When to hold and when to fold: Early prediction of nonresponse to transcranial magnetic stimulation in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Determining when to recommend a change in treatment regimen due to insufficient improvement is a common challenge in therapeutics. METHODS: In a sample of 7215 patients with major depressive disorder treated with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and with PHQ-9 scores before, during and after the course, 3 groups were identified based on number of acute course sessions: exactly 36 sessions (N = 3591), more than 36 sessions (N = 975), and less than 36 sessions (N = 2649). Two techniques were used to determine thresholds for percentage change in PHQ-9 scores at assessments after 10, 20, and 30 sessions that optimized prediction of endpoint response status: the Youden index and fixing the false positive rate at 10%. Positive and negative predictive values were calculated to assess the accuracy of identifying final nonresponders and responders, respectively. RESULTS: There was greater accuracy in predicting final response than nonresponse, especially in the groups that had at least 36 sessions. Substantial proportions of patients with low levels of early improvement were classified as responders at the end of treatment. LIMITATIONS: The findings should be validated with clinician ratings using a more comprehensive depression severity scale. CONCLUSIONS: Manifesting clinical improvement early in the TMS course is strongly predictive of final status as a responder, while lack of early improvement is a relatively poor indicator of final nonresponse status. The predictive value of lack of early symptomatic improvement is too low to make reliable recommendations regarding changes in treatment regimen.

Dosing transcranial magnetic stimulation in major depressive disorder: Relations between number of treatment sessions and effectiveness in a large patient registry.

BACKGROUND: The number of sessions in an acute TMS course for major depressive disorder (MDD) is greater than in the earlier randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes in groups that received differing numbers of TMS sessions. METHODS: From a registry sample (N = 13,732), data were extracted for 7215 patients treated for MDD with PHQ-9 assessments before and after their TMS course. Groups were defined by number of acute course treatment sessions: 1-19 (N = 658), 20-29 (N = 616), 30-35 (N = 1375), 36 (N = 3591), 37-41 (N = 626), or >41 (N = 349) and compared in clinical outcomes at endpoint and at fixed intervals (after 10, 20, 30, and 36 sessions). The impact of additional treatments beyond 36 sessions was also examined. RESULTS: Groups that received fewer than 30 sessions had inferior endpoint outcomes than all other groups. PHQ-9 symptom reduction was greatest in the group that ended treatment at 36 sessions. The extended treatment groups (>36 sessions) differed from all other groups by manifesting less antidepressant response early in the course and had a slower but steady rate of improvement over time. Extending treatment beyond 36 sessions was associated with further improvement without evidence of a plateau. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world practice, there are strong relations between the number of TMS sessions in a course and the magnitude of symptom reduction. Courses with less than 30 sessions are associated with diminished benefit. Patients with longer than standard courses typically show less initial improvement and a more gradual trajectory, but meaningful benefit accrues with treatment beyond 36 sessions.

The Anxiolytic and Antidepressant Effects of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Patients With Anxious Depression.

Objective: To determine the extent that treatment with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in diverse clinical settings has anxiolytic and antidepressant effects in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms and to contrast anxious and nonanxious depression subgroups in antidepressant effects.Methods: Within the NeuroStar Advanced Therapy System Clinical Outcomes Registry, 1,820 patients were identified with a diagnosis of MDD (using ICD-9, ICD-10, or DSM-IV) who completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Global Anxiety Disoder-7 scale (GAD-7) at baseline and following at least 1 TMS treatment between May 2016 and January 2021. Anxious depression was defined as a baseline GAD-7 score of 10 or greater (n = 1,514) and nonanxious depression by GAD-7 scores below this threshold (n = 306). Intent-to-treat and Completer samples were defined for patients treated with any TMS protocol and for the subgroup treated only with high-frequency left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex stimulation.Results: Patients with anxious depression showed clinically meaningful anxiolytic and antidepressant effects, averaging approximately 50% or greater reductions in both GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores following TMS in all samples. The anxious and nonanxious depression groups had equivalent absolute improvement in PHQ-9 scores (P values ≥ .29). However, the anxious group had higher scores both at baseline and following TMS resulting in significantly lower categorical rates of response (P values < .02) and remission (P values < .001) in depressive symptoms. Among those with anxious depression, the change in anxiety and depression symptoms strongly covaried (r1512 = 0.75, P < .001).Conclusions: Routine TMS delivered in diverse clinical settings results in marked anxiolytic and antidepressant effects in patients with anxious depression. The extent of improvement in anxiety and depression symptoms strongly covaries.

