Literature DB >> 22801557

The Illness Density Index (IDI): A longitudinal measure of treatment efficacy.

Mary E Kelley1, Alexandre R Franco, Helen S Mayberg, Paul E Holtzheimer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A reliable and meaningful quantitative index of success is paramount in the trial of any new treatment. However, existing methods for defining response and remission for treatments tested for psychiatric disorders are limited in that they often minimize the variance in change over time among individual patients and generally use arbitrarily chosen levels of functioning at specified times during treatment.
PURPOSE: To suggest and determine the properties of an alternative measure of treatment success, the Illness Density Index (IDI), that may be more sensitive to fluctuations in symptoms over the course of treatment compared to existing measures.
METHODS: We examined data from 64 depressed patients with multiple assessments of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) over 12 weeks of randomized treatment in order to compare and contrast varying numerical definitions of response and remission, including percent change and linear slope over time.
RESULTS: Examination of the indices comparing the within-sample rank of individual patients revealed that these indices agree in cases where patients have little or no response as well as clear and sustained response, while they differ in patients who have a slow (or late) response as well as relapse during the treatment course. LIMITATIONS: The measure may not be useful for all types of studies, especially short-term treatment trials.
CONCLUSIONS: The IDI is highly correlated with both categorical (e.g., remission) and continuous (e.g., percent change) definitions of treatment success. Furthermore, it differentiates certain trajectories of change that current definitions do not. Thus, the proposed index may be a valuable addition to current measures of efficacy, especially when trying to identify biological substrates of illness or predictors of long-term outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22801557      PMCID: PMC3742034          DOI: 10.1177/1740774512450099

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  13 in total

Review 1.  Definitions of antidepressant treatment response, remission, nonresponse, partial response, and other relevant outcomes: a focus on treatment-resistant depression.

Authors:  A A Nierenberg; L M DeCecco
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.384

2.  A rating scale for depression.

Authors:  M HAMILTON
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1960-02       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 3.  Evolution of remission as the new standard in the treatment of depression.

Authors:  A A Nierenberg; E C Wright
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.384

4.  Area under the curve and other summary indicators of repeated waking cortisol measurements.

Authors:  Desta B Fekedulegn; Michael E Andrew; Cecil M Burchfiel; John M Violanti; Tara A Hartley; Luenda E Charles; Diane B Miller
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2007-08-31       Impact factor: 4.312

5.  Two-year outcome of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for treatment of major depressive episodes.

Authors:  Ziad Nahas; Lauren B Marangell; Mustafa M Husain; A John Rush; Harold A Sackeim; Sarah H Lisanby; James M Martinez; Mark S George
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.384

6.  Effects of 12 months of vagus nerve stimulation in treatment-resistant depression: a naturalistic study.

Authors:  A John Rush; Harold A Sackeim; Lauren B Marangell; Mark S George; Stephen K Brannan; Sonia M Davis; Phil Lavori; Robert Howland; Mitchel A Kling; Barry Rittberg; Linda Carpenter; Philip Ninan; Francisco Moreno; Thomas Schwartz; Charles Conway; Michael Burke; John J Barry
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 13.382

7.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Patterns of early change and their relationship to outcome and follow-up among patients with major depressive disorders.

Authors:  Wolfgang Lutz; Niklaus Stulz; Katharina Köck
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2009-02-14       Impact factor: 4.839

9.  Subcallosal cingulate gyrus deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression.

Authors:  Andres M Lozano; Helen S Mayberg; Peter Giacobbe; Clement Hamani; R Cameron Craddock; Sydney H Kennedy
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2008-07-18       Impact factor: 13.382

10.  Area under the curve calculations as a tool to compare the efficacy of equine influenza vaccines--a retrospective analysis of three independent field trials.

Authors:  J G M Heldens; M W Weststrate; R van den Hoven
Journal:  J Immunol Methods       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 2.303

View more
  2 in total

1.  Metabolic activity in subcallosal cingulate predicts response to deep brain stimulation for depression.

Authors:  Elliot C Brown; Darren L Clark; Nils D Forkert; Christine P Molnar; Zelma H T Kiss; Rajamannar Ramasubbu
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 7.853

Review 2.  Deep brain stimulation of the human reward system for major depression--rationale, outcomes and outlook.

Authors:  Thomas E Schlaepfer; Bettina H Bewernick; Sarah Kayser; Rene Hurlemann; Volker A Coenen
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 7.853

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.