Treatment-resistant OCD: Pharmacotherapies in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) medications are well established as first-line pharmacotherapeutic treatment for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). However, despite the excellent safety profile and demonstrated efficacy of these medications, a substantial proportion of individuals with OCD fail to attain sufficient benefit from SRIs. In this narrative review, we discuss clinical features of OCD that have been associated with poorer response to SRIs, and we present pharmacotherapeutic interventions that have been explored as augmenting or alternative treatments for treatment-resistant OCD. We additionally highlight non-SRI interventions for OCD that are currently under investigation. Pharmacotherapeutic interventions were identified via expert consensus. To assess the evidence base for individual pharmacotherapies, targeted searches for relevant English-language publications were performed on standard biomedical research databases, including MEDLINE. Information relevant to ongoing registered clinical trials in OCD was obtained by search of ClinicalTrials.gov. Pharmacotherapies are grouped for review in accordance with the general principles of Neuroscience-based Nomenclature (NbN). Clinical features of OCD that may suggest poorer response to SRI treatment include early age of onset, severity of illness, duration of untreated illness, and the presence of symmetry/ordering or hoarding-related symptoms. Based on evolving pathophysiologic models of OCD, diverse agents engaging serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, glutamate, and anti-inflammatory pathways have been explored as alternative or adjunctive therapies for treatment-resistant OCD and have at least preliminary evidence of efficacy. Medications with dopamine antagonist activity remain the most robustly evidence-based of augmenting interventions, yet dopamine antagonists benefit only a minority of those who try them and carry elevated risks of adverse effects. Interventions targeting glutamatergic and anti-inflammatory pathways are less well evidenced, but may offer more favorable benefit to risk profiles. Ongoing research should explore whether specific interventions may benefit individuals with particular features of treatment-resistant OCD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".