Stress system concordance as a predictor of longitudinal patterns of resilience in adolescence

Psychobiological Stress Response Profiles in Current and Remitted Depression: A Person-Centered, Multisystem Approach

Background

A dysregulated stress response, including exaggerated affective reactivity and abnormal hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis responsivity, has been implicated in the etiology, maintenance, and relapse of major depressive disorder (MDD). Among adolescents, discordant affective and physiological stress response profiles have been linked to negative affective outcomes and increased risk for psychopathology. Whether these findings extend to adults with varying degree of MDD risk is unclear, as are possible links to various risk factors.

Methods

We used a person-centered, multisystem approach in a sample of 119 unmedicated adults with current or remitted MDD and individuals without past MDD to evaluate psychobiological stress response profiles. Multitrajectory modeling was applied to positive affect, negative affect, and salivary cortisol (CORT) levels in response to the Maastricht Acute Stress Test.

Results

Analyses identified 4 within-person profiles, 1 typical, termed normative (n = 32, 26.9%) and 3 atypical: CORT hyperreactivity affective stability (n = 17, 14.3%), CORT hyporeactivity affective reactivity 1 (n = 45, 37.8%), and CORT hyporeactivity affective reactivity 2 (n = 25, 21.0%). While validating the assumption of a normative profile and increased risk for psychopathology in non-normative stress response profiles, coherent associations emerged between stress response profiles and clinical status, depression severity, anhedonia, perceived stress, childhood adversity, and reports of well-being, suggesting increased risk for psychopathology for individuals with a hyperreactive or discordant hyporeactive stress response profile.

Conclusions

This work advances our understanding of stress response mechanisms in MDD and underscores the potential of targeted interventions to enhance resilience and reduce psychopathology based on individual stress response profiles.

Restoration of typical HPA-SAM co-activation following psychosocial intervention among preadolescent youth living in poverty

Despite the added value of multisystem (relative to traditional single-system) approaches for characterizing biological processes linked to risk for psychopathology (e.g., neuroendocrine stress responsivity; Buss et al., 2019; Quas et al., 2014), no study to date has evaluated whether multisystem processes may serve as viable biological targets of intervention. Utilizing a multiple-levels-of-analysis approach (Cicchetti & Dawson, 2002), this person-centered study examined whether stress-adapted patterns of hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and sympathetic-adrenomedullary (SAM) system co-activation were amenable to change following the Building a Strong Identity and Coping Skills intervention (BaSICS; Wadsworth et al., 2022). Preadolescents exposed to concentrated poverty (n = 112, M age = 11.78 years, 57.1% female, 54% assigned to intervention; 40% Hispanic, 63% Black, 20% White) completed questionnaires and the Trier Social Stress Test at both pre- and posttest. Multitrajectory modeling of cortisol and alpha-amylase levels identified four pretest and posttest HPA-SAM co-activation profiles. At pretest, youth exhibiting Asymmetric Nos. 1 & 2 HPA-SAM co-activation reported greater maladjustment relative to youth with Symmetric Nos. 1 & 2 co-activation. Youth exhibiting Asymmetric No. 1 co-activation at pretest were more likely to exhibit Symmetric No. 1 co-activation following BaSICS relative to control. Findings highlight the potential of BaSICS to restore neuroendocrine stress response function in impoverished youth, pointing to HPA-SAM co-activation as a potential biological target of preventive intervention in this population.

Emergence and evolution of developmental resilience science over half a century

This reflection on the history and future of developmental resilience science (DRS) highlights its co-emergence with developmental psychopathology (DP), as well as the roles of this journal and its founding editor, Dante Cicchetti, in the evolution of these intertwined domains of scholarship. A remarkable constellation of scholars at the University of Minnesota shaped the course of both conceptual frameworks and their dissemination. I describe fundamental assumptions common to DP and DRS frameworks that reflect their common roots and the pervasive influence of systems theory on developmental science. I describe four waves of DRS and key principles of DRS at the present time. In conclusion, I consider the possibility that a fifth wave of DRS is emerging with a focus on understanding patterns of multisystem, multilevel processes of resilience and their implications for interventions in the context of interacting, interdependent, and complex adaptive systems. I close this commentary with questions for future research and a hopeful outlook on the future of human resilience.

Seeing adolescents grow from many angles using a multilevel approach: A tribute to the contributions of Dante Cicchetti to the field of developmental psychopathology

Dante Cicchetti propelled forward the field of developmental psychopathology by advancing this framework and championing new methods, including emphasizing the central role that multilevel analysis holds for explicating pathways of risk and resilience. His work continues to change the face of existing science. It has also paved the way for the formation of new projects, like the Research Domain Criteria initiative. This paper uses our laboratory's work on multilevel approaches to studying adolescent depression, non-suicidal self-injury, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors to shine a spotlight on Dr Cicchetti's contributions. In addition, we review recent developments, ongoing challenges, and promising future directions within developmental psychopathology as we endeavor to carry on the tradition of growth in the field.