Precision medicine for mood disorders: objective assessment, risk prediction, pharmacogenomics, and repurposed drugs.

Mood disorders (depression, bipolar disorders) are prevalent and disabling. They are also highly co-morbid with other psychiatric disorders. Currently there are no objective measures, such as blood tests, used in clinical practice, and available treatments do not work in everybody. The development of blood tests, as well as matching of patients with existing and new treatments, in a precise, personalized and preventive fashion, would make a significant difference at an individual and societal level. Early pilot studies by us to discover blood biomarkers for mood state were promising [1], and validated by others [2]. Recent work by us has identified blood gene expression biomarkers that track suicidality, a tragic behavioral outcome of mood disorders, using powerful longitudinal within-subject designs, validated them in suicide completers, and tested them in independent cohorts for ability to assess state (suicidal ideation), and ability to predict trait (future hospitalizations for suicidality) [3-6]. These studies showed good reproducibility with subsequent independent genetic studies [7]. More recently, we have conducted such studies also for pain [8], for stress disorders [9], and for memory/Alzheimer's Disease [10]. We endeavored to use a similar comprehensive approach to identify more definitive biomarkers for mood disorders, that are transdiagnostic, by studying mood in psychiatric disorders patients. First, we used a longitudinal within-subject design and whole-genome gene expression approach to discover biomarkers which track mood state in subjects who had diametric changes in mood state from low to high, from visit to visit, as measured by a simple visual analog scale that we had previously developed (SMS-7). Second, we prioritized these biomarkers using a convergent functional genomics (CFG) approach encompassing in a comprehensive fashion prior published evidence in the field. Third, we validated the biomarkers in an independent cohort of subjects with clinically severe depression (as measured by Hamilton Depression Scale, (HAMD)) and with clinically severe mania (as measured by the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS)). Adding the scores from the first three steps into an overall convergent functional evidence (CFE) score, we ended up with 26 top candidate blood gene expression biomarkers that had a CFE score as good as or better than SLC6A4, an empirical finding which we used as a de facto positive control and cutoff. Notably, there was among them an enrichment in genes involved in circadian mechanisms. We further analyzed the biological pathways and networks for the top candidate biomarkers, showing that circadian, neurotrophic, and cell differentiation functions are involved, along with serotonergic and glutamatergic signaling, supporting a view of mood as reflecting energy, activity and growth. Fourth, we tested in independent cohorts of psychiatric patients the ability of each of these 26 top candidate biomarkers to assess state (mood (SMS-7), depression (HAMD), mania (YMRS)), and to predict clinical course (future hospitalizations for depression, future hospitalizations for mania). We conducted our analyses across all patients, as well as personalized by gender and diagnosis, showing increased accuracy with the personalized approach, particularly in women. Again, using SLC6A4 as the cutoff, twelve top biomarkers had the strongest overall evidence for tracking and predicting depression after all four steps: NRG1, DOCK10, GLS, PRPS1, TMEM161B, GLO1, FANCF, HNRNPDL, CD47, OLFM1, SMAD7, and SLC6A4. Of them, six had the strongest overall evidence for tracking and predicting both depression and mania, hence bipolar mood disorders. There were also two biomarkers (RLP3 and SLC6A4) with the strongest overall evidence for mania. These panels of biomarkers have practical implications for distinguishing between depression and bipolar disorder. Next, we evaluated the evidence for our top biomarkers being targets of existing psychiatric drugs, which permits matching patients to medications in a targeted fashion, and the measuring of response to treatment. We also used the biomarker signatures to bioinformatically identify new/repurposed candidate drugs. Top drugs of interest as potential new antidepressants were pindolol, ciprofibrate, pioglitazone and adiphenine, as well as the natural compounds asiaticoside and chlorogenic acid. The last 3 had also been identified by our previous suicidality studies. Finally, we provide an example of how a report to doctors would look for a patient with depression, based on the panel of top biomarkers (12 for depression and bipolar, one for mania), with an objective depression score, risk for future depression, and risk for bipolar switching, as well as personalized lists of targeted prioritized existing psychiatric medications and new potential medications. Overall, our studies provide objective assessments, targeted therapeutics, and monitoring of response to treatment, that enable precision medicine for mood disorders.

