Literature DB >> 28359201

A 5-Year Observational Study of Patients With Treatment-Resistant Depression Treated With Vagus Nerve Stimulation or Treatment as Usual: Comparison of Response, Remission, and Suicidality.

Scott T Aaronson1, Peter Sears1, Francis Ruvuna1, Mark Bunker1, Charles R Conway1, Darin D Dougherty1, Frederick W Reimherr1, Thomas L Schwartz1, John M Zajecka1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Treatment-Resistant Depression Registry investigated whether adjunctive vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) with treatment as usual in depression has superior long-term outcomes compared with treatment as usual only.
METHOD: This 5-year, prospective, open-label, nonrandomized, observational registry study was conducted at 61 U.S. sites and included 795 patients who were experiencing a major depressive episode (unipolar or bipolar depression) of at least 2 years' duration or had three or more depressive episodes (including the current episode), and who had failed four or more depression treatments (including ECT). Patients with a history of psychosis or rapid-cycling bipolar disorder were excluded. The primary efficacy measure was response rate, defined as a decrease of ≥50% in baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at any postbaseline visit during the 5-year study. Secondary efficacy measures included remission.
RESULTS: Patients had chronic moderate to severe depression at baseline (the mean MADRS score was 29.3 [SD=6.9] for the treatment-as-usual group and 33.1 [SD=7.0] for the adjunctive VNS group). The registry results indicate that the adjunctive VNS group had better clinical outcomes than the treatment-as-usual group, including a significantly higher 5-year cumulative response rate (67.6% compared with 40.9%) and a significantly higher remission rate (cumulative first-time remitters, 43.3% compared with 25.7%). A subanalysis demonstrated that among patients with a history of response to ECT, those in the adjunctive VNS group had a significantly higher 5-year cumulative response rate than those in the treatment-as-usual group (71.3% compared with 56.9%). A similar significant response differential was observed among ECT nonresponders (59.6% compared with 34.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: This registry represents the longest and largest naturalistic study of efficacy outcomes in treatment-resistant depression, and it provides additional evidence that adjunctive VNS has enhanced antidepressant effects compared with treatment as usual in this severely ill patient population.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mortality; Remission; Response; Suicidality; Treatment-Resistant Depression; Vagus Nerve Stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28359201     DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.16010034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0002-953X            Impact factor:   18.112


  63 in total

Review 1.  Advances in understanding mechanisms and therapeutic targets to treat comorbid depression and cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Brittany S Pope; Susan K Wood
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 8.989

2.  Cognition-Enhancing Vagus Nerve Stimulation Alters the Epigenetic Landscape.

Authors:  Teresa H Sanders; Joseph Weiss; Luke Hogewood; Lan Chen; Casey Paton; Rebekah L McMahan; J David Sweatt
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  Interoception and Inflammation in Psychiatric Disorders.

Authors:  Jonathan Savitz; Neil A Harrison
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging       Date:  2018-01-09

4.  Vagus Nerve Stimulation: Back to the Future.

Authors:  J Douglas Bremner; Mark Hyman Rapaport
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 18.112

Review 5.  The immune system and psychiatric disease: a basic science perspective.

Authors:  F C Bennett; A V Molofsky
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2019-06-09       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 6.  Vagal Nerve Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression.

Authors:  Flavia R Carreno; Alan Frazer
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 7.620

7.  Timing Considerations for Noninvasive Vagal Nerve Stimulation in Clinical Studies.

Authors:  Nil Z Gurel; Asim H Gazi; Kristine L Scott; Matthew T Wittbrodt; Amit J Shah; Viola Vaccarino; J Douglas Bremner; Omer T Inan
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2020-03-04

Review 8.  Comparison and Selection of Current Implantable Anti-Epileptic Devices.

Authors:  Stephen Wong; Ram Mani; Shabbar Danish
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 7.620

Review 9.  Neurotherapeutic Interventions for Psychiatric Illness.

Authors:  Darin D Dougherty; Alik S Widge
Journal:  Harv Rev Psychiatry       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.732

Review 10.  Atypical interoception as a common risk factor for psychopathology: A review.

Authors:  Rebecca Brewer; Jennifer Murphy; Geoffrey Bird
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 8.989

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.