Dataset Information

Magnetic Seizure Therapy Compared to Electroconvulsive Therapy for Schizophrenia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Background: Magnetic seizure therapy (MST) is a potential alternative to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). However, reports on the use of MST for patients with schizophrenia, particularly in developing countries, which is a main indication for ECT, are limited. Methods: From February 2017 to July 2018, 79 inpatients who met the DSM-5 criteria for schizophrenia were randomized to receive 10 sessions of MST (43 inpatients) or ECT (36 inpatients) over the course of 4 weeks. At baseline and 4-week follow-up, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) were used to assess symptom severity and cognitive functions, respectively. Results: Seventy-one patients who completed at least half of the treatment protocol were included in the per-protocol analysis. MST generated a non-significant larger antipsychotic effect in terms of a reduction in PANSS total score [g = 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.30, 0.63] and response rate [relative risk (RR) = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.83-2.39]. Twenty-four participants failed to complete the cognitive assessment as a result of severe psychotic symptoms. MST showed significant less cognitive impairment over ECT in terms of immediate memory (g = 1.26, 95% CI = 0.63-1.89), language function (g =1.14, 95% CI = 0.52-1.76), delayed memory (g = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.16-1.35), and global cognitive function (g = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.45-1.68). The intention-to-treat analysis generated similar results except for the differences in delayed memory became statistically insignificant. Better baseline cognitive performance predicted MST and ECT response. Conclusions: Compared to bitemporal ECT with brief pulses and age-dose method, MST had similar antipsychotic efficacy with fewer cognitive impairments, indicating that MST is a promising alternative to ECT as an add-on treatment for schizophrenia. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02746965.

SUBMITTER: Jiang J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8656219 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceElectroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is highly effective and rapid in treating depression, but it carries a risk of significant cognitive adverse effects. Magnetic seizure therapy (MST), an investigational antidepressant treatment, may maintain the robust antidepressant efficacy of ECT while substantially reducing adverse effects due to its enhanced focality and weaker stimulation strength; however, previous clinical trials of MST were limited by small sample sizes.ObjectiveTo compare the antidepressant efficacy of MST vs ultrabrief pulse right unilateral (RUL) ECT.Design, setting, and participantsA between-participants, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 3 academic hospitals from June 2007 to August 2012. Adults aged 18 to 90 years who were referred for treatment with ECT, had a major depressive episode in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder, and had a baseline 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-24) total score of 18 or higher were included. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with MST or ultrabrief pulse RUL ECT. After the treatment course, patients were naturalistically followed up for up to 6 months to examine the durability of clinical effects.InterventionsTreatment with MST, applied at 100 Hz at 100% of the maximum device power for 10 seconds, or ultrabrief pulse RUL ECT, applied at 6 times seizure threshold.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was change from baseline in HDRS-24 total score, with patients followed up for up to 6 months. A reduction of at least 50% in the HDRS-24 score indicated response, and at least a 60% decrease in the HDRS-24 score and a total score of 8 or less indicated remission.ResultsOf the 73 participants (41 [56.2%] female; mean [SD] age, 48 [14.1] years), 35 were randomized to MST and 38 to ECT. Among them, 53 (72.6%) were classified as completers (29 in the MST group and 24 in the ECT group). Both MST and ECT demonstrated clinically meaningful antidepressant effects. In the intent-to-treat sample, 18 participants (51.4%) in the MST group and 16 (42.1%) in the ECT group met response criteria; 13 (37.1%) in the MST group and 10 (26.3%) in the ECT group met remission criteria. Among completers, 17 of 29 (58.6%) in the MST group and 15 of 24 (62.5%) in the ECT group met response criteria; 13 of 29 (44.8%) in the MST group and 10 of 24 (41.7%) in the ECT group met remission criteria. There was no significant difference between MST and ECT for either response or remission rates. However, the mean (SD) number of treatments needed to achieve remission was 9.0 (3.1) with MST and 6.7 (3.3) with ECT, a difference of 2.3 treatments (t71.0 = 3.1; P = .003). Both MST and ECT showed a sustained benefit over a 6-month follow-up period, again with no significant difference between them. Compared with MST, ECT had significantly longer time to orientation after treatment (threshold level: F1,56 = 10.0; P = .003) and greater severity of subjective adverse effects, particularly in the physical and cognitive domains.Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized clinical trial found that the efficacy of MST was indistinguishable from that of ultrabrief pulse RUL ECT, the safest form of ECT currently available. These results support the continued development of MST and provide evidence for advantages relative to state-of-the-art ECT.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00488748.

