4.7 Review

Peripheral biomarkers of major depression and antidepressant treatment response: Current knowledge and future outlooks

Journal

JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
Volume 233, Issue -, Pages 3-14

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.001

Keywords

Depression; Biomarkers; Biosignatures; Genomics; Proteomics; Metabolomics

Funding

  1. Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care
  2. NIMH [R25MH101078]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R25MH101078] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: In recent years, we have accomplished a deeper understanding about the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD). Nevertheless, this improved comprehension has not translated to improved treatment outcome, as identification of specific biologic markers of disease may still be crucial to facilitate a more rapid, successful treatment. Ongoing research explores the importance of screening biomarkers using neuroimaging, neurophysiology, genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics measures. Results: In the present review, we highlight the biomarkers that are differentially expressed in MDD and treatment response and place a particular emphasis on the most recent progress in advancing technology which will continue the search for blood-based biomarkers. Limitations: Due to space constraints, we are unable to detail all biomarker platforms, such as neurophysiological and neuroimaging markers, although their contributions are certainly applicable to a biomarker review and valuable to the field. Conclusions: Although the search for reliable biomarkers of depression and/or treatment outcome is ongoing, the rapidly-expanding field of research along with promising new technologies may provide the foundation for identifying key factors which will ultimately help direct patients toward a quicker and more effective treatment for MDD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available