Depression with psychotic features has been shown to respond to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The serotonin transporter (5-HTT) is a prime target for SSRIs. A functional polymorphism within the promoter region of the 5-HTT gene, leading to different transcriptional efficiency, was recently reported. We tested the hypothesis that allelic variation of the 5-HTT promoter could be related to the antidepressant response to fluvoxamine and/or augmentation with pindolol (a serotonin autoreceptors antagonist) which has been suggested as an augmentation therapy for nonresponders. One hundred and two inpatients with major depression with psychotic features were randomly assigned to treatment with a fixed dose of fluvoxamine and either placebo or pindolol for 6 weeks. Depression severity was assessed once a week using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Allelic variation in each subject was determined using a PCR-based method. Data were analyzed with a three-way repeated measures analysis of variance. Both homozygotes for the long variant (l/l) of the 5-HTT promoter and heterozygotes (l/s) showed a better response to fluvoxamine than homozygotes for the short variant (s/s). In the group treated with fluvoxamine plus pindolol all the genotypes acted like l/l treated with fluvoxamine alone. Fluvoxamine efficacy in delusional depression seems to be related to allelic variation within the promoter of the 5-HTT gene. Even though other factors may be implicated, genotyping at 5-HTT promoter may represent a promising tool to individualize the pharmacological treatment of depression.

A double-blind study was undertaken to investigate the period of treatment with the beta-adrenoreceptor/5-hydroxytryptamine 1A (5-HT1A) antagonist pindolol required to enhance the antidepressant effects of paroxetine. After 1 week of a placebo run-in period, 63 untreated major depressive inpatients were randomly assigned to three different groups. Group 1 received paroxetine (20 mg/day) plus placebo (4 weeks). Group 2 received paroxetine (20 mg/day) plus pindolol (7.5 mg/day) for 1 week and placebo for 3 weeks. Group 3 received both active treatments for the entire duration of the study (4 weeks). Clinical response was defined as a reduction of the score in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) to 8 or below. Also, to preliminarily examine whether beta-adrenoreceptor blockade was involved in the action of pindolol, another group of 10 inpatients was treated in an open-label manner with paroxetine (20 mg/day) plus 50 mg/day of the beta-adrenergic antagonist metoprolol, devoid of significant affinity for 5-HT1A receptors. At endpoint, the incidence of treatment-emergent side effects did not significantly differ among the three groups. After 1 and 2 weeks of treatment, the two groups treated with paroxetine plus pindolol displayed a significantly greater response rate than the group treated with paroxetine plus placebo. At study completion, only the patients treated with pindolol for the entire period showed a significantly greater response rate (p = 0.05). HAM-D scores were also significantly lower at endpoint in patients treated with the combination for 4 weeks (p = 0.00003). The group of patients treated with paroxetine and metoprolol exhibited a side-effect profile comparable to that of paroxetine alone. Response rates were also comparable. These findings support the efficacy of pindolol, but not of metoprolol, in accelerating the antidepressant effect of paroxetine and suggest that the administration of pindolol for the entire period of the acute treatment may increase the efficacy of paroxetine.(J Clin Psychopharmacol 1997;17:446-450).