PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 30, 2026Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology0 citations

Toward Precision Psychiatry

View Full Paper
HKHelena K. KimXMXiaoyu MenSESamar S. M. Elsheikh

Key Points

  • This research aims to determine if pharmacogenetic and pharmacokinetic factors can enhance decision tree performance for antidepressant treatment in older patients with MDD.
  • Participants included 191 older patients from the IRL-Grey trial who did not fully respond to venlafaxine after 4 weeks.
  • CYP2D6 genotypes were analyzed along with blood levels of venlafaxine and its metabolites using pharmacokinetic modeling.
  • Decision trees were developed to optimize both specificity and sensitivity based on clinical and pharmacogenetic predictors.
  • Clinical predictors included longer episode duration and lack of partial response at week 4.
  • Lower active moiety and ODV exposures were additional predictors identified.
  • Negative predictive values of the decision trees were similar to those based solely on clinical predictors.

Abstract

Purpose: Decision trees can use clinical predictors to determine whether to continue the same antidepressant or switch to a different treatment in older patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). We examined whether pharmacogenetic and pharmacokinetic variables could improve their performance. Procedures: We analyzed 191 participants from the Incomplete Response in Late-Life Depression: Getting to Remission (IRL-Grey) trial who had not responded fully after 4 weeks of venlafaxine XR (150 mg/d) and for whom venlafaxine up to 300 mg/d was continued for 8 additional weeks. CYP2D6 genotypes were determined; venlafaxine, o-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV), and active moiety (AM) exposures at week 4 were calculated using population pharmacokinetic modeling. Decision tree analysis was performed using 5 early clinical predictors of eventual nonresponse identified in previous research and 4 pharmacogenetic and pharmacokinetic potential predictors. One decision tree was designed to optimize specificity (k=0.3), and another to optimize sensitivity (k=0.7). Results: Longer episode duration and lack of partial response at week 4 were retained as clinical predictors, and lower AM and ODV exposures were identified as additional predictors. Negative predictive values (NPVs) of the high-specificity and high-sensitivity trees (77.7% and 73.0%, respectively) were similar to NPVs in trees based solely on clinical predictors. Implications: Our methods can guide future studies combining clinical and biomarker data to address applied pharmacological questions relevant to day-to-day practice.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kim et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69f2a47b8c0f03fd6776384fhttps://doi.org/10.1097/jcp.0000000000002182
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1PharmGKB summary2013 · 63 citations
  2. 2Defining Success in Measurement-Based Care for Depression: A Comparison of Common Metrics2019 · 90 citations
  3. 3The Montgomery‐Åsberg Depression Scale: reliability and validity1986 · 310 citations
  4. 4A Scoping Review of the Evidence Behind Cytochrome P450 2D6 Isoenzyme Inhibitor Classifications2020 · 53 citations
  5. 5Tolerability of High-Dose Venlafaxine After Switch From Escitalopram in Nonresponding Patients With Major Depressive Disorder2020 · 14 citations