Functional neuroimaging biomarkers of anhedonia response to escitalopram plus adjunct aripiprazole treatment for major depressive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Identifying neuroimaging biomarkers of antidepressant response may help guide treatment decisions and advance precision medicine. AIMS: To examine the relationship between anhedonia and functional neurocircuitry in key reward processing brain regions in people with major depressive disorder receiving aripiprazole adjunct therapy with escitalopram. METHOD: Data were collected as part of the CAN-BIND-1 study. Participants experiencing a current major depressive episode received escitalopram for 8 weeks; escitalopram non-responders received adjunct aripiprazole for an additional 8 weeks. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (on weeks 0 and 8) and clinical assessment of anhedonia (on weeks 0, 8 and 16) were completed. Seed-based correlational analysis was employed to examine the relationship between baseline resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC), using the nucleus accumbens (NAc) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) as key regions of interest, and change in anhedonia severity after adjunct aripiprazole. RESULTS: Anhedonia severity significantly improved after treatment with adjunct aripiprazole.There was a positive correlation between anhedonia improvement and rsFC between the ACC and posterior cingulate cortex, ACC and posterior praecuneus, and NAc and posterior praecuneus. There was a negative correlation between anhedonia improvement and rsFC between the ACC and anterior praecuneus and NAc and anterior praecuneus. CONCLUSIONS: Eight weeks of aripiprazole, adjunct to escitalopram, was associated with improved anhedonia symptoms. Changes in functional connectivity between key reward regions were associated with anhedonia improvement, suggesting aripiprazole may be an effective treatment for individuals experiencing reward-related deficits. Future studies are required to replicate our findings and explore their generalisability, using other agents with partial dopamine (D2) agonism and/or serotonin (5-HT2A) antagonism.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".