MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of Adjunctive <scp>D</scp>-Cycloserine to Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder

2022· article· en· W4304694995 on OpenAlexaff
Jaeden Cole, Maya N. Sohn, Ashley D. Harris, Signe Bray, Scott B. Patten, Alexander McGirr

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderTranscranial magnetic stimulationPsychologyPlaceboInternal medicineClinical Global ImpressionDepression (economics)Major depressive episodePsychiatryMedicineStimulationMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The antidepressant effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols for major depressive disorder (MDD) are thought to depend on synaptic plasticity. The theta-burst stimulation (TBS) protocol synaptic plasticity is known to be N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)-receptor dependent, yet it is unknown whether enhancing NMDA-receptor signaling improves treatment outcomes in MDD. Objective: To test whether low doses of the NMDA-receptor partial-agonist, D-cycloserine, would enhance intermittent TBS (iTBS) treatment outcomes in MDD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-site 4-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted from November 6, 2019, to December 24, 2020, including 50 participants with MDD. Participants were recruited via advertisements and referral. Inclusion criteria were as follows: age 18 to 65 years with a primary diagnosis of MDD, a major depressive episode with score of 18 or more on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, a Young Mania Rating Scale score of 8 or less, and normal blood work (including complete blood cell count, electrolytes, liver function tests, and creatinine level). Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to either iTBS plus placebo or iTBS plus D-cycloserine (100 mg) for the first 2 weeks followed by iTBS without an adjunct for weeks 3 and 4. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in depressive symptoms as measured by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) at the conclusion of treatment. Secondary outcomes included clinical response, clinical remission, and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scores. Results: A total of 50 participants (mean [SD] age, 40.8 [13.4] years; 31 female [62%]) were randomly assigned to treatment groups: iTBS plus placebo (mean [SD] baseline score, 30.3 [4.2]) and iTBS plus D-cycloserine (mean [SD] baseline score, 30.4 [4.5]). The iTBS plus D-cycloserine group had greater improvements in MADRS scores compared with the iTBS plus placebo group (mean difference, -6.15; 95% CI, -2.43 to -9.88; Hedges g = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.34-1.62). Rates of clinical response were higher in the iTBS plus D-cycloserine group than in the iTBS plus placebo group (73.9% vs 29.3%), as were rates of clinical remission (39.1% vs 4.2%). This was reflected in lower CGI-severity ratings and greater CGI-improvement ratings. No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings from this clinical trial indicate that adjunctive D-cycloserine may be a promising strategy for enhancing transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment outcomes in MDD using iTBS requiring further investigation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03937596.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations88
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA PsychiatrySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207