Minocycline as adjunctive treatment for treatment-resistant depression: study protocol for a double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial (MINDEP2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Available evidence suggests that adjunctive treatment with immunomodulatory medications may be effective in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). A pilot trial of the tetracycline minocycline as adjunctive treatment in treatment-resistant depression (TRD), produced promising results, however, a larger scale trial is needed to confirm the antidepressant actions of this drug. METHODS: This is a 12-week double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of minocycline as an add-on to standard antidepressants for adults (age > 18) with DSM-5 major depressive episode, who have failed to respond to at least two adequate trials of antidepressant treatment. It is a parallel-arm study with 50 participants in each group. The primary outcome measure is change in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HRSD-17) total scores from baseline to week 12. Secondary measures include the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, World Health Organization Quality of Life Short Version (WHOQOL-BREF) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7). Peripheral inflammatory biomarkers will be collected at baseline, week 6 and 12. DISCUSSION: If minocycline is well tolerated and effective in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with TRD, it would warrant genuine consideration as a treatment option for TRD. Additionally, if results demonstrate that minocycline has antidepressant properties, and that changes in inflammatory status are associated with its antidepressant action, it will inform the development of individualized treatment for a subset of patients with MDD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03947827. Registered 13th May, 2019.
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 | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.069 | 0.012 |
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".