Alternative metrics for characterizing longer-term clinical outcomes in difficult-to-treat depression: II. Sensitivity to treatment effects

Author:

Aaronson Scott T1,Sackeim Harold A2ORCID,Jiang Mei3,Badejo Sarah4,Greco Teresa56,Bunker Mark T6,Conway Charles R7,Demyttenaere Koen8,Young Allan H910,McAllister-Williams R Hamish1112ORCID,Rush A John1314

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinical Research, Sheppard Pratt Health System, Baltimore, MD, USA

2. Departments of Psychiatry and Radiology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

3. LivaNova USA PLC, Minneapolis, MN, USA

4. LivaNova PLC, Milan, Italy

5. Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC, Milan, Italy

6. LivaNova USA PLC, Houston, TX, USA

7. Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA

8. Psychiatry, Leuven Brain Institute, University Psychiatric Center KU Leuven, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

9. Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK

10. National Mood Disorders Service, Bethlem Royal Hospital, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Beckenham, UK

11. Northern Centre for Mood Disorders, Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

12. Regional Affective Disorders Service, Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

13. Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore

14. Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

Abstract

Objective: Characteristics of difficult-to-treat depression (DTD), including infrequent symptom remission and poor durability of benefit, compel reconsideration of the outcome metrics historically used to gauge the effectiveness of antidepressant interventions. Methods: Self-report and clinician assessments of depression symptom severity were obtained regularly over a 2-year period in a difficult-to-treat depression registry sample receiving treatment as usual (TAU), with or without vagus nerve stimulation (VNS). Alternative outcome metrics for characterizing symptom change were compared in effect size and discriminating power in distinguishing the vagus nerve stimulation + treatment as usual and treatment as usual treatment groups. We expected metrics based on remission status to produce weaker between-group separation than those based on the classifications of partial response or response and metrics that integrate information over time to produce greater separation than those based on single endpoint assessment. Results: Metrics based on remission status had smaller effect size and poorer discrimination in separating the treatment groups than metrics based on partial response or response classifications. Metrics that integrated information over the 2-year observation period had stronger performance characteristics than those based on symptom scores at single endpoint assessment. For both the clinician-rated and self-report depression ratings, the metrics with the strongest performance characteristics were the median percentage change in symptom scores over the observation period and the proportion of the observation period in partial response or better. Conclusion: In difficult-to-treat depression, integrative symptom severity-based and time-based measures are sensitive and informative outcomes for assessing between-group treatment effects, while metrics based on remission status are not.

Funder

LivaNova PLC

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3