EPIGENETIC BIOMARKERS OF POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION IDENTIFY PREMENSTRUAL DYSPHORIC DISORDER (PMDD) AND POST-MENOPAUSAL DEPRESSION (PMD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Postpartum depression (PPD) occurs following periods of major hormonal flux and experiments modulating gonadal hormone levels in the humans pharmacologically can lead to the onset of depressive phenotypes(Bloch et al., 2000). Together the data suggest a class of depression driven by hormonal change, here termed ‘hormonal depression’ (Payne, Palmer and Joffe, 2009; Payne, 2019).Previous work out of our laboratories have identified epigenetic variation at the TTC9B and HP1BP3 loci that is prospectively predictive of PPD risk, validated in over 5 cohorts(Guintivano et al., 2014; Osborne et al., 2016; Kaminsky et al., 2020; Lapato et al., 2020; Payne et al., 2020). Objectives The primary objective was to assess the predictive efficacy of epigenetic PPD biomarkers for other hormonally driven depressions including premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) and post-menopausal depression (PMD). The secondary objective was to assess the influence of antidepressant medications and serum hormones and neuroactive metabolites on biomarker outcomes. Methods We applied our published PPD biomarker linear model to DNA methylation generated by targeted pyrosequencing at TTC9B and HP1BP3 in a cohort of N=55 women with and without premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). The model was evaluated in a convenience sample of publicly available DNA methylation data from N=128 women to predict current depression in post-menopausal women. Results In the PMDD sample, Luteal but not follicular phase samples generated an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.49-0.93 ) to distinguish N= 10 PMDD cases from N=18 controls and generated an AUC of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.70-0.86). In the PMD sample, the PPD model predicted depression status with an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.81) in N=80 women with current depression and N=48 controls. In the PMDD sample, model application to luteal phase samples distinguished between N=5 SSRI responders from N=5 non-responders (AUC= 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50-0.80). HP1BP3 DNA methylation was significantly positively associated with levels of pregnenolone (rho= 0.35, p=0.014), suggesting it may be a marker of progesterone pathway precursor levels. Additionally, follicular phase TTC9B methylation was associated with the change in log(allopregnanolone) levels from follicular to luteal phases (rho= -0.53, p=0.02), suggesting it may be a marker of altered neuroactive steroid metabolism in the progesterone pathway. Conclusions This study suggests epigenetic PPD biomarkers can predict other hormonal depressions like PMDD and PMD. Furthermore, they may mark a biology related to variation of gonadal hormones like pregnenolone, the precursor to progesterone, and allopregnanolone, a neuroactive steroid important for modulating mood. Allopregnanolone, a target of recently approved PPD medications like Zuranolone(Althaus et al., 2020; Deligiannidis et al., 2021), can interact with the serotonin system and may be important for antidepressant medication response(Lovick, 2013; Lü scher and Mö hler, 2019). Future work should investigate the interaction of PPD biomarkers with medication response in hormonal depressions. References Althaus, A.L. et al. (2020) ‘Preclinical characterization of zuranolone (SAGE-217), a selective neuroactive steroid GABAA receptor positive allosteric modulator’, Neuropharmacology [Preprint]. doi:10.1016/j.neuropharm.2020.108333. Bloch, M. et al. (2000) ‘Effects of gonadal steroids in women with a history of postpartum depression’, American Journal of Psychiatry [Preprint]. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.157.6.924.Deligiannidis, K.M. et al. (2021) ‘Effect of Zuranolone vs Placebo in Postpartum Depression’, JAMA Psychiatry [Preprint]. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.1559. Guintivano, J. et al. (2014) ‘Antenatal prediction of postpartum depression with blood DNA methylation biomarkers’, Molecular Psychiatry [Preprint]. doi:10.1038/mp.2013.62. Kaminsky, Z.A. et al. (2020) ‘Postpartum depression biomarkers predict exacerbation of OCD symptoms during pregnancy’, Psychiatry Research [Preprint]. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113332. Lapato, D.M. et al. (2020) ‘Predictive validity of a DNA methylation-based screening panel for postpartum depression’, medRxiv [Preprint].Lovick, T. (2013) ‘SSRIs and the female brain - Potential for utilizing steroid-stimulating properties to treat menstrual cycle-linked dysphorias’, Journal of Psychopharmacology [Preprint]. doi:10.1177/0269881113490327. Lü scher, B. and Mö hler, H. (2019) ‘Brexanolone, a neurosteroid antidepressant, vindicates the gabaergic deficit hypothesis of depression and may foster resilience.’, F1000Research [Preprint]. doi:10.12688/f1000research.18758.1. Osborne, L. et al. (2016) ‘Replication of epigenetic postpartum depression biomarkers and variation with hormone levels’, Neuropsychopharmacology [Preprint]. doi:10.1038/npp.2015.333. Payne, J.L. (2019) ‘Reproductive psychiatry: giving birth to a new subspecialty’, International Review of Psychiatry [Preprint]. doi:10.1080/09540261.2018.1579991. Payne, J.L. et al. (2020) ‘DNA methylation biomarkers prospectively predict both antenatal and postpartum depression’, Psychiatry Research, 285. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112711. Payne, J.L., Palmer, J.T. and Joffe, H. (2009) ‘A reproductive subtype of depression: Conceptualizing models and moving toward etiology’, Harvard Review of Psychiatry [Preprint]. doi:10.1080/10673220902899706.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".