Association between 5-HTR1A gene C-1019G polymorphism and antidepressant response in patients with major depressive disorder: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in the study

First author	Year	Country	Population	Diagnostic criteria	Age (mean ± SD) (years)	Sample size (man/female)	Efficacy criteria	Treatment duration (weeks)	Antidepressant medication
Ramesh	2022	India	Asian	DSM-IV	39.26 ± 11.52	125 (73/52)	HAMD	8	SER, ESC, FLU, PAR
Scutt	2018	United Kingdom	Caucasian	DSM-IV	88.16 ± 3.80	19 (5/14)	Geriatric depression scale	4	CIT
Basu	2015	India	Asian	DSM-IV	35.0 ± 10.3	55 (32/23)	MADRS	6-8	ESC
Chang	2014	South Korea	Asian	DSM-IV	NA	283 (254/290)	HAMD-17	12	Mirtazapine
Serretti	2013	Italy	Caucasian	DSM-IV	43.93 ± 15.93	117 (80/37)	Hamilton depression rating scale	8	AD
Zhao	2012	China	Asian	DSM-IV	45.75 ± 7.28	85 (28/57)	HAMD-21	4	SER
Noro	2010	Belgium, Austria, Israel	Caucasian	DSM-IV	NA	206	HAMD-17	4	AD
Illi	2009	Finland	Caucasian	DSM-IV	44.4 ± 13.9	86	MADRS	6	FLU, PAR, CIT
Kato	2009	Japan	Asian	DSM-IV	45.8 ± 14.4	137 (75/62)	HAMD	6	Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors
Lin	2009	China	Asian	DSM-IV	38.4 ± 12.6	101 (26/75)	HAMD	≥ 2	Venlafaxine, SER, PAR, FLU
Serretti	2004	Italy	Caucasian	DSM-IV	NA	262 (173/89)	HAMD-21	6	Fluvoxamine

DSM-IV: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition; MADRS: Montgomery and asberg depression rating scale; HAMD: Hamilton depression scale; ESC: Escitalopram; FLU: Fluoxetine; PAR: Paroxetine; SER: Sertraline; NA: Not available; AD: Antidepressant drug; CIT: Citalopram.

Table 2 The quality assessment according to Newcastle-Ottawa Scale of each cohort study

Ref.	Selection				Comparability	Outcome			Total score
	Representativ-eness of the exposed cohort	Selection of the non-exposed cohort	Ascertainment of exposure	Demonstration that outcome	Comparability of cohorts	Assessment of outcome	Was follow-up long enough	Adequacy of follow up of cohorts
Ramesh et al[16]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	9
Scutt et al[17]	1	1		1	1	1	1	1	7
Basu et al[10]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	9
Chang et al[11]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	9
Serretti et al[19]		1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	8
Zhao et al[20]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	9
Noro et al[15]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1		1	8
Illi et al[12]	1	1		1	1	1	1	1	7
Kato et al[13]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	9
Lin et al[14]	1	1	1	1	1,1	1	1	1	9
Serretti et al[18]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8

Table 3 Meta-analysis results of serotonin 1A receptor polymorphism gene C-1019G polymorphism and antidepressant efficacy in the effective treatment group

Genetic model	Odds ratio	95%CI	P value (association)	Model type (heterogeneity)	P value (heterogeneity)	I² (heterogeneity)	Egger's test P value	Begg's test P value
Allelic Model (G vs C)	0.86	0.69–1.12	0.23	Random	0.02	46.46	0.64	0.83
Dominant model (CG vs CC)	0.81	0.71–1.09	0.13	Fixed	0.26	15.81	0.10	0.09
Recessive model (GG vs CC)	0.80	0.60–1.31	0.37	Random	0.04	40.64	0.25	0.21
Dominant model (CG+GG vs CC)	0.80	0.59–1.09	0.23	Random	0.04	33.66	0.10	0.08
Locus model (GG vs CG+CC)	1.15	0.90–1.47	0.20	Fixed	0.907	0.00	0.29	0.16
Unfitted model (CC+GG vs GC)	0.97	0.82–1.20	0.95	Fixed	0.52	0.00	0.64	0.21