Towards precision medicine for stress disorders: diagnostic biomarkers and targeted drugs.

The biological fingerprint of environmental adversity may be key to understanding health and disease, as it encompasses the damage induced as well as the compensatory reactions of the organism. Metabolic and hormonal changes may be an informative but incomplete window into the underlying biology. We endeavored to identify objective blood gene expression biomarkers for psychological stress, a subjective sensation with biological roots. To quantify the stress perception at a particular moment in time, we used a simple visual analog scale for life stress in psychiatric patients, a high-risk group. Then, using a stepwise discovery, prioritization, validation, and testing in independent cohort design, we were successful in identifying gene expression biomarkers that were predictive of high-stress states and of future psychiatric hospitalizations related to stress, more so when personalized by gender and diagnosis. One of the top biomarkers that survived discovery, prioritization, validation, and testing was FKBP5, a well-known gene involved in stress response, which serves as a de facto reassuring positive control. We also compared our biomarker findings with telomere length (TL), another well-established biological marker of psychological stress and show that newly identified predictive biomarkers such as NUB1, APOL3, MAD1L1, or NKTR are comparable or better state or trait predictors of stress than TL or FKBP5. Over half of the top predictive biomarkers for stress also had prior evidence of involvement in suicide, and the majority of them had evidence in other psychiatric disorders, providing a molecular underpinning for the effects of stress in those disorders. Some of the biomarkers are targets of existing drugs, of potential utility in patient stratification, and pharmacogenomics approaches. Based on our studies and analyses, the biomarkers with the best overall convergent functional evidence (CFE) for involvement in stress were FKBP5, DDX6, B2M, LAIR1, RTN4, and NUB1. Moreover, the biomarker gene expression signatures yielded leads for possible new drug candidates and natural compounds upon bioinformatics drug repurposing analyses, such as calcium folinate and betulin. Our work may lead to improved diagnosis and treatment for stress disorders such as PTSD, that result in decreased quality of life and adverse outcomes, including addictions, violence, and suicide.

An examination of perceptions of individuals with an intellectual disability, with and without co-morbid schizophrenia: effects of labels on stigma.

BACKGROUND: Research demonstrates negative perceptions of individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) and individuals with schizophrenia, but no study has examined ID with a co-morbid psychiatric disorder. The present study examined the social distance desired from and perceptions of dangerousness of ID, schizophrenia and co-morbid schizophrenia and ID and examined the impact of providing a label for the behaviours presented in a vignette. METHODS: A total of 160 participants, all university students, were randomly assigned to one of six vignettes detailing a person with schizophrenia, ID, or a person with both presenting problems. Half of the participants were randomly assigned to read vignettes that had a label provided for the behaviours of the target. RESULTS: Participants desired more social distance from the unlabelled than labelled targets. Presence of schizophrenia resulted in increased social distance, but co-morbid ID and schizophrenia elicited less desire for social distance than schizophrenia alone. Schizophrenia resulted in more perceived danger, but labelled co-morbid schizophrenia and ID resulted in little perceived danger. CONCLUSIONS: Labels resulted in positive outcomes, particularly, when ID was co-morbid with schizophrenia. Schizophrenia stigma appears to be impacted by an ID label, indicating educating the public about the spectrum of co-morbidity may be useful.

Precision medicine for suicidality: from universality to subtypes and personalization.

