<scp><i>ABCB1</i></scp> Gene Variants and Antidepressant Treatment Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Including Results from the <scp>CAN‐BIND</scp>‐1 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The P-glycoprotein efflux pump, encoded by the ABCB1 gene, has been shown to alter concentrations of various antidepressants in the brain. In this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between six ABCB1 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; rs1045642, rs2032582, rs1128503, rs2032583, rs2235015, and rs2235040) and antidepressant treatment outcomes in individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD), including new data from the Canadian Biomarker and Integration Network for Depression (CAN-BIND-1) cohort. For the CAN-BIND-1 sample, we applied regression models to investigate the association between ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant treatment response, remission, tolerability, and antidepressant serum levels. For the meta-analysis, we systematically summarized pharmacogenetic evidence of the association between ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant treatment outcomes. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they investigated at least one ABCB1 SNP in individuals with MDD treated with at least one antidepressant. We did not find a significant association between ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant treatment outcomes in the CAN-BIND-1 sample. A total of 39 studies were included in the systematic review. In the meta-analysis, we observed a significant association between rs1128503 and treatment response (T vs. C-allele, odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval = 1.15-1.48, P value (adjusted) = 0.024, n = 2,526). We did not find associations among the six SNPs and treatment remission nor tolerability. Our findings provide limited evidence for an association between common ABCB1 SNPs and antidepressant outcomes, which do not support the implementation of ABCB1 genotyping to inform antidepressant treatment at this time. Future research, especially on rs1128503, is recommended.
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 | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".