经颅磁刺激治疗抑郁症的轨迹建模和反应预测

Aaron N. McInnes , Sarah T. Olsen , Christi R.P. Sullivan, Dawson C. Cooper, Saydra Wilson, Ayse Irem Sonmez, C. Sophia Albott, Stephen C. Olson, Carol B. Peterson, Barry R. Rittberg, Alexander Herman, Matej Bajzer, Ziad Nahas, Alik S. Widge
{"title":"经颅磁刺激治疗抑郁症的轨迹建模和反应预测","authors":"Aaron N. McInnes ,&nbsp;Sarah T. Olsen ,&nbsp;Christi R.P. Sullivan,&nbsp;Dawson C. Cooper,&nbsp;Saydra Wilson,&nbsp;Ayse Irem Sonmez,&nbsp;C. Sophia Albott,&nbsp;Stephen C. Olson,&nbsp;Carol B. Peterson,&nbsp;Barry R. Rittberg,&nbsp;Alexander Herman,&nbsp;Matej Bajzer,&nbsp;Ziad Nahas,&nbsp;Alik S. Widge","doi":"10.1016/j.pmip.2024.100135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) therapy could be improved by more accurate and earlier prediction of response. Latent class mixture (LCMM) and non-linear mixed effects (NLME) modeling have been applied to model the trajectories of antidepressant response (or non-response) to TMS, but it is not known whether such models are useful in predicting clinically meaningful change in symptom severity, i.e. categorical (non)response as opposed to continuous scores.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We compared LCMM and NLME approaches to model the antidepressant response to TMS in a naturalistic sample of 238 patients receiving rTMS for treatment resistant depression, across multiple coils and protocols. We then compared the predictive power of those models.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>LCMM trajectories were influenced largely by baseline symptom severity, but baseline symptoms provided little predictive power for later antidepressant response. Rather, the optimal LCMM model was a nonlinear two-class model that accounted for baseline symptoms. This model accurately predicted patient response at 4 weeks of treatment (AUC=0.70, 95 % CI=[0.52–0.87]), but not before. NLME offered slightly improved predictive performance at 4 weeks of treatment (AUC=0.76, 95 % CI=[0.58–0.94], but likewise, not before.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In showing the predictive validity of these approaches to model response trajectories to rTMS, we provided preliminary evidence that trajectory modeling could be used to guide future treatment decisions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19837,"journal":{"name":"Personalized Medicine in Psychiatry","volume":"47 ","pages":"Article 100135"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trajectory modeling and response prediction in transcranial magnetic stimulation for depression\",\"authors\":\"Aaron N. McInnes ,&nbsp;Sarah T. Olsen ,&nbsp;Christi R.P. Sullivan,&nbsp;Dawson C. Cooper,&nbsp;Saydra Wilson,&nbsp;Ayse Irem Sonmez,&nbsp;C. Sophia Albott,&nbsp;Stephen C. Olson,&nbsp;Carol B. Peterson,&nbsp;Barry R. Rittberg,&nbsp;Alexander Herman,&nbsp;Matej Bajzer,&nbsp;Ziad Nahas,&nbsp;Alik S. Widge\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pmip.2024.100135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) therapy could be improved by more accurate and earlier prediction of response. Latent class mixture (LCMM) and non-linear mixed effects (NLME) modeling have been applied to model the trajectories of antidepressant response (or non-response) to TMS, but it is not known whether such models are useful in predicting clinically meaningful change in symptom severity, i.e. categorical (non)response as opposed to continuous scores.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We compared LCMM and NLME approaches to model the antidepressant response to TMS in a naturalistic sample of 238 patients receiving rTMS for treatment resistant depression, across multiple coils and protocols. We then compared the predictive power of those models.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>LCMM trajectories were influenced largely by baseline symptom severity, but baseline symptoms provided little predictive power for later antidepressant response. Rather, the optimal LCMM model was a nonlinear two-class model that accounted for baseline symptoms. This model accurately predicted patient response at 4 weeks of treatment (AUC=0.70, 95 % CI=[0.52–0.87]), but not before. NLME offered slightly improved predictive performance at 4 weeks of treatment (AUC=0.76, 95 % CI=[0.58–0.94], but likewise, not before.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In showing the predictive validity of these approaches to model response trajectories to rTMS, we provided preliminary evidence that trajectory modeling could be used to guide future treatment decisions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personalized Medicine in Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"47 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100135\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personalized Medicine in Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468171724000218\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personalized Medicine in Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468171724000218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景通过更准确、更早地预测反应,可改善复发性经颅磁刺激(rTMS)疗法。潜类混合(LCMM)和非线性混合效应(NLME)建模已被用于对经颅磁刺激治疗的抗抑郁反应(或无反应)轨迹建模,但这些模型是否有助于预测症状严重程度的临床意义变化(即分类(非)反应而非连续得分)尚不清楚。我们比较了 LCMM 和 NLME 方法,以 238 名接受经颅磁刺激治疗耐药抑郁症的患者为自然样本,通过多个线圈和方案建立经颅磁刺激抗抑郁反应模型。结果LCMM 轨迹主要受基线症状严重程度的影响,但基线症状对后期抗抑郁反应的预测力很小。相反,最佳的 LCMM 模型是一个考虑了基线症状的非线性两类模型。该模型可准确预测患者在治疗 4 周后的反应(AUC=0.70,95 % CI=[0.52-0.87]),但在治疗 4 周前则无法预测。NLME 在治疗 4 周时的预测性能略有提高(AUC=0.76,95 % CI=[0.58-0.94],但同样地,在治疗 4 周之前也没有提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Trajectory modeling and response prediction in transcranial magnetic stimulation for depression

Background

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) therapy could be improved by more accurate and earlier prediction of response. Latent class mixture (LCMM) and non-linear mixed effects (NLME) modeling have been applied to model the trajectories of antidepressant response (or non-response) to TMS, but it is not known whether such models are useful in predicting clinically meaningful change in symptom severity, i.e. categorical (non)response as opposed to continuous scores.

Methods

We compared LCMM and NLME approaches to model the antidepressant response to TMS in a naturalistic sample of 238 patients receiving rTMS for treatment resistant depression, across multiple coils and protocols. We then compared the predictive power of those models.

Results

LCMM trajectories were influenced largely by baseline symptom severity, but baseline symptoms provided little predictive power for later antidepressant response. Rather, the optimal LCMM model was a nonlinear two-class model that accounted for baseline symptoms. This model accurately predicted patient response at 4 weeks of treatment (AUC=0.70, 95 % CI=[0.52–0.87]), but not before. NLME offered slightly improved predictive performance at 4 weeks of treatment (AUC=0.76, 95 % CI=[0.58–0.94], but likewise, not before.

Conclusions

In showing the predictive validity of these approaches to model response trajectories to rTMS, we provided preliminary evidence that trajectory modeling could be used to guide future treatment decisions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy as an adjunctive treatment for treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review The role of meta-cognitive and emotional beliefs, and negative repetitive thinking in the relationship between emotional abuse and psychological distress in psychiatric outpatients: A serial multiple mediation model Low handgrip strength is a risk factor for symptoms of anxiety and depression in survivors breast cancer patients BDNF blood levels as a potential biomarker Predictor of treatment response and remission in bipolar depression Erratum regarding missing ethical statements in previously published articles
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1