EPA-0491 – Glutamate alterations associated with transcranial magnetic stimulation in youth depression: a case series ‘ptsd and the phantom of the opera’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesized an increase in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) glutamate levels would occur after three weeks of repetitve transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) treatment and a decrease in major depressive disorder (MDD) symptoms. We report six cases (four females) 15–21 years of age with treatment-resistant MDD. Participants had a mean age of 18.7 years and a mean IQ of 102.3. Short echo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (H-MRS) was used to quantify glutamate levels in the left DLPFC (4.5cc) before and after rTMS treatment. rTMS was localized to the left DLPFC and applied for 15 consecutive weekdays. Treatment response was defined as a greater than 50% reduction in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores (Ham-D).1H-MRS data was analyzed with LCModel to determine glutamate concentration. Following rTMS, treatment responders (N=4) showed an increase (relative to baseline) in left DLPFC glutamate levels (11%), which corresponded to an improvement in depressive symptom severity (68% Ham-D score reduction). Treatment non-responders (N=2) had elevated baseline glutamate levels compared to responders in that same region, which decreased with rTMS (−10%). Procedures were generally well tolerated with no adverse events. rTMS is feasible and possibly efficacious in adolescents with MDD. In responders, rTMS may act by Induced elevations in elevating DFPLC glutamate levels in the left DLPFC, thereby leading to symptom improvement. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Adolescent Depression (TMSAD)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".