Shan H Siddiqi1, Stephan F Taylor1, Danielle Cooke1, Alvaro Pascual-Leone1, Mark S George1, Michael D Fox1. 1. Department of Psychiatry (Siddiqi) and Department of Neurology (Pascual-Leone, Fox), Harvard Medical School, Boston; Berenson-Allen Center for Noninvasive Brain Stimulation (Siddiqi, Cooke, Fox), and Cognitive Neurology Unit, Department of Neurology (Siddiqi), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston; Division of Neurotherapeutics, McLean Hospital, Belmont, Mass. (Siddiqi); Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis (Siddiqi); Center for Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Md. (Siddiqi); Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor (Taylor); Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research and Center for Memory Health, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston (Pascual-Leone); Guttmann Institute, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (Pascual-Leone); Brain Stimulation Lab, Department of Psychiatry, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (George); Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, S.C. (George); Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (Fox); Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Charlestown, Mass. (Fox).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Treatment of different depression symptoms may require different brain stimulation targets with different underlying brain circuits. The authors sought to identify such targets, which could improve the efficacy of therapeutic brain stimulation and facilitate personalized therapy. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed two independent cohorts of patients who received left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment of depression (discovery sample, N=30; active replication sample, N=81; sham replication sample, N=87). Each patient's TMS site was mapped to underlying brain circuits using functional connectivity MRI from a large connectome database (N=1,000). Circuits associated with improvement in each depression symptom were identified and then clustered based on similarity. The authors tested for reproducibility across data sets and whether symptom-specific targets derived from one data set could predict symptom improvement in the other independent cohort. RESULTS: The authors identified two distinct circuit targets effective for two discrete clusters of depressive symptoms. Dysphoric symptoms, such as sadness and anhedonia, responded best to stimulation of one circuit, while anxiety and somatic symptoms responded best to stimulation of a different circuit. These circuit maps were reproducible, predicted symptom improvement in independent patient cohorts, and were specific to active compared with sham stimulation. The maps predicted symptom improvement in an exploratory analysis of stimulation sites from 14 clinical TMS trials. CONCLUSIONS: Distinct clusters of depressive symptoms responded better to different TMS targets across independent retrospective data sets. These symptom-specific targets can be prospectively tested in a randomized clinical trial. This data-driven approach for identifying symptom-specific targets may prove useful for other disorders and facilitate personalized neuromodulation therapy.
OBJECTIVE: Treatment of different depression symptoms may require different brain stimulation targets with different underlying brain circuits. The authors sought to identify such targets, which could improve the efficacy of therapeutic brain stimulation and facilitate personalized therapy. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed two independent cohorts of patients who received left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for treatment of depression (discovery sample, N=30; active replication sample, N=81; sham replication sample, N=87). Each patient's TMS site was mapped to underlying brain circuits using functional connectivity MRI from a large connectome database (N=1,000). Circuits associated with improvement in each depression symptom were identified and then clustered based on similarity. The authors tested for reproducibility across data sets and whether symptom-specific targets derived from one data set could predict symptom improvement in the other independent cohort. RESULTS: The authors identified two distinct circuit targets effective for two discrete clusters of depressive symptoms. Dysphoric symptoms, such as sadness and anhedonia, responded best to stimulation of one circuit, while anxiety and somatic symptoms responded best to stimulation of a different circuit. These circuit maps were reproducible, predicted symptom improvement in independent patient cohorts, and were specific to active compared with sham stimulation. The maps predicted symptom improvement in an exploratory analysis of stimulation sites from 14 clinical TMS trials. CONCLUSIONS: Distinct clusters of depressive symptoms responded better to different TMS targets across independent retrospective data sets. These symptom-specific targets can be prospectively tested in a randomized clinical trial. This data-driven approach for identifying symptom-specific targets may prove useful for other disorders and facilitate personalized neuromodulation therapy.
Authors: Jerome A Yesavage; J Kaci Fairchild; Zhibao Mi; Kousick Biswas; Anne Davis-Karim; Ciaran S Phibbs; Steven D Forman; Michael Thase; Leanne M Williams; Amit Etkin; Ruth O'Hara; Gerald Georgette; Tamara Beale; Grant D Huang; Art Noda; Mark S George Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Robin F H Cash; Andrew Zalesky; Richard H Thomson; Ye Tian; Luca Cocchi; Paul B Fitzgerald Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2019-01-19 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Stephan F Taylor; S Shaun Ho; Tessa Abagis; Mike Angstadt; Daniel F Maixner; Robert C Welsh; Luis Hernandez-Garcia Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Carlos Gustavo Mansur; Martin Luiz Myczkowki; Sergio de Barros Cabral; Maria do Carmo Breda Sartorelli; Bianca Boura Bellini; Alvaro Machado Dias; Marcio Antonini Bernik; Marco Antonio Marcolin Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2011-04-18 Impact factor: 5.176
Authors: Kevin A Johnson; Mirza Baig; Dave Ramsey; Sarah H Lisanby; David Avery; William M McDonald; Xingbao Li; Elisabeth R Bernhardt; David R Haynor; Paul E Holtzheimer; Harold A Sackeim; Mark S George; Ziad Nahas Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: John P O'Reardon; H Brent Solvason; Philip G Janicak; Shirlene Sampson; Keith E Isenberg; Ziad Nahas; William M McDonald; David Avery; Paul B Fitzgerald; Colleen Loo; Mark A Demitrack; Mark S George; Harold A Sackeim Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2007-06-14 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Patricio Riva-Posse; Ki Sueng Choi; Paul E Holtzheimer; Cameron C McIntyre; Robert E Gross; Ashutosh Chaturvedi; Andrea L Crowell; Steven J Garlow; Justin K Rajendra; Helen S Mayberg Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Michael C Gold; Shiwen Yuan; Eric Tirrell; E Frances Kronenberg; Jee Won D Kang; Lauren Hindley; Mohamed Sherif; Joshua C Brown; Linda L Carpenter Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2022-01-17 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Evan H Einstein; Nicholas B Dadario; Hamza Khilji; Justin W Silverstein; Michael E Sughrue; Randy S D'Amico Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Michelle R Madore; Eugenia Poh; Samuel John Bollard; Jesus Rivera; Joy Taylor; Jauhtai Cheng; Eric Booth; Monica Nable; Alesha Heath; Jerry Yesavage; Jennifer Rodger; M Windy McNerney Journal: J Neurosci Methods Date: 2021-06-17 Impact factor: 2.987
Authors: Desmond J Oathes; Nicholas L Balderston; Konrad P Kording; Joseph A DeLuisi; Gianna M Perez; John D Medaglia; Yong Fan; Romain J Duprat; Theodore D Satterthwaite; Yvette I Sheline; Kristin A Linn Journal: Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci Date: 2021-01-19
Authors: Brian L Edlow; Leandro R D Sanz; Robert D Stevens; Olivia Gosseries; Len Polizzotto; Nader Pouratian; John D Rolston; Samuel B Snider; Aurore Thibaut Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 3.210