated DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing site, which suggests that it may be involved in epigenetic regulation of neuronal gene expression. This and two other common gene variants provided a highly accurate cross-validated predictive model for treatment remission of major depression (receiver operating characteristic integral=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with desipramine, fluoxetine treatment showed a more rapid reduction of HAM-D score and a lower incidence of side effects in a population comprising primarily first-generation Mexican Americans with major depression. This study's pharmacogenetics approach strongly implicates the role of functional variants in antidepressant treatment response.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The authors compared the effectiveness of fluoxetine and desipramine treatment in a prospective double-blind pharmacogenetics study in first-generation Mexican Americans and examined the role of whole-exome functional gene variations in the patients' antidepressant response. METHOD: A total of 232 Mexican Americans who met DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with desipramine (50-200 mg/day) or fluoxetine (10-40 mg/day) after a 1-week placebo lead-in period. Outcome measures included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, and the Beck Depression Inventory. At week 8, whole-exome genotyping data were obtained for 36 participants who remitted and 29 who did not respond to treatment. RESULTS: Compared with desipramine treatment, fluoxetine treatment was associated with a greater reduction in HAM-D score, higher response and remission rates, shorter time to response and remission, and lower incidences of anticholinergic and cardiovascular side effects. Pharmacogenetics analysis showed that exm-rs1321744 achieved exome-wide significance for treatment remission. This variant is located in a brain methylated DNA immunoprecipitation sequencing site, which suggests that it may be involved in epigenetic regulation of neuronal gene expression. This and two other common gene variants provided a highly accurate cross-validated predictive model for treatment remission of major depression (receiver operating characteristic integral=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with desipramine, fluoxetine treatment showed a more rapid reduction of HAM-D score and a lower incidence of side effects in a population comprising primarily first-generation Mexican Americans with major depression. This study's pharmacogenetics approach strongly implicates the role of functional variants in antidepressant treatment response.
Authors: J A Sánchez-Lacay; R Lewis-Fernández; D Goetz; C Blanco; E Salmán; S Davies; M Liebowitz Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2001 Impact factor: 6.505
Authors: Alkes L Price; Nick J Patterson; Robert M Plenge; Michael E Weinblatt; Nancy A Shadick; David Reich Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-07-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Sekar Kathiresan; Alisa K Manning; Serkalem Demissie; Ralph B D'Agostino; Aarti Surti; Candace Guiducci; Lauren Gianniny; Nöel P Burtt; Olle Melander; Marju Orho-Melander; Donna K Arnett; Gina M Peloso; Jose M Ordovas; L Adrienne Cupples Journal: BMC Med Genet Date: 2007-09-19 Impact factor: 2.103
Authors: Ma-Li Wong; Mauricio Arcos-Burgos; Sha Liu; Alice W Licinio; Chenglong Yu; Eunice W M Chin; Wei-Dong Yao; Xin-Yun Lu; Stefan R Bornstein; Julio Licinio Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2020-10-17 Impact factor: 6.533
Authors: M-L Wong; M Arcos-Burgos; S Liu; J I Vélez; C Yu; B T Baune; M C Jawahar; V Arolt; U Dannlowski; A Chuah; G A Huttley; R Fogarty; M D Lewis; S R Bornstein; J Licinio Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: C A Mastronardi; E Pillai; D A Pineda; A F Martinez; F Lopera; J I Velez; J D Palacio; H Patel; S Easteal; M T Acosta; F X Castellanos; M Muenke; M Arcos-Burgos Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2015-11-24 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: J I Vélez; F Lopera; D Sepulveda-Falla; H R Patel; A S Johar; A Chuah; C Tobón; D Rivera; A Villegas; Y Cai; K Peng; R Arkell; F X Castellanos; S J Andrews; M F Silva Lara; P K Creagh; S Easteal; J de Leon; M L Wong; J Licinio; C A Mastronardi; M Arcos-Burgos Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 15.992