1 Hz rTMS of the right orbitofrontal cortex for major depression: Safety, tolerability and clinical outcomes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional rTMS in major depressive disorder (MDD) targets the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). However, many patients do not respond to DLPFC-rTMS. Recent evidence suggests that the right lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) plays a key role in 'non-reward' functions and shows hyperconnectivity in MDD. OFC-rTMS has been used successfully in obsessive-compulsive disorder, and achieved remission in an MDD case nonresponsive to DLPFC- and DMPFC-rTMS. Here, we assess the safety and tolerability of right OFC-rTMS, and examine the effectiveness of inhibitory right OFC-rTMS in MDD, particularly among patients with previous nonresponse to DMPFC-rTMS. We performed a chart review to retrieve data on clinical characteristics, stimulation parameters, adverse events, and clinical symptom outcomes for a series of 42 patients with medication-resistant and/or DMPFC-rTMS-nonresponsive MDD, who underwent 20-30 sessions of 1Hz right OFC-rTMS at a single Canadian clinic from 2015 to 2017. Over 882 sessions of treatment, there were no seizures, visual/ocular complications, or other serious or treatment-limiting adverse events. Pain ratings averaged 6-7/10 (10=maximum tolerable); no patient discontinued treatment prematurely due to pain. 15/42 patients (35.7%) achieved response (≥50% symptom reduction) and 10/42 (23.8%) achieved remission. Among the 30/42 patients who were previous nonresponders to DMPFC-rTMS, 9/30 (30.0%) achieved response and 7/30 (23.8%) achieved remission. Response distribution was sharply bimodal. 1Hz right OFC-rTMS appears safe and tolerable, and may achieve remission in MDD patients even when conventional rTMS has failed. Sham-controlled follow-up studies may be warranted.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it