REDEFINING RECOVERY: EXPLORING ANTIDEPRESSANT EFFECTS AND COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT IN TREATMENT RESISTANT DEPRESSION WITH REPETITIVE TRANSCRANIAL MAGNETIC STIMULATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cognitive dysfunction is a key pathological feature of treatment resistant major depression (TRD) that is often overlooked (1). Persistent deficits in cognition are common and serve as a mediator of psychosocial and functional outcomes. Such deficits are associated with reduced quality of life and increased likelihood of relapsing (2). Subtle cognitive deficits in depressed patients may also evade detection by traditional screening tools. Unfortunately, despite much advancement in treatment options, a significant proportion of patients who achieve symptomatic improvement in mood symptoms do not return to premorbid functioning. More recently, studies have reported promise of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) related improvements across multiple cognitive domains however whether this translates to improved functional outcomes is unknown (3). It is also unknown whether the presence of cognitive complaints impacts the antidepressant effects of rTMS. Aims & Objectives Investigate how subjective cognitive complaints impact the antidepressant response to rTMS and its relation to residual self-perceived disability, functional impairment, and quality of life. Method Naturalistic study of 457 adults with treatment resistant depression treated with high-frequency rTMS to the left DLPFC at a tertiary academic centre. rTMS treatment was provided 5 days per week for 4-6 weeks at 120% of motor threshold. Participants completed baseline measures of depression severity, perceived cognitive impairment, perceived disability, and quality of life. Measures were repeated at weeks 2, 4 and 6. Binomial logistic regression, linear regression and paired T-tests were then subsequently used for analysis. Results We observed robust antidepressant effects of rTMS with statistically significant improvements in depression severity (p<0.001), reported disability (p<0.001) and quality of life (p<0.001) following 4-6 weeks of treatment. However, there was no significant improvement in degree of subjective memory impairment but there was improvement in self-reported attentional capacity (p<0.001). Compared to those reporting minimum to mild memory impairment at baseline, those reporting moderate to severe memory impairment at baseline are less likely to achieve remission of their depressive symptoms with rTMS (20.3% vs. 42.6%). Subjective memory impairment at baseline was found to be a statistically significant independent predictor of remission following rTMS (p = 0.031, Beta = - 0.95), after controlling for age, biological sex, medical comorbidity burden, and baseline depression severity. Furthermore, residual subjective memory impairment following 4-6 weeks of rTMS was an independent predictor of disability (as measured by the WHODAS) above and beyond residual depressive symptoms (p<0.001, Beta = 0.537). Discussion & Conclusion Robust antidepressant effects are observed in response to rTMS in adults with TRD, however we observed no significant improvement in subjective memory impairment. Subjective memory impairment at baseline independently predicts poorer remission outcomes following rTMS, confirmed by logistic regression, and residual subjective memory impairment predicts perceived disability. Further research is needed to characterize the neurobiology of subjective memory impairment in order to inform future treatment protocols to optimize clinical and functional outcomes in this population. References 1. Zuckerman, H., Pan, Z., Park, C., Brietzke, E., Musial, N., Shariq, A. S., Iacobucci, M., Yim, S. J., Lui, L. M. W., Rong, C. and McIntyre, R. S. (2018) 'Recognition and Treatment of Cognitive Dysfunction in Major Depressive Disorder', Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9. 2. Lam, R. W., Kennedy, S. H., McIntyre, R. S. and Khullar, A. (2014) 'Cognitive dysfunction in major depressive disorder: effects on psychosocial functioning and implications for treatment', Canadian journal of psychiatry, 59(12), pp. 649-654. 3. Hammar, Å., Ronold, E. H. and Rekkedal, G. Å. (2022) 'Cognitive Impairment and Neurocognitive Profiles in Major Depression— A Clinical Perspective', Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".