Dataset Information

Treatment-resistant major depressive disorder: Canadian expert consensus on definition and assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is a debilitating chronic mental illness that confers increased morbidity and mortality, decreases the quality of life, impairs occupational, social, and offspring development, and translates into increased costs on the healthcare system. The goal of this study is to reach an agreement on the concept, definition, staging model, and assessment of TRD.

Methods

This study involved a review of the literature and a modified Delphi process for consensus agreement. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II guidelines were followed for the literature appraisal. Literature was assessed for quality and strength of evidence using the grading, assessment, development, and evaluations system. Canadian national experts in depression were invited for the modified Delphi process based on their prior clinical and research expertize. Survey items were considered to have reached a consensus if 80% or more of the experts supported the statement.

Results

Fourteen Canadian experts were recruited for three rounds of surveys to reach a consensus on a total of 27 items. Experts agreed that a dimensional definition for treatment resistance was a useful concept to describe the heterogeneity of this illness. The use of staging models and clinical scales was recommended in evaluating depression. Risk factors and comorbidities were identified as potential predictors for treatment resistance.

Conclusions

TRD is a meaningful concept both for clinical practice and research. An operational definition for TRD will allow for opportunities to improve the validity of predictors and therapeutic options for these patients.

SUBMITTER: Rybak YE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8049072 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTreatment-resistant depression (TRD) refers to patients with major depressive disorder who do not remit after 2 or more antidepressant trials. TRD is common and highly debilitating, but its neurobiological basis remains poorly understood. Recent neuroimaging studies have revealed cortical connectivity gradients that dissociate primary sensorimotor areas from higher-order associative cortices. This fundamental topography determines cortical information flow and is affected by psychiatric disorders. We examined how TRD impacts gradient-based hierarchical cortical organization.MethodsIn this secondary study, we analyzed resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data from a mindfulness-based intervention enrolling 56 patients with TRD and 28 healthy control subjects. Using gradient extraction tools, baseline measures of cortical gradient dispersion within and between functional brain networks were derived, compared across groups, and associated with graph theoretical measures of network topology. In patients, correlation analyses were used to associate measures of cortical gradient dispersion with clinical measures of anxiety, depression, and mindfulness at baseline and following the intervention.ResultsCortical gradient dispersion was reduced within major intrinsic brain networks in patients with TRD. Reduced cortical gradient dispersion correlated with increased network degree assessed through graph theory-based measures of network topology. Lower dispersion among default mode, control, and limbic network nodes related to baseline levels of trait anxiety, depression, and mindfulness. Patients' baseline limbic network dispersion predicted trait anxiety scores 24 weeks after the intervention.ConclusionsOur findings provide preliminary support for widespread alterations in cortical gradient architecture in TRD, implicating a significant role for transmodal and limbic networks in mediating depression, anxiety, and lower mindfulness in patients with TRD.

Project description:Background: Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a moderately heritable disorder with a high lifetime prevalence. At present, laboratory blood tests to support MDD diagnosis are not available. Methods: We used a classifier approach on blood gene expression profiles of a unique set of non-medicated subjects (MDD patients and controls) to select genes of which expression is predictive for disease status. To reveal blood gene expression changes related to MDD disease, we applied a powerful ex vivo stimulus to the blood, i.e. incubation with lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 10 ng/ml blood). Results: Based on LPS-stimulated blood gene expression using whole-genome microarrays in 42 subjects (primary cohort; 21 MDD patients (mean age 42.3 years), 21 healthy controls (mean age 41.9 years)), we identified a set of genes (CAPRIN1, CLEC4A, KRT23, MLC1, PLSCR1, PROK2, ZBTB16) that serves as a molecular signature of MDD. These findings were validated for the primary cohort using an independent quantitative PCR method (P = 0.007). The difference between depressive patients and controls was confirmed (P = 0.019) in a replication cohort of 13 patients with MDD (mean age 42.8 years) and 14 controls (mean age 45.6 years). The MDD-signature score comprised of expression levels of 7 genes could discriminate depressive patients from controls with sensitivity of 76.9% and specificity of 71.8%. Conclusions: We show for the first time that molecular analysis of stimulated blood cells can be used as an endophenotype for MDD diagnosis, which is a milestone in establishing biomarkers for neuropsychiatric disorders with moderate heritability in general. Our results may provide a new entry point for following and predicting treatment outcome, as well as prediction of severity and recurrence of MDD. In total, 33 MDD patients and 34 healthy controls were analyzed using basal gene expression in whole blood, and gene expression from whole blood that was stimulated with LPS for 5-6 h, using microarrays. Patients were arbitrarily selected from all patients to serve as primary cohort (nMDD = 21 (MDD01-MDD21); nControls = 21 (Con01-Con21)), or replication cohort (nMDD = 12 (MDD22-MDD35); nControls = 13 (Con22-Con37)) using microarrays. This submission does not include Samples CON21_LPS or CON30_LPS.