Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests that evening chronotype is related to poorer efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. It is unknown whether this is specific to particular medications, self-rated chronotype, or efficacy. METHODS: In the Australian Genetics of Depression Study (n = 15,108; 75% women; 18-90 years; 68% with ≥1 other lifetime diagnosis), a survey recorded experiences with 10 antidepressants, and the reduced Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire was used to estimate chronotype. A chronotype polygenic score was calculated. Age- and sex-adjusted regression models (Bonferroni-corrected) estimated associations among antidepressant variables (how well the antidepressant worked [efficacy], duration of symptom improvement, side effects, discontinuation due to side effects) and self-rated and genetic chronotypes. RESULTS: The chronotype polygenic score explained 4% of the variance in self-rated chronotype (r = 0.21). Higher self-rated eveningness was associated with poorer efficacy of escitalopram (odds ratio [OR] = 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.06; p = .000035), citalopram (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.05; p = .004), fluoxetine (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.05; p = .001), sertraline (OR = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.04; p = .0008), and desvenlafaxine (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.05; p = .004), and a profile of increased side effects (80% of those recorded; ORs = 0.93-0.98), with difficulty getting to sleep the most common. Self-rated chronotype was unrelated to duration of improvement or discontinuation. The chronotype polygenic score was only associated with suicidal thoughts and attempted suicide (self-reported). While our measures are imperfect, and not of circadian phase under controlled conditions, the model coefficients suggest that dysregulation of the phenotypic chronotype relative to its genetic proxy drove relationships with antidepressant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The idea that variation in circadian factors influences response to antidepressants was supported and encourages exploration of circadian mechanisms of depressive disorders and antidepressant treatments.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.biopsych.2023.12.023

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2024-07-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

96

Pages

4 - 14

Total pages

10

Keywords

Antidepressants, Circadian, Depressive disorders, Diurnal, Pharmacotherapy, Treatment, Humans, Female, Male, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Middle Aged, Adult, Aged, Adolescent, Circadian Rhythm, Young Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Self Report, Australia, Treatment Outcome, Depression, Multifactorial Inheritance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Antidepressive Agents, Chronotype