Suicide remains a clear, present and increasing public health problem, despite being a potentially preventable tragedy. Its incidence is particularly high in people with overt or un(der)diagnosed psychiatric disorders. Objective and precise identification of individuals at risk, ways of monitoring response to treatments and novel preventive therapeutics need to be discovered, employed and widely deployed. We sought to investigate whether blood gene expression biomarkers for suicide (that is, a 'liquid biopsy' approach) can be identified that are more universal in nature, working across psychiatric diagnoses and genders, using larger cohorts than in previous studies. Such markers may reflect and/or be a proxy for the core biology of suicide. We were successful in this endeavor, using a comprehensive stepwise approach, leading to a wealth of findings. Steps 1, 2 and 3 were discovery, prioritization and validation for tracking suicidality, resulting in a Top Dozen list of candidate biomarkers comprising the top biomarkers from each step, as well as a larger list of 148 candidate biomarkers that survived Bonferroni correction in the validation step. Step 4 was testing the Top Dozen list and Bonferroni biomarker list for predictive ability for suicidal ideation (SI) and for future hospitalizations for suicidality in independent cohorts, leading to the identification of completely novel predictive biomarkers (such as CLN5 and AK2), as well as reinforcement of ours and others previous findings in the field (such as SLC4A4 and SKA2). Additionally, we examined whether subtypes of suicidality can be identified based on mental state at the time of high SI and identified four potential subtypes: high anxiety, low mood, combined and non-affective (psychotic). Such subtypes may delineate groups of individuals that are more homogenous in terms of suicidality biology and behavior. We also studied a more personalized approach, by psychiatric diagnosis and gender, with a focus on bipolar males, the highest risk group. Such a personalized approach may be more sensitive to gender differences and to the impact of psychiatric co-morbidities and medications. We compared testing the universal biomarkers in everybody versus testing by subtypes versus personalized by gender and diagnosis, and show that the subtype and personalized approaches permit enhanced precision of predictions for different universal biomarkers. In particular, LHFP appears to be a strong predictor for suicidality in males with depression. We also directly examined whether biomarkers discovered using male bipolars only are better predictors in a male bipolar independent cohort than universal biomarkers and show evidence for a possible advantage of personalization. We identified completely novel biomarkers (such as SPTBN1 and C7orf73), and reinforced previously known biomarkers (such as PTEN and SAT1). For diagnostic ability testing purposes, we also examined as predictors phenotypic measures as apps (for suicide risk (CFI-S, Convergent Functional Information for Suicidality) and for anxiety and mood (SASS, Simplified Affective State Scale)) by themselves, as well as in combination with the top biomarkers (the combination being our a priori primary endpoint), to provide context and enhance precision of predictions. We obtained area under the curves of 90% for SI and 77% for future hospitalizations in independent cohorts. Step 5 was to look for mechanistic understanding, starting with examining evidence for the Top Dozen and Bonferroni biomarkers for involvement in other psychiatric and non-psychiatric disorders, as a mechanism for biological predisposition and vulnerability. The biomarkers we identified also provide a window towards understanding the biology of suicide, implicating biological pathways related to neurogenesis, programmed cell death and insulin signaling from the universal biomarkers, as well as mTOR signaling from the male bipolar biomarkers. In particular, HTR2A increase coupled with ARRB1 and GSK3B decreases in expression in suicidality may provide a synergistic mechanistical corrective target, as do SLC4A4 increase coupled with AHCYL1 and AHCYL2 decrease. Step 6 was to move beyond diagnostics and mechanistical risk assessment, towards providing a foundation for personalized therapeutics. Items scored positive in the CFI-S and subtypes identified by SASS in different individuals provide targets for personalized (psycho)therapy. Some individual biomarkers are targets of existing drugs used to treat mood disorders and suicidality (lithium, clozapine and omega-3 fatty acids), providing a means toward pharmacogenomics stratification of patients and monitoring of response to treatment. Such biomarkers merit evaluation in clinical trials. Bioinformatics drug repurposing analyses with the gene expression biosignatures of the Top Dozen and Bonferroni-validated universal biomarkers identified novel potential therapeutics for suicidality, such as ebselen (a lithium mimetic), piracetam (a nootropic), chlorogenic acid (a polyphenol) and metformin (an antidiabetic and possible longevity promoting drug). Finally, based on the totality of our data and of the evidence in the field to date, a convergent functional evidence score prioritizing biomarkers that have all around evidence (track suicidality, predict it, are reflective of biological predisposition and are potential drug targets) brought to the fore APOE and IL6 from among the universal biomarkers, suggesting an inflammatory/accelerated aging component that may be a targetable common denominator.

