Dataset Information

The association between antidepressant treatment and brain connectivity in two double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials: a treatment mechanism study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Antidepressant medications offer an effective treatment for depression, yet nearly 50% of patients either do not respond or have side-effects rendering them unable to continue the course of treatment. Mechanistic studies might help advance the pharmacology of depression by identifying pathways through which treatments exert their effects. Toward this goal, we aimed to identify the effects of antidepressant treatment on neural connectivity, the relationship with symptom improvement, and to test whether these effects were reproducible across two studies. METHODS:We completed two double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of SNRI antidepressant medications with MRI scans obtained before and after treatment. One was a 10-week trial of duloxetine (30-120 mg daily; mean 92·1 mg/day [SD 30·00]) and the other was a 12-week trial of desvenlafaxine (50-100 mg daily; 93·6 mg/day [16·47]). Participants consisted of adults with persistent depressive disorder. Adjusting for sex and age, we examined the effect of treatment on whole-brain functional connectivity. We also examined correlations between change in functional connectivity and improvement in symptoms of depression (24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale) and pain symptom severity (Symptom Checklist-90-Revised). FINDINGS:Participants were enrolled between Jan 26, 2006, and Nov 22, 2011, for the duloxetine RCT and Aug 5, 2012, and Jan 28, 2016, for the desvenlafaxine RCT. Before and after treatment MRI scans were collected in 32 participants for the duloxetine RCT and 34 participants for the desvenlafaxine RCT. In both studies, antidepressants decreased functional connectivity compared with placebo (duloxetine study: ?=-0·06; 95% CI -0·08 to -0·03; p<0·0001, ?p2=0·44; desvenlafaxine study: -0·06, -0·09 to -0·03; p<0·0001, ?p2=0·35) within a thalamo-cortico-periaqueductal network that has previously been associated with the experience of pain. Within the active drug groups, reductions in functional connectivity within this network correlated with improvements in depressive symptom severity in both studies (duloxetine study: r=0·38, 95% CI 0·01-0·65; p=0·0426; desvenlafaxine study: 0·44, 0·10-0·69; p=0·0138) and pain symptoms in the desvenlafaxine study (0·39, 0·04 to 0·65; p=0·0299). INTERPRETATION:The findings suggest the thalamo-cortico-periaqueductal network associated with the experience of pain is a new and potentially important target for novel antidepressant therapeutics. FUNDING:National Mental Health Institute, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, and the Edwin S Webster Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Wang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6937159 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The association between antidepressant treatment and brain connectivity in two double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials: a treatment mechanism study.

Wang Yun Y Bernanke Joel J Peterson Bradley S BS McGrath Patrick P Stewart Jonathan J Chen Ying Y Lee Seonjoo S Wall Melanie M Bastidas Vanessa V Hong Susie S Rutherford Bret R BR Hellerstein David J DJ Posner Jonathan J

The lancet. Psychiatry 20190624 8

<h4>Background</h4>Antidepressant medications offer an effective treatment for depression, yet nearly 50% of patients either do not respond or have side-effects rendering them unable to continue the course of treatment. Mechanistic studies might help advance the pharmacology of depression by identifying pathways through which treatments exert their effects. Toward this goal, we aimed to identify the effects of antidepressant treatment on neural connectivity, the relationship with symptom improve ...[more]

PMID: 31248841

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-individualised homeopathic treatment has not previously been reported. We tested the null hypothesis that the main outcome of treatment using a non-individualised (standardised) homeopathic medicine is indistinguishable from that of placebo. An additional aim was to quantify any condition-specific effects of non-individualised homeopathic treatment.MethodsLiterature search strategy, data extraction and statistical analysis all followed the methods described in a pre-published protocol. A trial comprised 'reliable evidence' if its risk of bias was low or it was unclear in one specified domain of assessment. 'Effect size' was reported as standardised mean difference (SMD), with arithmetic transformation for dichotomous data carried out as required; a negative SMD indicated an effect favouring homeopathy.ResultsForty-eight different clinical conditions were represented in 75 eligible RCTs. Forty-nine trials were classed as 'high risk of bias' and 23 as 'uncertain risk of bias'; the remaining three, clinically heterogeneous, trials displayed sufficiently low risk of bias to be designated reliable evidence. Fifty-four trials had extractable data: pooled SMD was -0.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.44, -0.21), which was attenuated to -0.16 (95% CI -0.31, -0.02) after adjustment for publication bias. The three trials with reliable evidence yielded a non-significant pooled SMD: -0.18 (95% CI -0.46, 0.09). There was no single clinical condition for which meta-analysis included reliable evidence.ConclusionsThe quality of the body of evidence is low. A meta-analysis of all extractable data leads to rejection of our null hypothesis, but analysis of a small sub-group of reliable evidence does not support that rejection. Reliable evidence is lacking in condition-specific meta-analyses, precluding relevant conclusions. Better designed and more rigorous RCTs are needed in order to develop an evidence base that can decisively provide reliable effect estimates of non-individualised homeopathic treatment.

