Thilo Deckersbach1, Amy T Peters2, Louisa G Sylvia3, Alexandra K Gold4, Pedro Vieira da Silva Magalhaes5, David B Henry2, Ellen Frank6, Michael W Otto7, Michael Berk8, Darin D Dougherty3, Andrew A Nierenberg3, David J Miklowitz9. 1. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States. Electronic address: tdeckersbach@partners.org. 2. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States. 3. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States. 4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States. 5. Universidade Federal de Rio Grande de Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 6. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. 7. Boston University, Boston, MA, United States. 8. Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 9. UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We sought to address how predictors and moderators of psychotherapy for bipolar depression - identified individually in prior analyses - can inform the development of a metric for prospectively classifying treatment outcome in intensive psychotherapy (IP) versus collaborative care (CC) adjunctive to pharmacotherapy in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program (STEP-BD) study. METHODS: We conducted post-hoc analyses on 135 STEP-BD participants using cluster analysis to identify subsets of participants with similar clinical profiles and investigated this combined metric as a moderator and predictor of response to IP. We used agglomerative hierarchical cluster analyses and k-means clustering to determine the content of the clinical profiles. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate whether the resulting clusters predicted or moderated likelihood of recovery or time until recovery. RESULTS: The cluster analysis yielded a two-cluster solution: 1) "less-recurrent/severe" and 2) "chronic/recurrent." Rates of recovery in IP were similar for less-recurrent/severe and chronic/recurrent participants. Less-recurrent/severe patients were more likely than chronic/recurrent patients to achieve recovery in CC (p=.040, OR=4.56). IP yielded a faster recovery for chronic/recurrent participants, whereas CC led to recovery sooner in the less-recurrent/severe cluster (p=.034, OR=2.62). LIMITATIONS: Cluster analyses require list-wise deletion of cases with missing data so we were unable to conduct analyses on all STEP-BD participants. CONCLUSIONS: A well-powered, parametric approach can distinguish patients based on illness history and provide clinicians with symptom profiles of patients that confer differential prognosis in CC vs. IP.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We sought to address how predictors and moderators of psychotherapy for bipolar depression - identified individually in prior analyses - can inform the development of a metric for prospectively classifying treatment outcome in intensive psychotherapy (IP) versus collaborative care (CC) adjunctive to pharmacotherapy in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program (STEP-BD) study. METHODS: We conducted post-hoc analyses on 135 STEP-BD participants using cluster analysis to identify subsets of participants with similar clinical profiles and investigated this combined metric as a moderator and predictor of response to IP. We used agglomerative hierarchical cluster analyses and k-means clustering to determine the content of the clinical profiles. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate whether the resulting clusters predicted or moderated likelihood of recovery or time until recovery. RESULTS: The cluster analysis yielded a two-cluster solution: 1) "less-recurrent/severe" and 2) "chronic/recurrent." Rates of recovery in IP were similar for less-recurrent/severe and chronic/recurrent participants. Less-recurrent/severe patients were more likely than chronic/recurrent patients to achieve recovery in CC (p=.040, OR=4.56). IP yielded a faster recovery for chronic/recurrent participants, whereas CC led to recovery sooner in the less-recurrent/severe cluster (p=.034, OR=2.62). LIMITATIONS: Cluster analyses require list-wise deletion of cases with missing data so we were unable to conduct analyses on all STEP-BD participants. CONCLUSIONS: A well-powered, parametric approach can distinguish patients based on illness history and provide clinicians with symptom profiles of patients that confer differential prognosis in CC vs. IP.
Authors: David J Miklowitz; Michael W Otto; Ellen Frank; Noreen A Reilly-Harrington; Stephen R Wisniewski; Jane N Kogan; Andrew A Nierenberg; Joseph R Calabrese; Lauren B Marangell; Laszlo Gyulai; Mako Araga; Jodi M Gonzalez; Edwin R Shirley; Michael E Thase; Gary S Sachs Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2007-04
Authors: Terence A Ketter; John P Houston; David H Adams; Richard C Risser; Adam L Meyers; Douglas J Williamson; Mauricio Tohen Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Joseph R Calabrese; Robert M A Hirschfeld; Michael Reed; Marilyn A Davies; Mark A Frye; Paul E Keck; Lydia Lewis; Susan L McElroy; James P McNulty; Karen D Wagner Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: David J Miklowitz; Michael W Otto; Ellen Frank; Noreen A Reilly-Harrington; Jane N Kogan; Gary S Sachs; Michael E Thase; Joseph R Calabrese; Lauren B Marangell; Michael J Ostacher; Jayendra Patel; Marshall R Thomas; Mako Araga; Jodi M Gonzalez; Stephen R Wisniewski Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Christopher M Celano; Federico Gomez-Bernal; Carol A Mastromauro; Eleanor E Beale; Christina M DuBois; Randy P Auerbach; Jeff C Huffman Journal: J Ment Health Date: 2018-10-26