New insights on the pharmacogenomics of antidepressant response from the GENDEP and STAR*D studies: rare variant analysis and high-density imputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Genome-wide association studies have generally failed to identify polymorphisms associated with antidepressant response. Possible reasons include limited coverage of genetic variants that this study tried to address by exome genotyping and dense imputation. A meta-analysis of Genome-Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) and Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) studies was performed at SNP, gene and pathway level. Coverage of genetic variants was increased compared to previous studies by adding exome genotypes to previously available genome-wide data and using the Haplotype Reference Consortium panel for imputation. Standard quality control was applied. Phenotypes were symptom improvement and remission after 12 weeks of antidepressant treatment. NEWMEDS consortium samples and Pharmacogenomic Research Network Antidepressant Medication Pharmacogenomic Study (PGRN-AMPS) served for replication. 7,062,950 SNPs were analysed in GENDEP (n=738) and STAR*D (n=1409). rs116692768 (p=1.80e-08, ITGA9 (integrin alpha 9)) and rs76191705 (p=2.59e-08, NRXN3 (neurexin 3)) were significantly associated with symptom improvement during citalopram/escitalopram treatment. At gene level, no consistent effect was found. At pathway level, the Gene Ontology terms GO:0005694 (chromosome) and GO:0044427 (chromosomal part) were associated with improvement (corrected p=0.007 and 0.045, respectively). The association between rs116692768 and symptom improvement was replicated in PGRN-AMPS (p=0.047), while rs76191705 was not. The two SNPs did not replicate in NEWMEDS. ITGA9 codes for a membrane receptor for neurotrophins and NRXN3 is a transmembrane neuronal adhesion receptor involved in synaptic differentiation. Despite their meaningful biological rationale for being involved in antidepressant effect, no convincing replication was achieved. Further studies may help in clarifying their role.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".