Introduction: There is mixed evidence in the literature on the role of inflammation in major depressive disorder. Contradictory findings are attributed to lack of rigorous characterization of study subjects, to the presence of concomitant medical illnesses, to the small sample sizes, and to the limited number of cytokines tested.Methods: Subjects aged 18-70 years, diagnosed with major depressive disorder and presenting with chronic course of illness, as well as matched controls (n = 236), were evaluated by trained raters and provided blood for cytokine measurements. Cytokine levels in EDTA plasma were measured with the MILLIPLEX Multi-Analyte Profiling Human Cytokine/ Chemokine Assay employing Luminex technology. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare cytokine levels between major depressive disorder subjects and healthy volunteers, before (interleukin [IL]-1β, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α) and after Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (IL-1α, IL-2, IL-3, IL-4, IL-5, IL-7, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12(p40), IL-12(p70), IL-13, IL-15, IFN-γ-inducible protein 10, Eotaxin, interferon-γ, monotype chemoattractant protein-1, macrophage inflammatory protein-1α, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor and vascular endothelial growth factor).Results: There were no significant differences in cytokine levels between major depressive disorder subjects and controls, both prior to and after correction for multiple analyses (significance set at p ⩽ 0.05 and p ⩽ 0.002, respectively). Conclusion:Our well-characterized examination of cytokine plasma levels did not support the association of major depressive disorder with systemic inflammation. The heterogeneity of major depressive disorder, as well as a potential sampling bias selecting for non-inflammatory depression, might have determined our findings discordant with the literature.

IntroductionMental health disparities based on minority racial status are well characterized, including inequities in access, symptom severity, diagnosis, and treatment. For African Americans, racism may affect mental health through factors such as poverty and segregation, which have operated since slavery. While the need to address racism in medical training has been recognized, there are few examples of formal didactic curricula in the psychiatric literature. Antiracism didactics during psychiatry residency provide a unique opportunity to equip physicians to address bias and racism in mental health care.MethodsWith advocacy by residents in the Massachusetts General Hospital/McLean Psychiatry residency program, the Division of Public and Community Psychiatry developed a curriculum addressing racial inequities in mental health, particularly those experienced by African Americans. Four 50-minute interactive didactic lectures were integrated into the required didactic curriculum (one lecture per postgraduate training class) during the 2015–2016 academic year.ResultsOf residents who attended lectures and provided anonymous feedback, 97% agreed that discussing racism in formal didactics was at least “somewhat” positive, and 92% agreed that it should “probably” or “definitely” remain in the curriculum. Qualitative feedback centered on a need for more time to discuss racism as well as a desire to learn more about minority mental health advocacy in general.DiscussionTeaching about racism as part of required training conveys the explicit message that this is core curricular material and critical knowledge for all physicians. These lectures can serve as a springboard for dissemination and provide scaffolding for similar curriculum development in medical residency programs.

No abstract

No abstract