Cited by 206Treatment of Major DepressionTryptophan and brain disordersStress Responses and Cortisol

Can C-reactive protein inform antidepressant medication selection in depressed outpatients? Findings from the CO-MED trial

Open access
Jha, Manish K., Minhajuddin, Abu, Gadad, Bharathi S., Greer, Tracy, Grannemann, Bruce, Soyombo, Abigail, Mayes, Taryn L., Rush, A. John +1 more·2017·Psychoneuroendocrinology

Abstract

Objective Currently, no valid measures inform treatment selection for depressed patients. Whether C-reactive protein (CRP) in particular and two other acute phase reactants (inflammatory markers) could differentiate between patients responding to either of two treatments with different mechanisms of action was assessed.Method Subjects included Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial participants randomly assigned to either escitalopram plus placebo (SSRI monotherapy, n=51) or bupropion plus escitalopram combination (bupropion-SSRI combination, n=55) with baseline plasma samples. CRP, serum amyloid P component, and alpha-2-macroglobulin were measured using the Bioplex Pro™ human acute-phase 4-plex panel. We conducted mixed model analyses of depressive symptom (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report) and side-effect burden (Frequency, Intensity, and Burden of Side-Effects Rating Scale) obtained weekly or every other week over the 12-week acute-phase of CO-MED trial to evaluate the relationship between these outcomes and baseline CRP and other acute-phase reactants.Results The treatment arms did not differ in depressive symptom or side effect outcomes. Most participants (69.8%, 74/106) had baseline CRP levels greater than 1mg/L (indicative of systemic inflammatory activity). Higher baseline CRP levels were associated lower depression severity (correlation coefficient=-0.63) with bupropion-SSRI combination but not with SSRI monotherapy (correlation coefficient=0.40). The overall remission rate was 41.5%. The estimated remission rate with CRP threshold based assignment (SSRI monotherapy for <1mg/L and Bupropion-SSRI for ≥1mg/L) was 53.1%, with a number needed to treat of 8.6. Side effect burden was unrelated to any baseline inflammatory marker.Conclusions Baseline CRP levels relate differentially to antidepressant treatment outcomes in persons with major depressive disorder. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00590863.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.01.023

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Patients with elevated inflammatory markers often show better outcomes with anti-inflammatory treatments and poorer responses to psychotherapy.

    “Patients with elevated inflammatory markers often show better outcomes with anti-inflammatory treatments and poorer responses to psychotherapy, supporting stratified therapeutic approaches (Shi et al., 2022; Jha et al., 2017; Orsolini et al., 2022; Pan et al., 2022).”

    From Histone modifications and depression: epigenetic mechanisms, therapeutic targets, and translational outlook (2026) · cites this paper as Jha et al., 2017

    The Introduction reports a lower likelihood of response to psychotherapy among patients with elevated inflammatory biomarkers. The Discussion says a subset of treatment-resistant depressed patients with elevated inflammation respond to drugs targeting inflammation, but it does not establish that patients with elevated markers generally or often have better outcomes with those treatments. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 54 · Cited by 206

Authors
Jha, M. K., Minhajuddin, A., Gadad, B. S., Greer, T., Grannemann, B., Soyombo, A., Mayes, T. L., Rush, A. J., & Trivedi, M. H.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
Corresponding author
Trivedi, Madhukar H.
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
78
Pages
105-113
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2582188919
Cited by
206
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 11
FWCI
16.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (N01 MH-90003)
  • Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care
  • Hersh Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Biological Psychiatry › Tryptophan and brain disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
C-reactive protein, acute phase proteins, inflammatory markers, major depressive disorder, escitalopram, bupropion, treatment response prediction, remission, systemic inflammation
MeSH terms
Adult, Antidepressive Agents, C-Reactive Protein, Depressive Disorder, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Remission Induction, Citalopram, Bupropion, Treatment Outcome, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review