Leonardo Tozzi1, Andrea N Goldstein-Piekarski2, Mayuresh S Korgaonkar3, Leanne M Williams4. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Sierra-Pacific Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. 3. Brain Dynamics Centre, Westmead Institute for Medical Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Discipline of Psychiatry, Western Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Sierra-Pacific Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. Electronic address: leawilliams@stanford.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In treating major depressive disorder, we lack tests anchored in neurobiology that predict antidepressant efficacy. Cognitive impairments are a particularly disabling feature of major depressive disorder. We tested whether functional connectivity during a response-inhibition task can predict response to antidepressants and whether its changes over time are correlated to symptom changes. METHODS: We analyzed data from outpatients with major depressive disorder (n = 124) randomized to receiveescitalopram, sertraline, or venlafaxine (8 weeks) and healthy control subjects (n = 59; age 18-65 years). Before and after treatment, participants were interviewed and scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging, and functional connectivity was measured using generalized psychophysiological interaction during response inhibition (Go-NoGo task). We investigated the interaction between treatment type and response (≥50% reduction on self-reported symptoms), coupling differences between responders and nonresponders at baseline, their correlation with symptom improvement, and their changes in time. RESULTS: During response inhibition, connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex/supramarginal gyrus and supramarginal gyrus/middle temporal gyrus was associated with response to sertraline and venlafaxine, but not escitalopram. Sertraline responders had higher functional connectivity between these regions compared with nonresponders, whereas venlafaxine responders had lower functional connectivity. For sertraline, attenuation of connectivity in the precentral and superior temporal gyri correlated with posttreatment symptom improvement. For venlafaxine, enhancement of connectivity between the orbitofrontal cortex and subcortical regions correlated with symptom improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Connectivity of the cognitive control circuit during response inhibition selectively and differentially predicts antidepressant treatment response and correlates with symptom improvement. These quantitative markers tied to the neurobiology of cognitive features of depression could be used translationally to predict and evaluate treatment response.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In treating major depressive disorder, we lack tests anchored in neurobiology that predict antidepressant efficacy. Cognitive impairments are a particularly disabling feature of major depressive disorder. We tested whether functional connectivity during a response-inhibition task can predict response to antidepressants and whether its changes over time are correlated to symptom changes. METHODS: We analyzed data from outpatients with major depressive disorder (n = 124) randomized to receive escitalopram, sertraline, or venlafaxine (8 weeks) and healthy control subjects (n = 59; age 18-65 years). Before and after treatment, participants were interviewed and scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging, and functional connectivity was measured using generalized psychophysiological interaction during response inhibition (Go-NoGo task). We investigated the interaction between treatment type and response (≥50% reduction on self-reported symptoms), coupling differences between responders and nonresponders at baseline, their correlation with symptom improvement, and their changes in time. RESULTS: During response inhibition, connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex/supramarginal gyrus and supramarginal gyrus/middle temporal gyrus was associated with response to sertraline and venlafaxine, but not escitalopram. Sertraline responders had higher functional connectivity between these regions compared with nonresponders, whereas venlafaxine responders had lower functional connectivity. For sertraline, attenuation of connectivity in the precentral and superior temporal gyri correlated with posttreatment symptom improvement. For venlafaxine, enhancement of connectivity between the orbitofrontal cortex and subcortical regions correlated with symptom improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Connectivity of the cognitive control circuit during response inhibition selectively and differentially predicts antidepressant treatment response and correlates with symptom improvement. These quantitative markers tied to the neurobiology of cognitive features of depression could be used translationally to predict and evaluate treatment response.
Authors: Yuen-Siang Ang; Roselinde Kaiser; Thilo Deckersbach; Jorge Almeida; Mary L Phillips; Henry W Chase; Christian A Webb; Ramin Parsey; Maurizio Fava; Patrick McGrath; Myrna Weissman; Phil Adams; Patricia Deldin; Maria A Oquendo; Melvin G McInnis; Thomas Carmody; Gerard Bruder; Crystal M Cooper; Cherise R Chin Fatt; Madhukar H Trivedi; Diego A Pizzagalli Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Gwen van der Wijk; Jacqueline K Harris; Stefanie Hassel; Andrew D Davis; Mojdeh Zamyadi; Stephen R Arnott; Roumen Milev; Raymond W Lam; Benicio N Frey; Geoffrey B Hall; Daniel J Müller; Susan Rotzinger; Sidney H Kennedy; Stephen C Strother; Glenda M MacQueen; Andrea B Protzner Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Adina S Fischer; Bailey Holt-Gosselin; Scott L Fleming; Laura M Hack; Tali M Ball; Alan F Schatzberg; Leanne M Williams Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Pranav Rajpurkar; Jingbo Yang; Nathan Dass; Vinjai Vale; Arielle S Keller; Jeremy Irvin; Zachary Taylor; Sanjay Basu; Andrew Ng; Leanne M Williams Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-06-01
Authors: Leanne M Williams; John T Coman; Patrick C Stetz; Nicole C Walker; F Andrew Kozel; Mark S George; Jong Yoon; Laura M Hack; Michelle R Madore; Kelvin O Lim; Noah S Philip; Paul E Holtzheimer Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Leonardo Tozzi; Esther T Anene; Ian H Gotlib; Max Wintermark; Adam B Kerr; Hua Wu; Darsol Seok; Katherine L Narr; Yvette I Sheline; Susan Whitfield-Gabrieli; Leanne M Williams Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2021-10-31 Impact factor: 7.400
Authors: Manfred Klöbl; Gregor Gryglewski; Lucas Rischka; Godber Mathis Godbersen; Jakob Unterholzner; Murray Bruce Reed; Paul Michenthaler; Thomas Vanicek; Edda Winkler-Pjrek; Andreas Hahn; Siegfried Kasper; Rupert Lanzenberger Journal: Front Comput Neurosci Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 2.380