MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388365897 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-45107-1

Baseline markers of cortical excitation and inhibition predict response to theta burst stimulation treatment for youth depression

2023· article· en· W4388365897 on OpenAlexafffund
Prabhjot Dhami, Sylvain Moreno, Paul E. Croarkin, Daniel M. Blumberger, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Faranak Farzan

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBC Innovation CouncilCanada Research ChairsSimon Fraser UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthMichael Smith Health Research BCNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation Brain CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health FoundationWeston Brain InstituteCampbell Institute
KeywordsDorsolateral prefrontal cortexTranscranial magnetic stimulationMajor depressive disorderMedicineStimulationPsychologyNeuroscienceClinical trialBiomarkerDepression (economics)Internal medicineAudiologyPrefrontal cortexCognitionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theta burst stimulation (TBS), a specific form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), is a promising treatment for youth with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) who do not respond to conventional therapies. However, given the variable response to TBS, a greater understanding of how baseline features relate to clinical response is needed to identify which patients are most likely to benefit from this treatment. In the current study, we sought to determine if baseline neurophysiology, specifically cortical excitation and/or inhibition, is associated with antidepressant response to TBS. In two independent open-label clinical trials, youth (aged 16-24 years old) with MDD underwent bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) TBS treatment. Clinical trial one and two consisted of 10 and 20 daily sessions of bilateral DLPFC TBS, respectively. At baseline, single-pulse TMS combined with electroencephalography was used to assess the neurophysiology of 4 cortical sites: bilateral DLPFC and inferior parietal lobule. Measures of cortical excitation and inhibition were indexed by TMS-evoked potentials (i.e., P30, N45, P60, N100, and P200). Depression severity was measured before, during and after treatment completion using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17. In both clinical trials, the baseline left DLPFC N45 and P60, which are believed to reflect inhibitory and excitatory mechanisms respectively, were predictors of clinical response. Specifically, greater (i.e., more negative) N45 and smaller P60 baseline values were associated with greater treatment response to TBS. Accordingly, cortical excitation and inhibition circuitry of the left DLPFC may have value as a TBS treatment response biomarker for youth with MDD.Clinical trial 1 registration number: NCT02472470 (June 15, 2015).Clinical trial 2 registration number: NCT03708172 (October 17, 2018).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207