Accelerated brain aging in major depressive disorder and antidepressant treatment response: A CAN-BIND report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Previous studies suggest that major depressive disorder (MDD) may be associated with volumetric indications of accelerated brain aging. This study investigated neuroanatomical signs of accelerated aging in MDD and evaluated whether a brain age gap is associated with antidepressant response. METHODS: Individuals in a major depressive episode received escitalopram treatment (10-20 mg/d) for 8 weeks. Depression severity was assessed at baseline and at weeks 8 and 16 using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Response to treatment was characterized by a significant reduction in the MADRS (≥50%). Nonresponders received adjunctive aripiprazole treatment (2-10 mg/d) for a further 8 weeks. The brain-predicted age difference (brain-PAD) at baseline was determined using machine learning methods trained on 3377 healthy individuals from seven publicly available datasets. The model used features from all brain regions extracted from structural magnetic resonance imaging data. RESULTS: Brain-PAD was significantly higher in older MDD participants compared to younger MDD participants [t(147.35) = -2.35, p < 0.03]. BMI was significantly associated with brain-PAD in the MDD group [r(155) = 0.19, p < 0.03]. Response to treatment was not significantly associated with brain-PAD. CONCLUSION: We found an elevated brain age gap in older individuals with MDD. Brain-PAD was not associated with overall treatment response to escitalopram monotherapy or escitalopram plus adjunctive aripiprazole.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".