Neural predictors of treatment response to brain stimulation and psychological therapy in depression: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.
Adult
Brain
/ diagnostic imaging
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
/ methods
Combined Modality Therapy
Depressive Disorder, Major
/ diagnostic imaging
Double-Blind Method
Female
Functional Neuroimaging
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Male
Middle Aged
Prefrontal Cortex
/ diagnostic imaging
Prognosis
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
/ methods
Young Adult
Journal
Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology
ISSN: 1740-634X
Titre abrégé: Neuropsychopharmacology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8904907
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2019
08 2019
Historique:
received:
16
01
2019
accepted:
15
04
2019
revised:
21
03
2019
pubmed:
1
5
2019
medline:
18
3
2020
entrez:
1
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Standard depression treatments, including antidepressant medication and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), are ineffective for many patients. Prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as an alternative treatment, but has shown inconsistent efficacy for depression, and its mechanisms are poorly understood. We recruited unmedicated patients with major depressive disorder (N = 71 approached; N = 39 randomised) for a mechanistic, double-blind, randomized controlled trial consisting of eight weekly sessions of prefrontal tDCS administered to the left prefrontal cortex prior to CBT. We probed (1) whether tDCS improved the efficacy of CBT relative to sham stimulation; and (2) whether neural measures predicted clinical response. We found a modest and non-significant effect of tDCS on clinical outcome over and above CBT (active: 50%; sham: 31.6%; odds ratio: 2.16, 95% CI = 0.59-7.99), but a strong relationship, predicted a priori, between baseline activation during a working memory task in the stimulated prefrontal region and symptom improvement. Repeating our analyses of symptom outcome splitting the sample according to this biomarker revealed that tDCS was significantly superior to sham in individuals with high left prefrontal cortex activation at baseline; we also show 86% accuracy in predicting clinical response using this measure. Exploratory analyses revealed several other regions where activation at baseline was associated with subsequent response to CBT, irrespective of tDCS. This mechanistic trial revealed variable, but predictable, clinical effects of prefrontal tDCS combined with CBT for depression. We have discovered a potential explanation for this variability: individual differences in baseline activation of the region stimulated. Such a biomarker could potentially be used to pre-select patients for trials and, eventually, in the clinic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31039579
doi: 10.1038/s41386-019-0401-0
pii: 10.1038/s41386-019-0401-0
pmc: PMC6784995
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1613-1622Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_U105579215
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Brain and Behavior Research Foundation (Brain & Behavior Research Foundation)
ID : 20162
Pays : International
Références
Front Syst Neurosci. 2013 Nov 28;7:99
pubmed: 24348348
Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014 Sep;17(9):1443-52
pubmed: 24713139
Bipolar Disord. 2006 Apr;8(2):203-4
pubmed: 16542193
Brain Stimul. 2015 May-Jun;8(3):663-5
pubmed: 25921355
J Neurosci. 2013 Jul 10;33(28):11425-31
pubmed: 23843514
Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2008 Mar;11(2):249-54
pubmed: 17559710
Brain Stimul. 2014 Mar-Apr;7(2):325-31
pubmed: 24486425
Am J Psychiatry. 2006 Apr;163(4):735-8
pubmed: 16585452
Brain Stimul. 2012 Apr;5(2):110-5
pubmed: 22483547
Br J Psychiatry. 2012 Jan;200(1):52-9
pubmed: 22215866
F1000Res. 2013 Oct 17;2:219
pubmed: 24555105
Exp Brain Res. 2005 Sep;166(1):23-30
pubmed: 15999258
Neuroimage. 2016 Aug 15;137:140-151
pubmed: 27188218
Neurology. 2001 Nov 27;57(10):1899-901
pubmed: 11723286
Neurosci Lett. 2013 Mar 14;537:60-4
pubmed: 23370288
Brain Stimul. 2014 Nov-Dec;7(6):773-83
pubmed: 25456566
Neuropsychologia. 2019 May;128:332-339
pubmed: 29630916
Brain Stimul. 2015 May-Jun;8(3):535-50
pubmed: 25701175
Brain Stimul. 2018 Jan - Feb;11(1):125-133
pubmed: 29111077
J Affect Disord. 2013 Sep 5;150(2):699-702
pubmed: 23707032
Neuroimage. 2017 Aug 1;156:119-127
pubmed: 28506872
Brain Stimul. 2013 May;6(3):465-7
pubmed: 23031723
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Apr;62(4):409-16
pubmed: 15809408
J Affect Disord. 2011 Nov;134(1-3):459-63
pubmed: 21641047
Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011 Sep;14(8):1133-45
pubmed: 21320389
Biol Psychiatry. 2005 Apr 1;57(7):809-12
pubmed: 15820239
Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:285-315
pubmed: 16318597
Psychol Med. 2012 Jan;42(1):29-40
pubmed: 21733287
Biol Psychiatry. 2007 Jan 15;61(2):198-209
pubmed: 17027931
Brain Stimul. 2012 Oct;5(4):499-504
pubmed: 22405745
J Neurosci. 2009 Jun 3;29(22):7271-7
pubmed: 19494149
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2017 May 1;12(5):839-847
pubmed: 28158703
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 29;376(26):2523-2533
pubmed: 28657871
Am J Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;164(8):1242-9
pubmed: 17671288
Neuromodulation. 2019 Dec;22(8):898-903
pubmed: 30153360
Brain Stimul. 2010 Oct;3(4):207-10
pubmed: 20965449
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Apr;70(4):383-91
pubmed: 23389323
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012 Jan;37(1):117-36
pubmed: 21976044
Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2014 Dec;16(4):479-90
pubmed: 25733953
Hum Brain Mapp. 2005 May;25(1):46-59
pubmed: 15846822
J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Nov;23(11):3681-93
pubmed: 21568644
Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2015 Jan 2;56:101-8
pubmed: 25174680