From a clinical perspective, the most influential neurobiological discoveries related to depression have probably been neurotransmitter-related ('neurochemical') abnormalities, with the monoamines (serotonin, noradrenaline and dopamine) having received most attention. Early observations of the ability of tricyclic antidepressants to (a) relieve depressive symptoms and (b) potentiate serotonin and noradrenaline activity triggered a wide range of Abstract Depression is a common and debilitating mental health condition whose underlying aetiology and pathophysiology is still relatively poorly understood. In this article, we first turn to the past and briefly review what neuroscientific investigations have taught us so far about depression. In doing so, we cover neurochemical, neuroendocrine, immunological, functional and structural anatomical, and cognitive levels of description. We then turn our attention to the future and discuss where the field might be moving in the years to come. We argue that future developments may rely on three important lines of enquiry: first, the development of an integrated neuroscientific model of depression and its treatment in which different levels of description can be mechanistically linked, and in which distinct pathophysiological trajectories leading to depressive symptomatology can be identified. Second, the continued search for potentially overlooked pathophysiological factors, especially outside the immediate boundaries of the brain. And third, the improvement in translation of neuroscientific insights to aid and advance clinical practice and research.

Bipolar disorders are a group of psychiatric disorders with profound negative impact on affected patients. Even if their symptomatology has long been recognized, diagnostic criteria have changed over time and diagnosis often remains difficult. The Fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), issued in May 2013, comprises several changes regarding the diagnosis of bipolar disorders compared to the previous edition. Diagnostic categories and criteria for bipolar disorders show some concordance with the internationally also widely used Tenth Edition of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10). However, there are also major differences that are worth highlighting. The aim of the following text is to depict and discuss those.

Immunomodulatory effects of oenothein B (1), a macrocyclic ellagitannin from various Onagraceae species, have been described previously. However, the mechanisms underlying the anti-inflammatory activity of 1 have not been fully clarified. The effects of 1 were investigated on inducible nitric oxide synthase, TLR-dependent and TLR-independent signal transduction cascades, and cytokine expression using murine macrophages (RAW 264.7). Compound 1 (10-60 μg/mL) reduced NO production, iNOS mRNA, and iNOS protein levels in a dose-dependent manner, without inhibition of iNOS enzymatic activity. It reduced the binding of the NF-κB p50 subunit to the biotinylated-consensus sequence and decreased nuclear p65 translocation. Gallic acid as a subunit of the macrocyclic ellagitannin 1 showed a far lower inhibitory activity. Nitric oxide production was reduced by 1 after stimulation using TLR2 (Pam2CSK4) and TLR4 (Kdo2) agonists, but this compound did not inhibit inducible nitric oxide synthesis after stimulation using interferon-gamma. IL-1beta, IL-6, and TNF-alpha mRNA synthesis was clearly reduced by the addition of 1. Oenothein B (1) inhibits iNOS after stimulation with LPS, TLR2, and TLR4 agonists via inhibition of TLR/NF-κB-dependent inducible nitric oxide and cytokine synthesis independent from IFN-gamma/JAK/STAT pathways. The full molecular structure of this macrocyclic ellagitannin seems to be required for its immunomodulatory actions.

Over the past three decades, functional MRI (fMRI) has become key to study how cognitive processes are implemented in the human brain. However, the question of whether participants recruited into fMRI studies differ from participants recruited into other study contexts has received little to no attention. This is particularly pertinent when effects fail to generalize across study contexts: for example, a behavioural effect discovered in a non-imaging context not replicating in a neuroimaging environment. Here, we tested the hypothesis, motivated by preliminary findings (n = 272), that fMRI participants differ from behaviour-only participants on one fundamental individual difference variable: trait anxiety. Analysing trait anxiety scores and possible confounding variables from healthy volunteers across multiple institutions (n = 3317), we found robust support for lower trait anxiety in fMRI study participants, consistent with a sampling or self-selection bias. The bias was larger in studies that relied on phone screening (compared to full in-person psychiatric screening), recruited at least partly from convenience samples (compared to community samples), and in pharmacology studies. Our findings highlight the need for surveying trait anxiety at recruitment and for appropriate screening procedures or sampling strategies to mitigate this bias.