Lack of association of FKBP5 SNPs and haplotypes with susceptibility and treatment response phenotypes in Han Chinese with major depressive disorder: A pilot case–control study (STROBE)

The identification of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes putatively related to pathophysiological processes in major depressive disorder (MDD) might improve both diagnosis and personalized treatment strategies eventually leading to more effective interventions. Considering the important role of the glucocorticoid receptor and the related FK506 binding protein 51 (FKBP51) in the pathophysiology of MDD, we aimed to investigate putative associations between variants of FKBP5, the coding gene of FKBP51, with antidepressant treatment resistance and MDD susceptibility. Nine common SNPs of the FKBP5 gene prioritized based on location and, putative or known functions were genotyped in Han Chinese population, including MDD patients with or without antidepressant-treatment resistance and healthy controls. Associations of FKBP5 SNPs with MDD susceptibility and treatment response were examined in the whole group of MDD patients, as well as in subgroups stratified by antidepressant treatment resistance, compared with healthy controls. In total, 181 Han Chinese patients with MDD and 80 healthy controls were recruited. No significant SNP or haplotype associations were observed in the whole patient group. There were nominal significant differences both for the haplotype block with SNPs in strong LD (r(2) > 0.8, P = .040) and haplotype block with SNPs in moderate LD (r(2) > 0.1, P = .017) between the haplotype distributions of patients with antidepressant treatment resistance (n = 81) and healthy controls, but both significances did not survive multiple testing correction. Furthermore, no specific haplotype could be observed causing a significant difference in any combination between all comparisons. No associations were observed of FKBP5 variants with MDD or antidepressant treatment response. The lack of associations might be due to the relatively small sample size of this study (power ranged from 0.100 to 0.752). A follow-up study will need larger, better phenotyped, and more homogeneous samples to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the involvement of this gene in MDD.