Towards understanding and predicting suicidality in women: biomarkers and clinical risk assessment.

Women are under-represented in research on suicidality to date. Although women have a lower rate of suicide completion than men, due in part to the less-violent methods used, they have a higher rate of suicide attempts. Our group has previously identified genomic (blood gene expression biomarkers) and clinical information (apps) predictors for suicidality in men. We now describe pilot studies in women. We used a powerful within-participant discovery approach to identify genes that change in expression between no suicidal ideation (no SI) and high suicidal ideation (high SI) states (n=12 participants out of a cohort of 51 women psychiatric participants followed longitudinally, with diagnoses of bipolar disorder, depression, schizoaffective disorder and schizophrenia). We then used a Convergent Functional Genomics (CFG) approach to prioritize the candidate biomarkers identified in the discovery step by using all the prior evidence in the field. Next, we validated for suicidal behavior the top-ranked biomarkers for SI, in a demographically matched cohort of women suicide completers from the coroner's office (n=6), by assessing which markers were stepwise changed from no SI to high SI to suicide completers. We then tested the 50 biomarkers that survived Bonferroni correction in the validation step, as well as top increased and decreased biomarkers from the discovery and prioritization steps, in a completely independent test cohort of women psychiatric disorder participants for prediction of SI (n=33) and in a future follow-up cohort of psychiatric disorder participants for prediction of psychiatric hospitalizations due to suicidality (n=24). Additionally, we examined how two clinical instruments in the form of apps, Convergent Functional Information for Suicidality (CFI-S) and Simplified Affective State Scale (SASS), previously tested in men, perform in women. The top CFI-S item distinguishing high SI from no SI states was the chronic stress of social isolation. We then showed how the clinical information apps combined with the 50 validated biomarkers into a broad predictor (UP-Suicide), our apriori primary end point, predicts suicidality in women. UP-Suicide had a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) of 82% for predicting SI and an AUC of 78% for predicting future hospitalizations for suicidality. Some of the individual components of the UP-Suicide showed even better results. SASS had an AUC of 81% for predicting SI, CFI-S had an AUC of 84% and the combination of the two apps had an AUC of 87%. The top biomarker from our sequential discovery, prioritization and validation steps, BCL2, predicted future hospitalizations due to suicidality with an AUC of 89%, and the panel of 50 validated biomarkers (BioM-50) predicted future hospitalizations due to suicidality with an AUC of 94%. The best overall single blood biomarker for predictions was PIK3C3 with an AUC of 65% for SI and an AUC of 90% for future hospitalizations. Finally, we sought to understand the biology of the biomarkers. BCL2 and GSK3B, the top CFG scoring validated biomarkers, as well as PIK3C3, have anti-apoptotic and neurotrophic effects, are decreased in expression in suicidality and are known targets of the anti-suicidal mood stabilizer drug lithium, which increases their expression and/or activity. Circadian clock genes were overrepresented among the top markers. Notably, PER1, increased in expression in suicidality, had an AUC of 84% for predicting future hospitalizations, and CSNK1A1, decreased in expression, had an AUC of 96% for predicting future hospitalizations. Circadian clock abnormalities are related to mood disorder, and sleep abnormalities have been implicated in suicide. Docosahexaenoic acid signaling was one of the top biological pathways overrepresented in validated biomarkers, which is of interest given the potential therapeutic and prophylactic benefits of omega-3 fatty acids. Some of the top biomarkers from the current work in women showed co-directionality of change in expression with our previous work in men, whereas others had changes in opposite directions, underlying the issue of biological context and differences in suicidality between the two genders. With this study, we begin to shed much needed light in the area of female suicidality, identify useful objective predictors and help understand gender commonalities and differences. During the conduct of the study, one participant committed suicide. In retrospect, when the analyses were completed, her UP-Suicide risk prediction score was at the 100 percentile of all participants tested.