Project description:Placebo response in the clinical trial setting is poorly understood and alleged to be driven by statistical confounds, and its biological underpinnings are questioned. Here we identified and validated that clinical placebo response is predictable from resting-state functional magnetic-resonance-imaging (fMRI) brain connectivity. This also led to discovering a brain region predicting active drug response and demonstrating the adverse effect of active drug interfering with placebo analgesia. Chronic knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain patients (n = 56) underwent pretreatment brain scans in two clinical trials. Study 1 (n = 17) was a 2-wk single-blinded placebo pill trial. Study 2 (n = 39) was a 3-mo double-blinded randomized trial comparing placebo pill to duloxetine. Study 3, which was conducted in additional knee OA pain patients (n = 42), was observational. fMRI-derived brain connectivity maps in study 1 were contrasted between placebo responders and nonresponders and compared to healthy controls (n = 20). Study 2 validated the primary biomarker and identified a brain region predicting drug response. In both studies, approximately half of the participants exhibited analgesia with placebo treatment. In study 1, right midfrontal gyrus connectivity best identified placebo responders. In study 2, the same measure identified placebo responders (95% correct) and predicted the magnitude of placebo's effectiveness. By subtracting away linearly modeled placebo analgesia from duloxetine response, we uncovered in 6/19 participants a tendency of duloxetine enhancing predicted placebo response, while in another 6/19, we uncovered a tendency for duloxetine to diminish it. Moreover, the approach led to discovering that right parahippocampus gyrus connectivity predicts drug analgesia after correcting for modeled placebo-related analgesia. Our evidence is consistent with clinical placebo response having biological underpinnings and shows that the method can also reveal that active treatment in some patients diminishes modeled placebo-related analgesia. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02903238 ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01558700.

Project description:BackgroundInnate immunity contributes to the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases, such as type 1 diabetes, but until now no randomised, controlled trials of blockade of the key innate immune mediator interleukin-1 have been done. We aimed to assess whether canakinumab, a human monoclonal anti-interleukin-1 antibody, or anakinra, a human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, improved β-cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes.MethodsWe did two randomised, placebo-controlled trials in two groups of patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes and mixed-meal-tolerance-test-stimulated C peptide of at least 0·2 nM. Patients in the canakinumab trial were aged 6-45 years and those in the anakinra trial were aged 18-35 years. Patients in the canakinumab trial were enrolled at 12 sites in the USA and Canada and those in the anakinra trial were enrolled at 14 sites across Europe. Participants were randomly assigned by computer-generated blocked randomisation to subcutaneous injection of either 2 mg/kg (maximum 300 mg) canakinumab or placebo monthly for 12 months or 100 mg anakinra or placebo daily for 9 months. Participants and carers were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was baseline-adjusted 2-h area under curve C-peptide response to the mixed meal tolerance test at 12 months (canakinumab trial) and 9 months (anakinra trial). Analyses were by intention to treat. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00947427 and NCT00711503, and EudraCT number 2007-007146-34.FindingsPatients were enrolled in the canakinumab trial between Nov 12, 2010, and April 11, 2011, and in the anakinra trial between Jan 26, 2009, and May 25, 2011. 69 patients were randomly assigned to canakinumab (n=47) or placebo (n=22) monthly for 12 months and 69 were randomly assigned to anakinra (n=35) or placebo (n=34) daily for 9 months. No interim analyses were done. 45 canakinumab-treated and 21 placebo-treated patients in the canakinumab trial and 25 anakinra-treated and 26 placebo-treated patients in the anakinra trial were included in the primary analyses. The difference in C peptide area under curve between the canakinumab and placebo groups at 12 months was 0·01 nmol/L (95% CI -0·11 to 0·14; p=0·86), and between the anakinra and the placebo groups at 9 months was 0·02 nmol/L (-0·09 to 0·15; p=0·71). The number and severity of adverse events did not differ between groups in the canakinumab trial. In the anakinra trial, patients in the anakinra group had significantly higher grades of adverse events than the placebo group (p=0·018), which was mainly because of a higher number of injection site reactions in the anakinra group.InterpretationCanakinumab and anakinra were safe but were not effective as single immunomodulatory drugs in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. Interleukin-1 blockade might be more effective in combination with treatments that target adaptive immunity in organ-specific autoimmune disorders.FundingNational Institutes of Health and Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.

Dataset Information

The association between antidepressant treatment and brain connectivity in two double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials: a treatment mechanism study.

Publications

The association between antidepressant treatment and brain connectivity in two double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials: a treatment mechanism study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure