A polygenic predictor of treatment-resistant depression using whole exome sequencing and genome-wide genotyping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) occurs in ∼30% of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) but the genetics of TRD was previously poorly investigated. Whole exome sequencing and genome-wide genotyping were performed in 1320 MDD patients. Response to the first pharmacological treatment was compared to non-response to one treatment and non-response to two or more treatments (TRD). Differences in the risk of carrying damaging variants were tested. A score expressing the burden of variants in genes and pathways was calculated weighting each variant for its functional (Eigen) score and frequency, considering rare variants only and rare + common variants. Gene- and pathway-based scores were used to develop predictive models of TRD and non-response using gradient boosting in 70% of the sample (training) which were tested in the remaining 30% (testing), evaluating also the addition of clinical predictors. Independent replication was tested in STAR*D and GENDEP using exome array-based data. After quality control 1209 subjects were included. TRD and non-responders did not show higher risk to carry damaging variants compared to responders. Genes/pathways associated with TRD included those modulating cell survival and proliferation, neurodegeneration and immune response. Significant prediction of TRD vs. response was observed in the testing sample which was improved by the addition of clinical factors. Some models were replicated, with a weaker prediction, in STAR*D and GENDEP when considering also clinical factors and in the extremes of the genetic score distribution. These results suggested relevant biological mechanisms implicated in TRD and a new methodological approach to the prediction of TRD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".