We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is often accompanied by changes in appetite and weight. Prior task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) findings suggest these MDD phenotypes are associated with altered reward and interoceptive processing.
Methods
Using resting-state fMRI data, we compared the fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFF) and seed-based connectivity (SBC) among hyperphagic (n = 77), hypophagic (n = 66), and euphagic (n = 42) MDD groups and a healthy comparison group (n = 38). We examined fALFF and SBC in a mask restricted to reward [nucleus accumbens (NAcc), putamen, caudate, ventral pallidum, and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC)] and interoceptive (anterior insula and hypothalamus) regions and also performed exploratory whole-brain analyses. SBC analyses included as seeds the NAcc and also regions demonstrating group differences in fALFF (i.e. right lateral OFC and right anterior insula). All analyses used threshold-free cluster enhancement.
Results
Mask-restricted analyses revealed stronger fALFF in the right lateral OFC, and weaker fALFF in the right anterior insula, for hyperphagic MDD v. healthy comparison. We also found weaker SBC between the right lateral OFC and left anterior insula for hyperphagic MDD v. healthy comparison. Whole-brain analyses revealed weaker fALFF in the right anterior insula, and stronger SBC between the right lateral OFC and left precentral gyrus, for hyperphagic MDD v. healthy comparison. Findings were no longer significant after controlling for body mass index, which was higher for hyperphagic MDD.
Conclusions
Our results suggest hyperphagic MDD may be associated with altered activity in and connectivity between interoceptive and reward regions.
Treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) is imprecise and often involves trial-and-error to determine the most effective approach. To facilitate optimal treatment selection and inform timely adjustment, the current study investigated whether neurocognitive variables could predict an antidepressant response in a treatment-specific manner.
Methods
In the two-stage Establishing Moderators and Biosignatures of Antidepressant Response for Clinical Care (EMBARC) trial, outpatients with non-psychotic recurrent MDD were first randomized to an 8-week course of sertraline selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or placebo. Behavioral measures of reward responsiveness, cognitive control, verbal fluency, psychomotor, and cognitive processing speeds were collected at baseline and week 1. Treatment responders then continued on another 8-week course of the same medication, whereas non-responders to sertraline or placebo were crossed-over under double-blinded conditions to bupropion noradrenaline/dopamine reuptake inhibitor or sertraline, respectively. Hamilton Rating for Depression scores were also assessed at baseline, weeks 8, and 16.
Results
Greater improvements in psychomotor and cognitive processing speeds within the first week, as well as better pretreatment performance in these domains, were specifically associated with higher likelihood of response to placebo. Moreover, better reward responsiveness, poorer cognitive control and greater verbal fluency were associated with greater likelihood of response to bupropion in patients who previously failed to respond to sertraline.
Conclusion
These exploratory results warrant further scrutiny, but demonstrate that quick and non-invasive behavioral tests may have substantial clinical value in predicting antidepressant treatment response.
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly heterogeneous condition in terms of symptom presentation and, likely, underlying pathophysiology. Accordingly, it is possible that only certain individuals with MDD are well-suited to antidepressants. A potentially fruitful approach to parsing this heterogeneity is to focus on promising endophenotypes of depression, such as neuroticism, anhedonia, and cognitive control deficits.
Methods
Within an 8-week multisite trial of sertraline v. placebo for depressed adults (n = 216), we examined whether the combination of machine learning with a Personalized Advantage Index (PAI) can generate individualized treatment recommendations on the basis of endophenotype profiles coupled with clinical and demographic characteristics.
Results
Five pre-treatment variables moderated treatment response. Higher depression severity and neuroticism, older age, less impairment in cognitive control, and being employed were each associated with better outcomes to sertraline than placebo. Across 1000 iterations of a 10-fold cross-validation, the PAI model predicted that 31% of the sample would exhibit a clinically meaningful advantage [post-treatment Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) difference ⩾3] with sertraline relative to placebo. Although there were no overall outcome differences between treatment groups (d = 0.15), those identified as optimally suited to sertraline at pre-treatment had better week 8 HRSD scores if randomized to sertraline (10.7) than placebo (14.7) (d = 0.58).
Conclusions
A subset of MDD patients optimally suited to sertraline can be identified on the basis of pre-treatment characteristics. This model must be tested prospectively before it can be used to inform treatment selection. However, findings demonstrate the potential to improve individual outcomes through algorithm-guided treatment recommendations.
This chapter focuses on a member of a much larger family of interventions known as cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). Cognitive therapy (CT) was first developed as a time-limited treatment of depression. Dysfunctional cognitions about medication can be modified with CT, and behavioral interventions, such as reminder systems and behavioral plans to overcome obstacles to adherence, can be used. The efficacy of CT has been subjected to hundreds of controlled investigations across a wide range of disorders. CT is the most exhaustively studied psychosocial intervention for depressive disorders. The primary analyses of six subsequent studies, all making greater efforts to ensure that pharmacotherapy was adequately administered, found CT and pharmacotherapy to be comparably effective across 12-16 weeks. It is noteworthy that the two most recent studies used selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and, hence, have greater generalizability to contemporary practice.