Although usually thought of as external environmental stressors, a significant heritable component has been reported for measures of stressful life events (SLEs) in twin studies.

We examined the variance in SLEs captured by common genetic variants from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 2578 individuals. Genome-wide complex trait analysis (GCTA) was used to estimate the phenotypic variance tagged by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We also performed a GWAS on the number of SLEs, and looked at correlations between siblings.

A significant proportion of variance in SLEs was captured by SNPs (30%, p = 0.04). When events were divided into those considered to be dependent or independent, an equal amount of variance was explained for both. This ‘heritability’ was in part confounded by personality measures of neuroticism and psychoticism. A GWAS for the total number of SLEs revealed one SNP that reached genome-wide significance (p = 4 × 10−8), although this association was not replicated in separate samples. Using available sibling data for 744 individuals, we also found a significant positive correlation of R2 = 0.08 in SLEs (p = 0.03).

These results provide independent validation from molecular data for the heritability of reporting environmental measures, and show that this heritability is in part due to both common variants and the confounding effect of personality.

It has been proposed that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may interfere with the efficacy of antidepressants and contribute to treatment resistance in major depressive disorder (MDD). This effect requires replication and a test of whether it is specific to serotonin-reuptake inhibiting (SRI) antidepressants.

We tested the effect of concomitant medication with NSAIDs on the efficacy of escitalopram, a SRI antidepressant, and nortriptyline, a tricyclic antidepressant, among 811 subjects with MDD treated for up to 12 weeks in the GENDEP study. Effects of NSAIDs on improvement of depressive symptoms were tested in mixed-effect linear models. Effects on remission were tested in logistic regression. Age, sex, baseline severity and centre of recruitment were considered as potential confounding factors.

Ten percent (n=78) of subjects were taking NSAIDs during the antidepressant treatment. Older subjects were significantly more likely to take NSAIDs. After controlling for age, sex, centre of recruitment and baseline severity, concomitant medication with NSAIDs did not significantly influence the efficacy of escitalopram [β=0.035, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.145 to 0.215, p=0.704] or nortriptyline (β=0.075, 95% CI −0.131 to 0.281, p=0.476). Although slightly fewer subjects who took NSAIDs reached remission [odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.49–1.31, p=0.383], this non-significant effect was reversed after controlling for age, sex, baseline severity and recruitment centre effects (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.61–1.77, p=0.882).

NSAIDs are unlikely to affect the efficacy of SRI or other antidepressants. Concurrent use of NSAIDs and antidepressants does not need to be avoided.

Response and remission defined by cut-off values on the last observed depression severity score are commonly used as outcome criteria in clinical trials, but ignore the time course of symptomatic change and may lead to inefficient analyses. We explore alternative categorization of outcome by naturally occurring trajectories of symptom change.

Growth mixture models were applied to repeated measurements of depression severity in 807 participants with major depression treated for 12 weeks with escitalopram or nortriptyline in the part-randomized Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression study. Latent trajectory classes were validated as outcomes in drug efficacy comparison and pharmacogenetic analyses.

The final two-piece growth mixture model categorized participants into a majority (75%) following a gradual improvement trajectory and the remainder following a trajectory with rapid initial improvement. The rapid improvement trajectory was over-represented among nortriptyline-treated participants and showed an antidepressant-specific pattern of pharmacogenetic associations. In contrast, conventional response and remission favoured escitalopram and produced chance results in pharmacogenetic analyses. Controlling for drop-out reduced drug differences on response and remission but did not affect latent trajectory results.

Latent trajectory mixture models capture heterogeneity in the development of clinical response after the initiation of antidepressants and provide an outcome that is distinct from traditional endpoint measures. It differentiates between antidepressants with different modes of action and is robust against bias due to differential discontinuation.

Adverse drug reactions are important determinants of non-adherence to antidepressant treatment but their assessment is complicated by overlap with depressive symptoms and lack of reliable self-report measures.

To evaluate a simple self-report measure and describe adverse reactions to antidepressants in a large sample.