Understanding and predicting suicidality using a combined genomic and clinical risk assessment approach.

Worldwide, one person dies every 40 seconds by suicide, a potentially preventable tragedy. A limiting step in our ability to intervene is the lack of objective, reliable predictors. We have previously provided proof of principle for the use of blood gene expression biomarkers to predict future hospitalizations due to suicidality, in male bipolar disorder participants. We now generalize the discovery, prioritization, validation, and testing of such markers across major psychiatric disorders (bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and schizophrenia) in male participants, to understand commonalities and differences. We used a powerful within-participant discovery approach to identify genes that change in expression between no suicidal ideation and high suicidal ideation states (n=37 participants out of a cohort of 217 psychiatric participants followed longitudinally). We then used a convergent functional genomics (CFG) approach with existing prior evidence in the field to prioritize the candidate biomarkers identified in the discovery step. Next, we validated the top biomarkers from the prioritization step for relevance to suicidal behavior, in a demographically matched cohort of suicide completers from the coroner's office (n=26). The biomarkers for suicidal ideation only are enriched for genes involved in neuronal connectivity and schizophrenia, the biomarkers also validated for suicidal behavior are enriched for genes involved in neuronal activity and mood. The 76 biomarkers that survived Bonferroni correction after validation for suicidal behavior map to biological pathways involved in immune and inflammatory response, mTOR signaling and growth factor regulation. mTOR signaling is necessary for the effects of the rapid-acting antidepressant agent ketamine, providing a novel biological rationale for its possible use in treating acute suicidality. Similarly, MAOB, a target of antidepressant inhibitors, was one of the increased biomarkers for suicidality. We also identified other potential therapeutic targets or biomarkers for drugs known to mitigate suicidality, such as omega-3 fatty acids, lithium and clozapine. Overall, 14% of the top candidate biomarkers also had evidence for involvement in psychological stress response, and 19% for involvement in programmed cell death/cellular suicide (apoptosis). It may be that in the face of adversity (stress), death mechanisms are turned on at a cellular (apoptosis) and organismal level. Finally, we tested the top increased and decreased biomarkers from the discovery for suicidal ideation (CADM1, CLIP4, DTNA, KIF2C), prioritization with CFG for prior evidence (SAT1, SKA2, SLC4A4), and validation for behavior in suicide completers (IL6, MBP, JUN, KLHDC3) steps in a completely independent test cohort of psychiatric participants for prediction of suicidal ideation (n=108), and in a future follow-up cohort of psychiatric participants (n=157) for prediction of psychiatric hospitalizations due to suicidality. The best individual biomarker across psychiatric diagnoses for predicting suicidal ideation was SLC4A4, with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) of 72%. For bipolar disorder in particular, SLC4A4 predicted suicidal ideation with an AUC of 93%, and future hospitalizations with an AUC of 70%. SLC4A4 is involved in brain extracellular space pH regulation. Brain pH has been implicated in the pathophysiology of acute panic attacks. We also describe two new clinical information apps, one for affective state (simplified affective state scale, SASS) and one for suicide risk factors (Convergent Functional Information for Suicide, CFI-S), and how well they predict suicidal ideation across psychiatric diagnoses (AUC of 85% for SASS, AUC of 89% for CFI-S). We hypothesized a priori, based on our previous work, that the integration of the top biomarkers and the clinical information into a universal predictive measure (UP-Suicide) would show broad-spectrum predictive ability across psychiatric diagnoses. Indeed, the UP-Suicide was able to predict suicidal ideation across psychiatric diagnoses with an AUC of 92%. For bipolar disorder, it predicted suicidal ideation with an AUC of 98%, and future hospitalizations with an AUC of 94%. Of note, both types of tests we developed (blood biomarkers and clinical information apps) do not require asking the individual assessed if they have thoughts of suicide, as individuals who are truly suicidal often do not share that information with clinicians. We propose that the widespread use of such risk prediction tests as part of routine or targeted healthcare assessments will lead to early disease interception followed by preventive lifestyle modifications and proactive treatment.