Differential effects of serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants on brain activity during a cognitive control task and neurofunctional prediction of treatment outcome in patients with depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We investigated the differential effects of serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants on brain activation in patients with major depressive disorder during a Stroop task. We predicted that pretreatment hyperactivity in the rostral anterior cingulate cortex would predict better treatment outcomes. METHODS: In total, 20 patients underwent naturalistic open-label clinical treatment with citalopram (n = 12) or reboxetine (n = 8). We performed functional magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: There were no significant group differences in clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes or baseline fMRI activations. The group by time interaction revealed significant voxels in the right amygdala-hippocampus complex (p < 0.05, family-wise error corrected by use of the bilateral amygdala and hippocampus mask image as a small volume), indicating a posttreatment blood oxygen level- dependent signal decrease in the citalopram group. Pretreatment hyperactivity in the rostral anterior cingulate cortex was not related to symptom improvement. LIMITATIONS: Our study was a nonrandomized clinical trial. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that serotonergic and noradrenergic antidepressants have a differential effect on brain activity, especially in the amygdala and hippocampus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".