Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines neuroanatomical variability in major depressive disorder, suggesting implications for clinical stratification.
The clinical and biological heterogeneity of major depressive disorder (MDD) may reflect the aggregation of different conditions with distinct pathologies under a single diagnostic label. Neuroanatomical heterogeneity in MDD was examined using a harmonized, age- and sex-matched sample from the ENIGMA MDD consortium (N = 5146; age range: 9–82 years; 64% female). Analyses of global neurostrucutral variability revealed greater cortical thickness heterogeneity in MDD compared with healthy controls (Cohen’s d = –0.26). Regionally, increased variability in cortical thickness was most prominent in the cingulate (+6.1 to +6.6% more variation in MDD) and insular (+5.8%) cortices, as well as in the frontal (+5.7 to +6.8%) and temporal (+6.1 to +6.8%) lobes. Heterogeneity in cortical thickness was more pronounced among patients using antidepressant medication (Cohen’s d = –0.39). Patient-specific analyses further showed that individuals with markedly increased cortical thickness variability (<5 th percentile relative to the normative range) exhibited greater depressive symptom severity than those within the normative range (5 th –95 th percentile; Cohen’s d = 0.19–0.36). Overall, the results indicate that neuroanatomical heterogeneity in MDD is primarily expressed in cortical thickness, offering refined insights into the neurobiological complexity of structural alterations associated with depression. These findings could guide future stratification efforts examining whether regionally confined changes in cortical thickness within areas of pronounced variability reflect clinically meaningful patient subgroups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sempach et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: