Genomic prediction of depression risk and resilience under stress

Abstract

Advancing ability to predict who is likely to develop depression holds great potential in reducing the disease burden. Here, we use the predictable and large increase in depression with physician training stress to identify predictors of depression. Applying the major depressive disorder polygenic risk score (MDD-PRS) derived from the most recent Psychiatric Genomics Consortium–UK Biobank–23andMe genome-wide association study to 5,227 training physicians, we found that MDD-PRS predicted depression under training stress (β = 0.095, P = 4.7 × 10−16) and that MDD-PRS was more strongly associated with depression under stress than at baseline (MDD-PRS × stress interaction β = 0.036, P = 0.005). Further, known risk factors accounted for substantially less of the association between MDD-PRS and depression when under stress than at baseline, suggesting that MDD-PRS adds unique predictive power in depression prediction. Finally, we found that low MDD-PRS may have particular use in identifying individuals with high resilience. Together, these findings suggest that MDD-PRS holds promise in furthering our ability to predict vulnerability and resilience under stress.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: MDD-PRS distribution.
Fig. 2: Associations of MDD-PRS and PHQ-9 depressive symptom score and mediations of the associations by known risk factors.
Fig. 3: PHQ depression proportion by MDD-PRS group.

Data availability

The de-identified data from Intern Health Study are available through the PGC: https://www.med.unc.edu/pgc/shared-methods.

PGC phase 2–UK Biobank–23andMe MDD GWAS meta-analysis summary statistics: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41593-018-0326-7#data-availability.

Code availability

Custom code that supports the findings of this study is available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. 1.

    Friedrich, M. J. Depression is the leading cause of disability around the world. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 317, 1517 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Rush, A. J. et al. Bupropion-SR, sertraline or venlafaxine-XR after failure of SSRIs for depression. N. Engl. J. Med. 354, 1231–1242 (2006).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Rossen, L. M., Hedegaard, H., Khan, D. & Warner, M. County-level trends in suicide rates in the U.S., 2005–2015. Am. J. Prev. Med. 55, 72–79 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Committee on Prevention of Mental Disorders & Institute of Medicine. Reducing Risks for Mental Disorders: Frontiers for Preventive Intervention Research (National Academies Press, 1994).

  5. 5.

    O’Connell, M. E. et al. (eds) Preventing Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Disorders Among Young People: Progress and Possibilities (National Academies Press, 2009).

  6. 6.

    Prendes-Alvarez, S. & Nemeroff, C. B. Personalized medicine: prediction of disease vulnerability in mood disorders. Neurosci. Lett. 669, 10–13 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Sullivan, P. F., Neale, M. C. & Kendler, K. S. Genetic epidemiology of major depression: review and meta-analysis. Am. J. Psychiatry 157, 1552–1562 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Okbay, A. et al. Genetic variants associated with subjective well-being, depressive symptoms, and neuroticism identified through genome-wide analyses. Nat. Genet. 48, 624–633 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    CONVERGE Consortium. Sparse whole-genome sequencing identifies two loci for major depressive disorder. Nature 523, 588–591 (2015).

  10. 10.

    Hyde, C. L. et al. Identification of 15 genetic loci associated with risk of major depression in individuals of European descent. Nat. Genet. 48, 1031–1036 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Howard, D. M. et al. Genome-wide association study of depression phenotypes in UK Biobank identifies variants in excitatory synaptic pathways. Nat. Commun. 9, 1470 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Wray, N. R. et al. Genome-wide association analyses identify 44 risk variants and refine the genetic architecture of major depression. Nat. Genet. 50, 668–681 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Howard, D. M. et al. Genome-wide meta-analysis of depression identifies 102 independent variants and highlights the importance of the prefrontal brain regions. Nat. Neurosci. 22, 343–352 (2019).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Dudbridge, F. Power and predictive accuracy of polygenic risk scores. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003348 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Chatterjee, N., Shi, J. & García-Closas, M. Developing and evaluating polygenic risk prediction models for stratified disease prevention. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 392–406 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Khera, A. V. et al. Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations. Nat. Genet. 50, 1219–1224 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Kessler, R. C. The effects of stressful life events on depression. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 48, 191–214 (1997).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Maciejewski, P. K. & Mazure, C. M. Stressful life events and depression. Am. J. Psychiatry 157, 1344–1345 (2000).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Mata, D. A. et al. Prevalence of depression and depressive symptoms among resident physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 314, 2373–2383 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Sen, S. et al. A prospective cohort study investigating factors associated with depression during medical internship. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 67, 557–565 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Martin, A. R. et al. Human demographic history impacts genetic risk prediction across diverse populations. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 100, 635–649 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Navrady, L. B. et al. Genetic risk of major depressive disorder: the moderating and mediating effects of neuroticism and psychological resilience on clinical and self-reported depression. Psychol. Med. 48, 1890–1899 (2018).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Middeldorp, C. M. & Wray, N. R. The value of polygenic analyses in psychiatry. World Psychiatry 17, 26–28 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Guille, C. et al. Web-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for the prevention of suicidal ideation in medical interns: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry 72, 1192–1198 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Southwick, S. M. & Charney, D. S. The science of resilience: implications for the prevention and treatment of depression. Science 338, 79–82 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Harper, A. R., Nayee, S. & Topol, E. J. Protective alleles and modifier variants in human health and disease. Nat. Rev. Genet. 16, 689–701 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edn (American Psychiatric Association, 2003).

  28. 28.

    Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L. & Williams, J. B. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 16, 606–613 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K. & Williams, J. B. W. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. J. Am. Med. Soc. 282, 1737–1744 (1999).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Levis, B., Benedetti, A. & Thombs, B. D. Accuracy of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for screening to detect major depression: individual participant data meta-analysis. Br. Med. J. 365, l1476 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Costa, P. T. Jr & McCrae, R. R. Stability and change in personality assessment: the revised NEO Personality Inventory in the year 2000. J. Pers. Assess. 68, 86–94 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Taylor, S. E. et al. Early family environment, current adversity, the serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism, and depressive symptomatology. Biol. Psychiatry 60, 671–676 (2006).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Rogers, N. L., Cole, S. A., Lan, H.-C., Crossa, A. & Demerath, E. W. New saliva DNA collection method compared to buccal cell collection techniques for epidemiological studies. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 19, 319–326 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Chang, C. C. et al. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience 4, 7 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Euesden, J., Lewis, C. M. & O’Reilly, P. F. PRSice: polygenic risk score software. Bioinformatics 31, 1466–1468 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Ware, E. B. et al. Heterogeneity in polygenic scores for common human traits. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/106062 (2017).

  37. 37.

    Choi, K. W. et al. Prospective study of polygenic risk, protective factors, and incident depression following combat deployment in US Army soldiers. Psychol. Med. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291719000527 (2019).

  38. 38.

    Peyrot, W. J. et al. Effect of polygenic risk scores on depression in childhood trauma. Br. J. Psychiatry 205, 113–119 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Musliner, K. L. et al. Polygenic risk, stressful life events and depressive symptoms in older adults: a polygenic score analysis. Psychol. Med. 45, 1709–1720 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Tingley, D., Yamamoto, T., Hirose, K., Keele, L. & Imai, K. mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. J. Stat. Softw. 59, 1–38 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the training physicians for taking part in this study. We also thank the participants and researchers of PGC and UK Biobank, and the research participants and employees of 23andMe, for making this work possible. This project was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (grant no. R01MH101459 to S.S.). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

S.S. designed the study. S.S. and Y.F. developed the research question. Y.F. performed the data management and analysis. Y.F. and S.S. wrote the manuscript. L.S., P.S. and M.B. provided critical review, discussion and revision of the manuscript. All authors approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Srijan Sen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Primary Handling Editor: Mary Elizabeth Sutherland.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1

Associations of Imputed Data Derived MDD Polygenic Risk Score with PHQ-9 Depressive Symptom Scores (N = 5,227).

Extended Data Fig. 2 Baseline and Internship PHQ-9 Depressive Symptom Scores by MDD-PRS Group.

5,227 Subjects from Intern Health Study were binned into 40 groups of 2.5% of subjects (n=131 per group) from low to high MDD-PRS (left to right). The 40 x-axis groups are defined by group-wise average standardized MDD-PRS. Average PHQ-9 score of each group at baseline (cyan dots) and during internship (orange dots) are plotted with 95% CI error bars. LOESS fitting line (dash line) shadowed by 95% CI and linear regression fitting line (solid line) were applied to both baseline and internship plots. Optimal span parameter for LOESS regression was selected by generalized cross-validation method. Source data

Extended Data Fig. 3 Population Structure Based on the Top Two Principal Component (PC) Analysis of the Intern Health Study.

Blue, red and green boxes depicted the analysis inclusion range of European, South Asian and East Asian Groups. Source data

Supplementary information

Source data

Source Data Fig. 1

Statistical Source Data

Source Data Fig. 3

Statistical Source Data

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 2

Statistical Source Data

Source Data Extended Data Fig. 3

Statistical Source Data

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fang, Y., Scott, L., Song, P. et al. Genomic prediction of depression risk and resilience under stress. Nat Hum Behav 4, 111–118 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0759-3

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing