1343 – RTMS Of The Dorsomedial Prefrontal Cortex Achieves Robust And Durable Improvements In Refractory Obsessive-compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) often show minimal response to either pharmacotherapy or psychotherapy. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is being explored as a new treatment for OCD. rTMS targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has not shown robust efficacy; however, neuroimaging studies of OCD have shown more consistent volumetric grey matter reductions along the medial rather than the lateral prefrontal cortex, specifically in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC). rTMS targeting medial motor areas such as the supplementary motor area (SMA) and pre-SMA has shown some efficacy in OCD. However, the DMPFC proper, just anterior to the pre-SMA, has not previously been targeted. We have previously used a novel rTMS technique to target DMPFC with robust effects in refractory depression. Here we apply this technique in an open-label series of 10 consecutive patients with refractory OCD. Under MRI-guidance, patients received bilateral DMPFC-rTMS at 10 Hz, 120% resting motor threshold, 6000 pulses per day for 20 - 30 sessions over 4-6 weeks. Robust improvements were achieved, with YBOCS scores dropping by more than half in the large majority of cases and full remission achieved in several cases. Scores continued dropping after treatment in some cases, suggesting durable improvements in capacity to suppress intrusive thoughts and behaviours. Improvements were durable at 3-6 months. Pre- and post-treatment functional MRI revealed changes in resting-state connectivity to DMPFC following treatment. A sham-controlled trial may be warranted as a next step. If successful, DMPFC-rTMS may represent a new, effective therapeutic option in refractory OCD.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".