MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392551074 · doi:10.1038/s41380-024-02468-x

Comparative effectiveness research trial for antidepressant incomplete and non-responders with treatment resistant depression (ASCERTAIN-TRD) a randomized clinical trial

2024· article· en· W4392551074 on OpenAlexafffund
George I. Papakostas, Madhukar H. Trivedi, Richard C. Shelton, Dan V. Iosifescu, Michael E. Thase, Manish K. Jha, Sanjay J. Mathew, Charles DeBattista, Mehmet E. Dokucu, Olga Brawman‐Mintzer, Glenn W. Currier, W. Vaughn McCall, Mandana Modirrousta, Matthew Macaluso, Alexander Bystritsky, Fidel Vila‐Rodriguez, Erik Nelson, Albert Yeung, Anna Feeney, Leslie C. MacGregor, Thomas Carmody, Maurizio Fava

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of California, San DiegoNational Institutes of HealthH. Lundbeck A/SVistagen TherapeuticsCerecorMarinus PharmaceuticalsNeurocrine BiosciencesACADIA PharmaceuticalsCongressionally Directed Medical Research ProgramsIdorsia PharmaceuticalsArbor PharmaceuticalsWeston Brain InstituteMichael Smith Health Research BCUCB PharmaStanley Medical Research InstituteBioClinicaPfizerNorthwestern UniversityBiogenScience Foundation IrelandMassachusetts General HospitalSanofiFondation Brain CanadaVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteShireJanssen PharmaceuticalsBrainsWayEli Lilly and CompanyAllerganAstraZenecaNational Institute of Mental HealthAvanir PharmaceuticalsPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
KeywordsVenlafaxineAripiprazoleTranscranial magnetic stimulationAntidepressantRandomized controlled trialDepression (economics)PsychologyMajor depressive episodeVenlafaxine HydrochlorideMedicineTreatment-resistant depressionInternal medicineMoodPsychiatryStimulationSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Anxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Further research is needed to help improve both the standard of care and the outcome for patients with treatment-resistant depression. A particularly critical evidence gap exists with respect to whether pharmacological or non-pharmacological augmentation is superior to antidepressant switch, or vice-versa. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of augmentation with aripiprazole or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation versus switching to the antidepressant venlafaxine XR (or duloxetine for those not eligible to receive venlafaxine) for treatment-resistant depression. In this multi-site, 8-week, randomized, open-label study, 278 subjects (196 females and 82 males, mean age 45.6 years (SD 15.3)) with treatment-resistant depression were assigned in a 1:1:1 fashion to treatment with either of these three interventions; 235 subjects completed the study. 260 randomized subjects with at least one post-baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating (MADRS) assessment were included in the analysis. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (score change (standard error (se)) = -17.39 (1.3) (p = 0.015) but not aripiprazole augmentation (score change (se) = -14.9 (1.1) (p = 0.069) was superior to switch (score change (se) = -13.22 (1.1)) on the MADRS. Aripiprazole (mean change (se) = -37.79 (2.9) (p = 0.003) but not repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation (mean change (se) = -42.96 (3.6) (p = 0.031) was superior to switch (mean change (se) = -34.45 (3.0)) on the symptoms of depression questionnaire. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation was shown to be more effective than switching antidepressants in treatment-resistant depression on the study primary measure. In light of these findings, clinicians should consider repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation early-on for treatment-resistant depression.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02977299.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations51
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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