Glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid systems in the pathophysiology of major depression and antidepressant response to ketamine
This review (2017) examines ketamine's rapid antidepressant efficacy with respect to evidence that it can neurochemical/physiological disturbances, such as abnormalities in excitatory and/or inhibitory neurotransmission in association with altered brain levels of glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid. It highlights neuroimaging studies to support the notion that glutamatergic modulation may be a viable biomarker for investigating depression in future studies.
Authors
- Carlos Zarate
- Evan Ballard
- Mark John Niciu
Published
Abstract
In patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD), abnormalities in excitatory and/or inhibitory neurotransmission and neuronal plasticity may lead to aberrant functional connectivity patterns within large brain networks. Network dysfunction in association with altered brain levels of glutamate (Glu) and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) have been identified in both animal and human studies of depression. In addition, evidence of an antidepressant response to subanesthetic dose ketamine has led to a collection of studies that have examined neurochemical (e.g. glutamatergic and GABA-ergic) and functional imaging correlates associated with such an effect. Results from these studies suggest that an antidepressant response in association with ketamine occurs, in part, by reversing these neurochemical/physiological disturbances. Future studies in depression will require a combination of neuroimaging approaches from which more biologically homogeneous subgroups can be identified, particularly with respect to treatment response biomarkers of glutamatergic modulation.
Research Summary of 'Glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid systems in the pathophysiology of major depression and antidepressant response to ketamine'
Introduction
Earlier preclinical and clinical work has implicated abnormalities in excitatory and inhibitory neurotransmission—principally involving glutamate (Glu) and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)—in the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD). Animal models using pharmacologic and stress-induction paradigms have shown cortical Glu alterations that are reversible with conventional antidepressant interventions, motivating a glutamatergic hypothesis that extends beyond monoaminergic explanations. Human neurochemical studies using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS), positron emission tomography (PET), and functional imaging (EEG, MEG, fMRI) have reported region-specific changes in Glu, Gln, Glx (combined Glu and Gln), and GABA, and concurrent evidence has linked these neurochemical alterations with aberrant large-scale network functional connectivity in depressed patients. Lener and colleagues present a narrative review that synthesises neurochemical and functional imaging literature to explore links between Glu/GABA disturbances, network-level dysfunction, and the rapid antidepressant effects of subanesthetic-dose ketamine. The review highlights ketamine as a molecular probe for glutamatergic modulation in humans because of its reproducible rapid antidepressant effects and relatively lower side-effect burden compared with other glutamatergic agents. The authors argue for combined multimodal imaging approaches to better characterise biologically homogeneous subgroups and to identify biomarkers predictive of treatment response to glutamatergic interventions such as ketamine.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Full Text PDF
Full Paper PDF
Create a free account to open full-text PDFs.
Study Details
- Study Typemeta
- Journal
- Compound
- Topics
- Authors
- APA Citation
Lener, M. S., Niciu, M. J., Ballard, E. D., Park, M., Park, L. T., Nugent, A. C., & Zarate, C. A. (2017). Glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid systems in the pathophysiology of major depression and antidepressant response to ketamine. Biological Psychiatry, 81(10), 886-897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2016.05.005
References (8)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Fond, G., Loundou, A., Macgregor, A. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2014)
Newport, D. J., Carpenter, L. L., Mcdonald, W. M. et al. · American Journal of Psychiatry (2015)
Berman, R. M., Cappiello, A., Anand, A. et al. · Biological Psychiatry (2000)
Murrough, J. W., Iosifescu, D. V., Chang, L. C. et al. · American Journal of Psychiatry (2013)
Grimm, O., Gass, N., Weber-Fahr, W. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2015)
Nutt, D. J. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2015)
Li, C. T., Chen, M. H., Lin, W. C. et al. · Human Brain Mapping (2016)
Lally, N., Nugent, A. C., Luckenbaugh, D. A. et al. · Translational Psychiatry (2014)
Cited By (5)
Papers in Blossom that reference this study
Rodrigues, L. S., Rossi, G. N., Guerra, L. T. L. et al. · Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology (2024)
Ragnhildstveit, A., Slayton, M., Jackson, L. K. et al. · Brain Sciences (2022)
Jelen, L. A., Young, A. H., Stone, J. M. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2020)
Ionescu, D. F., Felicione, J. M., Gosai, A. et al. · Harvard Review of Psychiatry (2018)
Huang, Y. J., Lane, H. Y., Lin, C. H. · Neural Plasticity (2017)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.