MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964175815 · doi:10.1002/hbm.24725

A multivariate neuroimaging biomarker of individual outcome to transcranial magnetic stimulation in depression

2019· article· en· W2964175815 on OpenAlexafffund
Robin Cash, Luca Cocchi, Rodney Anderson, Anton Rogachov, Aaron Kucyi, Alexander J. Barnett, Andrew Zalesky, Paul B. Fitzgerald

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCognitive Neuroscience SocietyMedical Research Council CanadaSociety for NeuroscienceBrainsWayCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMagVenture
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderDorsolateral prefrontal cortexNeuroimagingPsychologyTranscranial magnetic stimulationPrefrontal cortexFunctional magnetic resonance imagingDefault mode networkNeuroscienceAntidepressantMedicineStimulationHippocampusCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The neurobiology of major depressive disorder (MDD) remains incompletely understood, and many individuals fail to respond to standard treatments. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has emerged as a promising antidepressant therapy. However, the heterogeneity of response underscores a pressing need for biomarkers of treatment outcome. We acquired resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) data in 47 MDD individuals prior to 5-8 weeks of rTMS treatment targeted using the F3 beam approach and in 29 healthy comparison subjects. The caudate, prefrontal cortex, and thalamus showed significantly lower blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) signal power in MDD individuals at baseline. Critically, individuals who responded best to treatment were associated with lower pre-treatment BOLD power in these regions. Additionally, functional connectivity (FC) in the default mode and affective networks was associated with treatment response. We leveraged these findings to train support vector machines (SVMs) to predict individual treatment responses, based on learned patterns of baseline FC, BOLD signal power and clinical features. Treatment response (responder vs. nonresponder) was predicted with 85-95% accuracy. Reduction in symptoms was predicted to within a mean error of ±16% (r = .68, p < .001). These preliminary findings suggest that therapeutic outcome to DLPFC-rTMS could be predicted at a clinically meaningful level using only a small number of core neurobiological features of MDD, warranting prospective testing to ascertain generalizability. This provides a novel, transparent and physiologically plausible multivariate approach for classification of individual response to what has become the most commonly employed rTMS treatment worldwide. This study utilizes data from a larger clinical study (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: Investigating Predictors of Response to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Depression; ACTRN12610001071011; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=336262).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207