Romain Colle1, Irène Dupong1, Olivier Colliot2, Eric Deflesselle1, Patrick Hardy1, Bruno Falissard3, Denis Ducreux4, Marie Chupin2, Emmanuelle Corruble1. 1. a INSERM UMR 1178, Team "Depression and Antidepressants", Univ Paris Sud, Service de Psychiatrie, Hôpital Bicêtre, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris , Le Kremlin Bicêtre , France. 2. b Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle Épinière, ICM, INSERM, U1127, CNRS, UMR 7225, Sorbonne Universites, UPMC Univ Paris 06, Inria, Aramis Team, Centre de Recherche Paris, Inria Paris-Rocquencourt , Paris , France. 3. c INSERM UMR 1178, Département de Biostatistiques , Univ Paris Sud, Hôpital Paul Brousse, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris , Villejuif , France. 4. d CNRS IR4M, UMR 8081, Univ Paris Sud, Neuroradiology Hôpital Bicêtre, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris , Le Kremlin Bicêtre , France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Whether hippocampal volume predicts response and/or remission after antidepressant treatment of major depressive episodes (MDE) in major depressive disorder (MDD) remains unclear. We meta-analysed prospective studies comparing baseline hippocampal volume in patients with or without response/remission after antidepressant treatment. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched for studies of patients with current MDE in MDD, with hippocampal volume assessments at baseline, initiation of antidepressant drug treatment, and prospective assessment of response/remission after treatment. RESULTS: Six studies (374 patients), of which two were positive and four negative, were meta-analysed. Compared to responders/remitters, patients who failed to achieve response/remission had smaller total hippocampus volumes at baseline (mean volume difference = 260 mm3, 95% CI [93; 427], P = 0.002). These results remained significant in patients under 60 years of age (P = 0.02), in those over 60 years old (P = 0.04), and for right (P = 0.006) and left (P = 0.02) hippocampi. The probability of non-response/non-remission was 68.6% for patients with a total hippocampal volume at least 10% lower than the average, and 47.1% for patients with a total hippocampal volume 10% higher than the average. CONCLUSIONS: In depressed patients treated with antidepressant drugs, smaller hippocampal volumes predict lower response/remission rates.
OBJECTIVES: Whether hippocampal volume predicts response and/or remission after antidepressant treatment of major depressive episodes (MDE) in major depressive disorder (MDD) remains unclear. We meta-analysed prospective studies comparing baseline hippocampal volume in patients with or without response/remission after antidepressant treatment. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched for studies of patients with current MDE in MDD, with hippocampal volume assessments at baseline, initiation of antidepressant drug treatment, and prospective assessment of response/remission after treatment. RESULTS: Six studies (374 patients), of which two were positive and four negative, were meta-analysed. Compared to responders/remitters, patients who failed to achieve response/remission had smaller total hippocampus volumes at baseline (mean volume difference = 260 mm3, 95% CI [93; 427], P = 0.002). These results remained significant in patients under 60 years of age (P = 0.02), in those over 60 years old (P = 0.04), and for right (P = 0.006) and left (P = 0.02) hippocampi. The probability of non-response/non-remission was 68.6% for patients with a total hippocampal volume at least 10% lower than the average, and 47.1% for patients with a total hippocampal volume 10% higher than the average. CONCLUSIONS: In depressedpatients treated with antidepressant drugs, smaller hippocampal volumes predict lower response/remission rates.
Entities:
Keywords:
Hippocampal volume; antidepressant; major depressive episode; meta-analysis; response/remission
Authors: Benjamin S C Wade; Jing Sui; Stephanie Njau; Amber M Leaver; Megha Vasvada; Boris A Gutman; Paul M Thompson; Randal Espinoza; Roger P Woods; Christopher C Abbott; Katherine L Narr; Shantanu H Joshi Journal: Proc IEEE Int Symp Biomed Imaging Date: 2017-06-19
Authors: Kathryn L Humphreys; Lucy S King; Matthew D Sacchet; M Catalina Camacho; Natalie L Colich; Sarah J Ordaz; Tiffany C Ho; Ian H Gotlib Journal: Dev Sci Date: 2018-12-26
Authors: Tejas Sankar; M. Mallar Chakravarty; Natasha Jawa; Stanley X. Li; Peter Giacobbe; Sidney H. Kennedy; Sakina J. Rizvi; Helen S. Mayberg; Clement Hamani; Andres M. Lozano Journal: J Psychiatry Neurosci Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 6.186
Authors: Ryan Ahmed; Claire Ryan; Seth Christman; Damian Elson; Camilo Bermudez; Bennett A Landman; Sarah M Szymkowicz; Brian D Boyd; Hakmook Kang; Warren D Taylor Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2021-11-28 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Margarita Bronshteyn; Fan Nils Yang; Kyle F Shattuck; Matthew Dawson; Princy Kumar; David J Moore; Ronald J Ellis; Xiong Jiang Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2021-06-05 Impact factor: 5.038