Camellia P Clark1, Shahrokh Golshan. 1. Department of Psychiatry, VA San Diego Healthcare System, University of California, 3350 La Jolla Village Dr., San Diego, CA 92161, USA. cclark@vapop.ecsd.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One night of total or partial sleep deprivation (SD) produces a temporary remission in 40-60% of patients with major depression. Yet no attempts to determine the optimum response criterion(a) for the antidepressant response to SD have been published. METHODS: Twenty-three unmedicated major depression patients received polysomnography (PSG) on an adaptation night; a baseline night; a partial SD (PSD) night (awake after 3 a.m.); and a "recovery" night. Subjects received the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) at standard times during baseline and PSD days and at 8 a.m. after the "recovery" night. Response was defined as percent decrease in the modified HDRS17 (HDRS17Mod) (omitting sleep and weight loss items) from baseline to the minimum following PSD. Using cutoffs of 30%, 35%, 40%, and 50% to dichotomize responders and nonresponders, PSG variables were analyzed for between-group differences. RESULTS: All cutoffs differentiated responders' and nonresponders' mood response to PSD despite similar baseline values. Sleep continuity measures most consistently differed between responders and nonresponders on baseline and recovery nights. None of the response cutoffs tested were clearly "best" in terms of detecting the most PSG differences between groups. LIMITATIONS: More subjects may be needed. CONCLUSIONS: Given the increasing interest in SD for clinical and research applications, as well as its proposed use for subtyping depression, further study to determine the optimal response criterion(a) for the antidepressant response to SD is warranted. Planned pooling of multisite data on standardized SD protocols could help determine the optimal cutpoint for response.
BACKGROUND: One night of total or partial sleep deprivation (SD) produces a temporary remission in 40-60% of patients with major depression. Yet no attempts to determine the optimum response criterion(a) for the antidepressant response to SD have been published. METHODS: Twenty-three unmedicated major depressionpatients received polysomnography (PSG) on an adaptation night; a baseline night; a partial SD (PSD) night (awake after 3 a.m.); and a "recovery" night. Subjects received the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) at standard times during baseline and PSD days and at 8 a.m. after the "recovery" night. Response was defined as percent decrease in the modified HDRS17 (HDRS17Mod) (omitting sleep and weight loss items) from baseline to the minimum following PSD. Using cutoffs of 30%, 35%, 40%, and 50% to dichotomize responders and nonresponders, PSG variables were analyzed for between-group differences. RESULTS: All cutoffs differentiated responders' and nonresponders' mood response to PSD despite similar baseline values. Sleep continuity measures most consistently differed between responders and nonresponders on baseline and recovery nights. None of the response cutoffs tested were clearly "best" in terms of detecting the most PSG differences between groups. LIMITATIONS: More subjects may be needed. CONCLUSIONS: Given the increasing interest in SD for clinical and research applications, as well as its proposed use for subtyping depression, further study to determine the optimal response criterion(a) for the antidepressant response to SD is warranted. Planned pooling of multisite data on standardized SD protocols could help determine the optimal cutpoint for response.
Authors: T Hori; Y Sugita; E Koga; S Shirakawa; K Inoue; S Uchida; H Kuwahara; M Kousaka; T Kobayashi; Y Tsuji; M Terashima; K Fukuda; N Fukuda Journal: Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.188
Authors: J Wu; M S Buchsbaum; J C Gillin; C Tang; S Cadwell; M Wiegand; A Najafi; E Klein; K Hazen; W E Bunney; J H Fallon; D Keator Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Anna Wirz-Justice; Francesco Benedetti; Mathias Berger; Raymond W Lam; Klaus Martiny; Michael Terman; Joseph C Wu Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: S A Volk; S H Kaendler; A Hertel; F D Maul; R Manoocheri; R Weber; K Georgi; B Pflug; G Hör Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 1997-09-29 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Nathaniel F Watson; M Safwan Badr; Gregory Belenky; Donald L Bliwise; Orfeu M Buxton; Daniel Buysse; David F Dinges; James Gangwisch; Michael A Grandner; Clete Kushida; Raman K Malhotra; Jennifer L Martin; Sanjay R Patel; Stuart F Quan; Esra Tasali Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2015-08-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Nathaniel F Watson; M Safwan Badr; Gregory Belenky; Donald L Bliwise; Orfeu M Buxton; Daniel Buysse; David F Dinges; James Gangwisch; Michael A Grandner; Clete Kushida; Raman K Malhotra; Jennifer L Martin; Sanjay R Patel; Stuart F Quan; Esra Tasali Journal: Sleep Date: 2015-08-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: A Gururajan; M E Naughton; K A Scott; R M O'Connor; G Moloney; G Clarke; J Dowling; A Walsh; F Ismail; G Shorten; L Scott; D M McLoughlin; J F Cryan; T G Dinan Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Nina Trautmann; Jerome C Foo; Josef Frank; Stephanie H Witt; Fabian Streit; Jens Treutlein; Steffen Conrad von Heydendorff; Maria Gilles; Andreas J Forstner; Ulrich Ebner-Priemer; Markus M Nöthen; Michael Deuschle; Marcella Rietschel Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 7.853