Project description:BackgroundElectroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is well-established and effective for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), but in Canada and the USA, less than 1% of patients with TRD receive ECT mainly due to its cognitive adverse effects (i.e. amnesia). Thus, new treatment alternatives for TRD are urgently needed. One such treatment is magnetic seizure therapy (MST). ECT involves applying a train of high-frequency electrical stimuli to induce a seizure, whereas MST involves applying a train of high-frequency magnetic stimuli to induce a seizure.MethodsIn this manuscript, we introduce our international, two-site, double-blinded, randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial to develop MST as an effective and safe treatment for TRD. This trial will compare the efficacy of MST to right unilateral ultra-brief pulse width electroconvulsive therapy (RUL-UB-ECT) with a combined primary endpoint of remission of depression and superior cognitive adverse effects in 260 patients with TRD. Amelioration of suicidal ideation will be assessed as a secondary endpoint. Inpatients or outpatients, over 18 years of age with a MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) diagnosis of non-psychotic major depressive disorder (MDD) can be enrolled in the study provided that they meet illness severity and full eligibility criteria. Participants are randomized to receive MST or RUL-UB ECT, 2-3 days per week over seven weeks, or a maximum of 21 treatments. The study will involve before-, during-, and after-treatment assessments of depression severity, suicidal ideation, subjective side-effects, and cognitive performance consistent with an intent-to-treat study design approach.DiscussionPositive results from this trial could have an immediate and tremendous impact for patients with TRD. If MST demonstrates comparable antidepressant treatment efficacy to ECT, but with greater cognitive safety, it could rapidly be adopted into clinical practice. Indeed, given that the administration of MST is nearly identical to ECT, the majority of ECT facilities in North America could readily adopt MST. Furthermore, the potential for cognitive safety could lead to improved treatment acceptability. Healthcare providers, patients and care partners, and policymakers would therefore demand this form of convulsive therapy.Trial statusEnrollment for this study began on June 26, 2018, and is estimated to complete recruitment by July 2024. At the time of submission, we have enrolled and randomized 117 participants.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03191058 , Registered on June 19, 2017. Primary sponsor: Daniel Blumberger (DMB), Principal Investigator Daniel.Blumberger@camh.ca , 416-535-8501 x 33662 Contact for public queries: DMB, Daniel.Blumberger@camh.ca Contact for scientific queries: ZJD, Zdaskalakis@health.ucsd.edu.

Project description:Agitation poses a significant challenge in the treatment of schizophrenia. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a fast, effective and safe treatment for a variety of psychiatric disorders, but no meta-analysis of ECT treatment for agitation in schizophrenia has yet been reported.To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of ECT alone or ECT-antipsychotics (APs) combination for agitation in schizophrenia.Systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Two independent evaluators selected studies, extracted data about outcomes and safety with available data, conducted quality assessment and data synthesis. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to judge the level of the overall evidence of main outcomes.Seven RCTs from China, including ECT alone (4 RCTs with 5 treatment arms, n=240) and ECT-APs combination (3 RCTs, n=240), were identified. Participants in the studies were on average 34.3(4.5) years of age and lasted an average of 4.3(3.1) weeks of treatment duration. All 7 RCTs were non-blinded, and were rated as low quality based on Jadad scale. Meta-analysis of the pooled sample found no significant difference in the improvement of the agitation sub-score of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) when ECT alone (weighted mean difference=-0.90, (95% confidence interval (CI): -2.91, 1.11), p=0.38) or ECT-APs combination (WMD=-1.34, (95%CI: -4.07, 1.39), p=0.33) compared with APs monotherapy. However, ECT alone was superior to APs monotherapy regarding PANSS total score (WMD=-7.13, I2=0%, p=0.004) and its excitement sub-score (WMD=-1.97, p<0.0001) as well as the PANSS total score at 14 days (WMD=-7.13, I2 =0%, p=0.004) and its excitement sub-score at 7 and 14 days (WMD=-1.97 to -1.92, p=0.002 to 0.0001) after ECT. The ECT-APs combination was superior to APs monotherapy with respect to the PANSS total score at treatment endpoint (WMD=-10.40, p=0.03) and 7 days (WMD=-5.01, p=0.02). Headache (number-needed-to-harm (NNH)=3, 95%CI=2-4) was more frequent in the ECT alone group compared to AP monotherapy. According to the GRADE approach, the evidence levels of main outcomes were rated as ''very low'' (37.5%) and "low" (50%).Pooling of the data based on 7 RCTs from China found no advantage of ECT alone or ECT-APs combination in the treatment of agitation related outcomes in schizophrenia patients. However, ECT alone or ECT-APs combination were associated with significant reduction in the PANSS total score. High-quality RCTs are needed to confirm the current interpretations.

Dataset Information

Magnetic Seizure Therapy Compared to Electroconvulsive Therapy for Schizophrenia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets