MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155516308 · doi:10.1017/s1461145702002936

Pharmacogenetics of antidepressant and mood-stabilizing drugs: a review of candidate-gene studies and future research directions

2002· review· en· W2155516308 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacogeneticsSerotonin transporterCandidate geneAntidepressantMoodSerotonergicMedicinePharmacogenomicsMood disordersBioinformaticsPsychologyPsychiatryPharmacologyAnxietyBiologyGeneticsGeneSerotoninInternal medicineGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterogeneity of clinical response to antidepressant and mood-stabilizing drugs and susceptibility to adverse effects are major clinical problems. It is reasonable to suggest a genetic contribution to these inter-individual differences. Thus, pharmacogenetic approaches could provide the clinician with tools to individualize pharmacotherapy. In this paper, published reports that address the genetic basis of response to antidepressant drugs and mood-stabilizing drugs are selectively reviewed. There is substantial support for the assumption that genetic factors play a role in response to lithium and a degree of support for a role of such factors in response to antidepressants. Based on a Medline search and access to papers accepted but not yet published, studies on the role of specific candidate genes are comprehensively evaluated. A number of studies from different groups point to a role for polymorphism of the serotonin transporter gene in the therapeutic response to specific serotonin reuptake inhibitors. There are reports of other candidate genes, particularly in the serotonergic system, but these have still to be replicated. There is little evidence thus far that points to a role for specific candidate genes in response to mood-stabilizing drugs. Future research directions including the selection of relevant candidate genes, pivotal issues in the design of studies and high throughput methods of analysis are discussed in the light of the findings. Although pharmacogenetic approaches have great potential in the treatment of major depression and bipolar disorder, substantial further research is needed. Careful attention needs to be paid to research design issues and potential confounding factors such as population stratification. High throughput, genome-wide approaches could greatly accelerate the acquisition of relevant data but their success is dependent on the availability of appropriate clinical samples.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.366 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it