Comparison of clinical outcomes with left unilateral and sequential bilateral Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) treatment of major depressive disorder in a large patient registry.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that sequential bilateral (SBL) TMS, combining high frequency, left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) stimulation and low frequency, right DLPFC stimulation, is more effective than unilateral TMS. OBJECTIVE: To contrast treatment outcomes of left unilateral (LUL) and SBL protocols. METHODS: Registry data were collected at 111 practice sites. Of 10,099 patients, 3,871 comprised a modified intent-to-treat (mITT) sample, defined as a primary MDD diagnosis, age ≥18, and PHQ-9 completion before TMS and at least one PHQ-9 assessment after baseline. The mITT sample received high frequency (10 Hz) LUL TMS exclusively (N = 3,327) or SBL TMS in at least 90% of sessions (N = 544). Completers (N = 3,049) were responders or had received ≥20 sessions and had an end of acute treatment PHQ-9 assessment. To control for site effects, a Matched sample (N = 653) included Completers at sites that used both protocols. To control for selection bias, the SBL group was also compared to a Restricted LUL group, drawn from sites where no patient switched to SBL after substantial exposure to LUL TMS. Secondary analyses were conducted on CGI-S ratings. RESULTS: The LUL group had superior outcomes compared to the SBL group for multiple PHQ-9 and CGI-S continuous and categorical measures in the mITT, Completer and Matched samples, including in the specified primary analyses. However, outcome differences were not observed when comparing the Restricted LUL and SBL groups. Within SBL protocols, the LUL-RUL order had superior outcomes compared to the RUL-LUL order in all CGI-S, but not PHQ-9, measures. CONCLUSIONS: While limited by the naturalistic design, there was no evidence that SBL TMS was superior to LUL TMS. The sequential order of RUL TMS followed by LUL TMS may have reduced efficacy compared to LUL TMS followed by RUL TMS.

Comparison of clinical outcomes with two Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation treatment protocols for major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is an effective treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). The rest time between pulse trains is the inter-train interval (ITI). Since 2016, some TMS clinicians have adopted a stimulation protocol with shorter ITIs than were used in regulatory clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To contrast treatment outcomes with the Standard TMS protocol (38.5 min per session) and the "Dash" protocol, which, at the shortest ITI, has a session duration of 18.75 min. METHODS: Registry data were collected at 103 practice sites. Of 7759 participants, 5010 were included in an intent-to-treat (ITT) sample, defined as a primary MDD diagnosis, age ≥ 18, and completion of the PHQ-9 before TMS and with at least one PHQ-9 assessment after baseline. Completers (N = 3814) were responders or had received ≥ 20 sessions and had an end of acute treatment PHQ-9 assessment. Within the ITT sample, 613 patients were treated with the Standard NeuroStar 38-min protocol and 1493 patients with the new Dash protocol. CGI-S ratings were obtained in smaller samples. Treatment outcomes were also examined in subgroups considered Completers, as well as the subgroups who met criteria for Full Adherence to the Standard or Dash protocol parameters. RESULTS: In the ITT, Completer, and Fully Adherent samples, response (58-72%) and remission (28-53%) rates were notably high across PHQ-9 and CGI-S ratings. The Standard and Dash protocols did not differ in number of treatment sessions, and both manifested strong antidepressant effects. CONCLUSIONS: The Standard and Dash protocols did not meaningfully differ in efficacy.

Clinical outcomes in a large registry of patients with major depressive disorder treated with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) is an effective treatment for episodes of major depressive disorder (MDD). However, characterization of outcomes in routine clinical practice is needed, as well as identification of patient- and treatment-related outcome predictors. This study documented patient-rated (PHQ-9) and clinician-rated (CGI-S) clinical outcomes in the NeuroStar® Advanced Therapy System Clinical Outcomes Registry. METHODS: Registry data were collected at 103 practice sites. Of 7759 participants, 5010 patients were included in an intent-to-treat (ITT) sample, defined as a primary MDD diagnosis, age ≥ 18, and completion of the PHQ-9 before TMS and with at least one PHQ-9 assessment after baseline. Completers (N = 3,814) were responders or had received ≥ 20 sessions and had an end of acute treatment PHQ-9 assessment. CGI-S ratings were obtained in smaller samples. RESULTS: In the total ITT and Completer samples, response (58-83%) and remission (28-62%) rates were notably high across self-report and clinician-administered assessments. Female patients and those treated with a larger number of pulses per session had superior clinical outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Site participation in the registry was voluntary and treatment was open label. CONCLUSIONS: The extent of clinical benefit reported by patients and clinicians following TMS in routine practice compares favorably with alternative interventions for treatment-resistant depression. Strong efficacy and the low side effect and medical risk profile suggest that TMS be evaluated as a first-line treatment for MDD. The findings derive from the largest registry of clinical outcomes in MDD for any treatment.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation for major depressive disorder: a pragmatic approach to implementing TMS in a clinical practice.

Another option for managing major depressive disorder (MDD) became available in October 2008 with the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) market clearance of NeuroStar TMS (transcranial magnetic stimulation) Therapy System. A panel of psychiatrists who have been treating patients with NeuroStar TMS Therapy in their clinics assembled for a virtual roundtable discussion regarding their experiences. In this supplement, the panel addresses the following issues: the FDA-cleared indication for use of NeuroStar TMS Therapy; logistic and staffing considerations in the outpatient setting; selecting the right patient for TMS Therapy; talking with patients and family about TMS Therapy. To give the overview a meaningful context, each panelist shares a personal account of a patient case, describing the treatment course and outcomes achieved with TMS Therapy.