Back

Cohort Profile: Investigating Antidepressant Response within Generation Scotland

Calnan, M. L.; Edmonson-Stait, A.; Milbourn, H.; Elsden, E.; Henders, A. K.; Ball, E. L.; Iveson, M. H.; AMBER Research Team, ; AMBER Lived Experience Advisory Panel, ; Generation Scotland Team, ; Wray, N. R.; Shah, S.; Lewis, C.; McIntosh, A. M.

2026-02-24 genetic and genomic medicine
10.64898/2026.02.23.26346868 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe Antidepressant Medications: Biology, Exposure & Response (AMBER) research programme was established to investigate the biological mechanisms underlying antidepressant action and variability in treatment response. Generation Scotland holds detailed genomic, clinical, and health information with recontacting consent, making this cohort ideal for investigating these aims. MethodsWe deployed a questionnaire, developed with input from a Lived Experience panel, to the Generation Scotland cohort to gather data on their depressive symptoms, medication history, efficacy, and side effects to develop clinically meaningful phenotypes of antidepressant response. Invitations were sent to 15,117 Generation Scotland participants who were 18 years or older and consented to be recontacted. Between July and November 2025, 1,180 participants with a history of antidepressant treatment for depression completed the questionnaire. ResultsThe sample was predominantly female (78.1%), self-identified as White (98.6%), and older (median age 57 years) than the wider Generation Scotland cohort (median 49 years) and Scottish population (median 41.3 years). Participants reported heterogeneous depressive symptom profiles spanning mood, anxiety, cognitive, sleep, behavioural, and physical domains. One-third of participants (31.1%) had taken three or more different antidepressants. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) were the most common class (89.1%). Using self-reported treatment duration, discontinuation patterns, and efficacy, we developed a stringent classification system to capture treatment response extremes, where 23.8% were classified as responders and 1.5% as non-responders, with the majority unclassified. ConclusionsQuestionnaire data will be linked with electronic health records to validate antidepressant response classifications. Following validation, 25 responders and 25 non-responders will provide biological samples for DNA methylation profiling and generation of patient-derived cell lines. These models will be exposed to SSRIs to identify gene expression signatures and biological pathways distinguishing treatment response, integrating with genomic and clinical data across the AMBER project. These findings will provide a valuable resource for future antidepressant response research. Plain Language SummaryDepression is a common mental health condition affecting millions of people worldwide. Antidepressant medications are the primary medication treatment, but response is highly variable with only about one-third of individuals achieving full symptom remission after their first medication trial. We dont fully understand why some people respond well while others dont. To help answer this question, the Antidepressant Medications: Biology, Exposure & Response (AMBER) research programme was established. This study utilised the Generation Scotland cohort, a large health study in Scotland. Between July and November 2025, we invited 15,117 Generation Scotland participants to complete a detailed questionnaire about their experiences with antidepressant medications. A total of 1,180 participants answered detailed questions about their depression symptoms, which medications they tried, how long they were on a medication, how well the medications worked, and what side effects they experienced. We found that peoples experiences with depression and antidepressants varied considerably. About one-third had tried three or more different antidepressants. Using strict criteria based on treatment duration, effectiveness ratings, and medication changes, we identified 281 people (24%) who responded very well to SSRIs (the most common type of antidepressant) and 18 people (1.5%) who did not respond despite trying multiple SSRIs. A key limitation is that all information was self-reported, so we will validate findings by linking questionnaire responses with medical records. In the future, we will collect blood samples from some participants to study the biological differences between responders and non-responders. This research will help us better understand why antidepressants work for some people but not others, which could lead to more personalised treatment approaches for depression.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.1%
2
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.4%
3
European Neuropsychopharmacology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
5.0%
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 30%
5.0%
6
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
5.0%
7
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.4%
8
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
9
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
10
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.7%
11
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
12
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
13
Neuropsychopharmacology
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
14
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
16
JAMA Psychiatry
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
17
Molecular Psychiatry
242 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
18
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
19
Biological Psychiatry
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
20
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
22
Genetics in Medicine
69 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
23
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
24
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
25
BMJ Mental Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
26
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Psychopharmacology
59 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
29
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
30
International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%