Inflammation as a predictive biomarker for response to omega-3 fatty acids in major depressive disorder: a proof-of-concept study.

This study explores whether inflammatory biomarkers act as moderators of clinical response to omega-3 (n-3) fatty acids in subjects with major depressive disorder (MDD). One hundred fifty-five subjects with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition (DSM-IV) MDD, a baseline 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-17) score ⩾ 15 and baseline biomarker data (interleukin (IL)-1ra, IL-6, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), leptin and adiponectin) were randomized between 18 May 2006 and 30 June 2011 to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)-enriched n-3 1060 mg day(-1), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)-enriched n-3 900 mg day(-1) or placebo. Outcomes were determined using mixed model repeated measures analysis for 'high' and 'low' inflammation groups based on individual and combined biomarkers. Results are presented in terms of standardized treatment effect size (ES) for change in HAM-D-17 from baseline to treatment week 8. Although overall treatment group differences were negligible (ES=-0.13 to +0.04), subjects with any 'high' inflammation improved more on EPA than placebo (ES=-0.39) or DHA (ES=-0.60) and less on DHA than placebo (ES=+0.21); furthermore, EPA-placebo separation increased with increasing numbers of markers of high inflammation. Subjects randomized to EPA with 'high' IL-1ra or hs-CRP or low adiponectin ('high' inflammation) had medium ES decreases in HAM-D-17 scores vs subjects 'low' on these biomarkers. Subjects with 'high' hs-CRP, IL-6 or leptin were less placebo-responsive than subjects with low levels of these biomarkers (medium to large ES differences). Employing multiple markers of inflammation facilitated identification of a more homogeneous cohort of subjects with MDD responding to EPA vs placebo in our cohort. Studies are needed to replicate and extend this proof-of-concept work.

Does major depressive disorder change with age?

BACKGROUND: The authors used results from a 20-year, high-intensity follow-up to measure the influence of ageing, and of age at onset, on the long-term persistence of symptoms in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Subjects who completed a 20-year series of semi-annual and then annual assessments with a stable diagnosis of MDD or schizo-affective disorder other than mainly schizophrenic (n=220) were divided according to their ages at intake into youngest (18-29 years), middle (30-44 years) and oldest (>45 years) groups. Depressive morbidity was quantified as the proportion of weeks spent in major depressive or schizo-affective episodes. General linear models then tested for effects of time and time x group interactions on these measures. Regression analyses compared the influence of age of onset and of current age. RESULTS: Analyses revealed no significant time or group x time effects on the proportions of weeks in major depressive episodes in any of the three age groups. Earlier ages of onset were associated with greater symptom persistence, particularly in the youngest group. The proportions of weeks ill showed intra-individual stability over time that was most evident in the oldest group. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that the persistence of depressive symptoms in MDD does not change as individuals move from their third to their fifth decade, from their fourth to their sixth decade, or from their sixth to their eighth decade. An early age of onset, rather than youth per se, is associated with greater morbidity over two decades.

Does incomplete recovery from first lifetime major depressive episode herald a chronic course of illness?

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the influence of incomplete recovery from first lifetime major depressive episodes on long-term outcome. METHOD: After their first lifetime major depressive episode, patients were divided into asymptomatic (N=70) and residual subthreshold depressive symptom (N=26) recovery groups and compared on longitudinal course during up to 12 years of prospective naturalistic follow-up. RESULTS: Patients with residual subthreshold depressive symptoms during recovery had significantly more severe and chronic future courses. Those with residual symptoms relapsed to major and minor depressive episodes faster and had more recurrences, shorter well intervals, and fewer symptom-free weeks during follow-up than asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Resolution of major depressive episodes with residual subthreshold depressive symptoms, even the first lifetime episode, appears to be the first step of a more severe, relapsing, and chronic future course. When ongoing subthreshold symptoms continue after major depressive episodes, the illness is still active, and continued treatment is strongly recommended.

A brief assessment of psychosocial functioning of subjects with bipolar I disorder: the LIFE-RIFT. Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation-Range Impaired Functioning Tool.

Those afflicted with bipolar disorder often suffer from substantial functional impairment both when in episode and when in remission. This study examined the psychometric properties of a brief assessment of psychosocial functioning, the Range of Impaired Functioning Tool (LIFE-RIFT), among subjects with bipolar I disorder. The study sample consisted of 163 subjects who presented with bipolar I disorder at intake into the NIMH Collaborative Depression Study (CDS). All LIFE-RIFT items come from the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation (LIFE). Follow-up data that were used to examine the reliability and validity of the scale come from assessments of psychosocial functioning that were conducted 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after intake into the CDS. The results of factor analyses indicate that the scale items are measures of one construct, psychosocial functioning. The interrater agreement on the scale score was very good with an intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.94. The internal consistency reliability among the scale items was uniformly satisfactory over the four assessment periods, with coefficient alpha ranging from 0.78 to 0.84. Mixed-effect regression analyses showed that during mood episodes subjects were significantly more impaired than those in recovery. In conclusion, the psychometric properties of the LIFE-RIFT were examined in subjects with bipolar I disorder. The analyses from this longitudinal, observational study provide empirical support for the reliability and validity of the scale. The LIFE-RIFT provides a brief, inexpensive alternative to scales currently used to assess psychosocial functioning and can be easily added to semistructured assessments that are used in clinical and treatment outcome studies.