The newly developed self-report Antidepressant Side-Effect Checklist and the psychiatrist-rated UKU Side Effect Rating Scale were repeatedly administered to 811 adult participants with depression in a part-randomised multicentre open-label study comparing escitalopram and nortriptyline.

There was good agreement between self-report and psychiatrists' ratings. Most complaints listed as adverse reactions in people with depression were more common when they were medication-free rather than during their treatment with antidepressants. Dry mouth (74%), constipation (33%) and weight gain (15%) were associated with nortriptyline treatment. Diarrhoea (9%), insomnia (36%) and yawning (16%) were more common during treatment with escitalopram. Problems with urination and drowsiness predicted discontinuation of nortriptyline. Diarrhoea and decreased appetite predicted discontinuation of escitalopram.

Adverse reactions to antidepressants can be reliably assessed by self-report. Attention to specific adverse reactions may improve adherence to antidepressant treatment.

There have been conflicting reports on whether the length polymorphism in the promoter of the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR) moderates the antidepressant effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). We hypothesised that the pharmacogenetic effect of 5-HTTLPR is modulated by gender, age and other variants in the serotonin transporter gene.

To test the hypothesis that the 5-HTTLPR differently influences response to escitalopram (an SSRI) compared with nortriptyline (a noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor).

The 5-HTTLPR and 13 additional markers across the serotonin transporter gene were genotyped in 795 adults with moderate-to-severe depression treated with escitalopram or nortriptyline in the Genome Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) project.

The 5-HTTLPR moderated the response to escitalopram, with long-allele carriers improving more than short-allele homozygotes. A significant three-way interaction between 5-HTTLPR, drug and gender indicated that the effect was concentrated in males treated with escitalopram. The single-nucleotide polymorphism rs2020933 also influenced outcome.

The effect of 5-HTTLPR on antidepressant response is SSRI specific conditional on gender and modulated by another polymorphism at the 5' end of the serotonin transporter gene.

Tricyclic antidepressants and serotonin reuptake inhibitors are considered to be equally effective, but differences may have been obscured by internally inconsistent measurement scales and inefficient statistical analyses.

To test the hypothesis that escitalopram and nortriptyline differ in their effects on observed mood, cognitive and neurovegetative symptoms of depression.

In a multicentre part-randomised open-label design (the Genome Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) study) 811 adults with moderate to severe unipolar depression were allocated to flexible dosage escitalopram or nortriptyline for 12 weeks. The weekly Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and Beck Depression Inventory were scored both conventionally and in a more novel way according to dimensions of observed mood, cognitive symptoms and neurovegetative symptoms.

Mixed-effect linear regression showed no difference between escitalopram and nortriptyline on the three original scales, but symptom dimensions revealed drug-specific advantages. Observed mood and cognitive symptoms improved more with escitalopram than with nortriptyline. Neurovegetative symptoms improved more with nortriptyline than with escitalopram.

The three symptom dimensions provided sensitive descriptors of differential antidepressant response and enabled identification of drug-specific effects.

A number of scales are used to estimate the severity of depression. However, differences between self-report and clinician rating, multi-dimensionality and different weighting of individual symptoms in summed scores may affect the validity of measurement. In this study we examined and integrated the psychometric properties of three commonly used rating scales.

The 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) were administered to 660 adult patients with unipolar depression in a multi-centre pharmacogenetic study. Item response theory (IRT) and factor analysis were used to evaluate their psychometric properties and estimate true depression severity, as well as to group items and derive factor scores.

The MADRS and the BDI provide internally consistent but mutually distinct estimates of depression severity. The HAMD-17 is not internally consistent and contains several items less suitable for out-patients. Factor analyses indicated a dominant depression factor. A model comprising three dimensions, namely ‘observed mood and anxiety’, ‘cognitive’ and ‘neurovegetative’, provided a more detailed description of depression severity.

The MADRS and the BDI can be recommended as complementary measures of depression severity. The three factor scores are proposed for external validation.