The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.150.11.1618

OBJECTIVE: The authors undertook a review of the literature on the dexamethasone suppression test (DST) as a predictor of course and outcome in major depression, to illustrate clinical and pathophysiological implications of studying the relation between biological measures and course of illness in psychiatry. METHOD: In computerized searches and cross-references, 144 articles were found that related DST results to prediction of treatment response or outcome. Meta-analysis was performed on pooled data from all of the studies and separately on data from selected studies that had used stricter methodology. RESULTS: 1) Baseline DST status did not predict response to antidepressant treatment or outcome after hospital discharge. 2) Non-suppression of cortisol on the baseline DST predicted poorer response to placebo. 3) Persistent nonsuppression of cortisol on the DST after treatment was associated with high risk of early relapse and poor outcome after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline DST results may be devoid of prognostic value, but posttreatment nonsuppression of cortisol on the DST is strongly associated with poor outcome. Persistent nonsuppression may reflect a partially treated index episode or identify sicker patients who are unresponsive to treatment. The findings reiterate the importance of studying biological measures in relation to multiple validators of psychiatric illness beyond cross- sectional diagnosis.

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.