Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Psychobiological differences between depression and somatization.
J Psychosom Res. 2010 May; 68(5):495-502.JP

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Comorbidity studies have shown that depression and somatization (multiple somatoform symptoms) often overlap. Therefore it has been suggested to classify at least some patients with somatization syndromes under the category of depressive disorders. We wanted to investigate whether psychobiological investigations confirm the lumping of somatization and depression, or whether psychobiological pathways favor distinguishing these disorders.

METHOD

An overview is presented summarizing psychobiological studies including patients with depression and/or somatization-associated syndromes. We focus on the following topics: heritability, polymorphisms in special candidate genes, immune activation, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis reactivity, serotonergic pathways, monoamino acids, and fatty acid concentrations.

RESULTS

Immunological activation seems to be associated with specific features of somatoform disorders, namely, sickness behavior and pain thresholds. Genetic factors can also contribute to somatic complaints, e.g., via serotonergic pathways, HPA-axis response, immune activation, and other biological systems that contribute to the self-description of not being healthy. Some results indicate that psychobiological aspects of depression and somatization overlap in part (e.g., the relevance of serotonergic pathways), but there is clearly more evidence for discrepancies of psychobiological pathways in depression and somatization (e.g., the relevance of proinflammatory immune processes; HPA-axis activity; monoamino acid availability; omega-3-concentration; the role of triallelic subtypes of 5-HTTLPR).

CONCLUSION

Many psychobiological pathways act differently in depression and somatization. These differences in psychobiology favor the distinction of these syndromes in classification approaches.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Marburg, D-35032 Marburg, Germany. rief@staff.uni-marburg.deNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Review

Language

eng

PubMed ID

20403510

Citation

Rief, Winfried, et al. "Psychobiological Differences Between Depression and Somatization." Journal of Psychosomatic Research, vol. 68, no. 5, 2010, pp. 495-502.
Rief W, Hennings A, Riemer S, et al. Psychobiological differences between depression and somatization. J Psychosom Res. 2010;68(5):495-502.
Rief, W., Hennings, A., Riemer, S., & Euteneuer, F. (2010). Psychobiological differences between depression and somatization. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 68(5), 495-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2010.02.001
Rief W, et al. Psychobiological Differences Between Depression and Somatization. J Psychosom Res. 2010;68(5):495-502. PubMed PMID: 20403510.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Psychobiological differences between depression and somatization. AU - Rief,Winfried, AU - Hennings,Anika, AU - Riemer,Sabine, AU - Euteneuer,Frank, Y1 - 2010/03/17/ PY - 2009/10/28/received PY - 2010/02/02/revised PY - 2010/02/02/accepted PY - 2010/4/21/entrez PY - 2010/4/21/pubmed PY - 2010/7/22/medline SP - 495 EP - 502 JF - Journal of psychosomatic research JO - J Psychosom Res VL - 68 IS - 5 N2 - BACKGROUND: Comorbidity studies have shown that depression and somatization (multiple somatoform symptoms) often overlap. Therefore it has been suggested to classify at least some patients with somatization syndromes under the category of depressive disorders. We wanted to investigate whether psychobiological investigations confirm the lumping of somatization and depression, or whether psychobiological pathways favor distinguishing these disorders. METHOD: An overview is presented summarizing psychobiological studies including patients with depression and/or somatization-associated syndromes. We focus on the following topics: heritability, polymorphisms in special candidate genes, immune activation, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis reactivity, serotonergic pathways, monoamino acids, and fatty acid concentrations. RESULTS: Immunological activation seems to be associated with specific features of somatoform disorders, namely, sickness behavior and pain thresholds. Genetic factors can also contribute to somatic complaints, e.g., via serotonergic pathways, HPA-axis response, immune activation, and other biological systems that contribute to the self-description of not being healthy. Some results indicate that psychobiological aspects of depression and somatization overlap in part (e.g., the relevance of serotonergic pathways), but there is clearly more evidence for discrepancies of psychobiological pathways in depression and somatization (e.g., the relevance of proinflammatory immune processes; HPA-axis activity; monoamino acid availability; omega-3-concentration; the role of triallelic subtypes of 5-HTTLPR). CONCLUSION: Many psychobiological pathways act differently in depression and somatization. These differences in psychobiology favor the distinction of these syndromes in classification approaches. SN - 1879-1360 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/20403510/Psychobiological_differences_between_depression_and_somatization_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022-3999(10)00072-3 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -