Males and females differ in reported sexual functioning with escitalopram treatment for major depressive disorder: A CAN-BIND-1 study report.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressant use for major depressive disorder (MDD) is frequently associated with sexual dysfunction. AIMS: Cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between antidepressant treatment outcomes and sexual functioning (SF) were evaluated separately for males and females receiving escitalopram. We further assessed the association between pre- and posttreatment SF. METHODS: In all, 208 of the 211 CAN-BIND-1 trial participants (77 males and 131 females) with MDD and detectable drug blood levels were eligible for the analyses. All received escitalopram (10-20 mg) for 8 weeks. At baseline and Week 8, participants completed the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the SexFx scale, which measures sexual satisfaction and SF frequency. Mixed-model repeated measures assessed baseline to Week 8 SF changes among participants with different response/remission statuses. Multiple linear regression analyses examined SF differences between treatment outcomes at Week 8 as well as associations between pretreatment and eventual SF. RESULTS: For both sexes, overall sexual satisfaction improved among responders but not among nonresponders (p < 0.05). For females, overall SF frequency did not change significantly over time regardless of response status. For males, overall SF decreased significantly among nonresponders; orgasm decreased significantly among nonresponders and, to a lesser extent, among responders (p < 0.05). For both sexes, pretreatment SF was significantly associated with SF at Week 8 across all domains (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: For both sexes, sexual satisfaction improves with response to escitalopram. For females, the response does not correspond to improvements in SF frequency. For males, SF frequency, particularly that of orgasm, declines regardless of response/nonresponse.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01655706.

Pretreatment anxious depression as a predictor of side effect frequency and severity in escitalopram and aripiprazole adjunctive therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To report side effect frequency and severity in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) receiving escitalopram and aripiprazole adjunctive therapy and to examine whether pretreatment anxious depression is associated with the number and presence of specific side effects. METHODS: 188 of the 211 trial participants provided information on side effects during treatment with escitalopram (10-20 mg) for 8 weeks, and nonresponders received further augmentation on aripiprazole (2-10 mg) adjunctive therapy for another 8 weeks, whereas responders remained on escitalopram. Participants completed the Toronto Side Effects Scale at weeks 2, 4, 10, and 12. Covariate-adjusted negative binomial regression and Wilcoxon tests examined the association between anxious depression (GAD-7 ≥ 10) and number of side effects. Covariate-adjusted logistic regression and chi-square tests explored the association between anxious depression and specific side effects. RESULTS: For both therapies, the most frequent side effects were also the most severe. They mostly related to the central nervous system (CNS) (i.e., drowsiness and nervousness). Between baseline and week 2, the number of side effects participants experienced (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.38, p = .010) or had trouble with (IRR = 1.34, p = .026) was significantly higher among those with anxious depression for escitalopram but not adjunctive aripiprazole. Further, odds of experiencing and having trouble with nervousness and agitation were also significantly higher in anxious depression for escitalopram only (p < .05). CONCLUSION: Patients on escitalopram and aripiprazole adjunctive therapy may experience and have trouble with CNS side effects. Pretreatment anxious depression may predispose escitalopram recipients with MDD to developing side effects, especially those related to anxiety.

Neuromodulation for Pain: A Comprehensive Survey and Systematic Review of Clinical Trials and Connectomic Analysis of Brain Targets.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a debilitating condition that imposes a tremendous burden on health-care systems around the world. While frontline treatments for chronic pain involve pharmacological and psychological approaches, neuromodulation can be considered for treatment-resistant cases. Neuromodulatory approaches for pain are diverse in both modality and target and their mechanism of action is incompletely understood. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to (i) understand the current landscape of pain neuromodulation research through a comprehensive survey of past and current registered clinical trials (ii) investigate the network underpinnings of these neuromodulatory treatments by performing a connectomic mapping analysis of cortical and subcortical brain targets that have been stimulated for pain relief. METHODS: A search for clinical trials involving pain neuromodulation was conducted using 2 major trial databases (ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). Trials were categorized by variables and analyzed to gain an overview of the contemporary research landscape. Additionally, a connectomic mapping analysis was performed to investigate the network connectivity patterns of analgesic brain stimulation targets using a normative connectome based on a functional magnetic resonance imaging dataset. RESULTS: In total, 487 relevant clinical trials were identified. Noninvasive cortical stimulation and spinal cord stimulation trials represented 49.3 and 43.7% of this count, respectively, while deep brain stimulation trials accounted for <3%. The mapping analysis revealed that superficial target connectomics overlapped with deep target connectomics, suggesting a common pain network across the targets. CONCLUSIONS: Research for pain neuromodulation is a rapidly growing field. Our connectomic network analysis reinforced existing knowledge of the pain matrix, identifying both well-described hubs and more obscure structures. Further studies are needed to decode the circuits underlying pain relief and determine the most effective targets for neuromodulatory treatment.

Neuromodulatory treatments for psychiatric disease: A comprehensive survey of the clinical trial landscape.

BACKGROUND: Numerous neuromodulatory therapies are currently under investigation or in clinical use for the treatment of psychiatric conditions. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: We sought to catalogue past and present human research studies on psychiatric neuromodulation and identify relevant trends in this field. METHODS: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/) and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (https://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) were queried in March 2020 for trials assessing the outcome of neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders. Relevant trials were categorized by variables such as neuromodulation modality, country, brain target, publication status, design, and funding source. RESULTS: From 72,086 initial search results, 1252 unique trials were identified. The number of trials registered annually has consistently increased. Half of all trials were active and a quarter have translated to publications. The largest proportion of trials involved depression (45%), schizophrenia (18%), and substance use disorders (14%). Trials spanned 37 countries; China, the second largest contributor (13%) after the United States (28%), has increased its output substantially in recent years. Over 75% of trials involved non-convulsive non-invasive modalities (e.g., transcranial magnetic stimulation), while convulsive (e.g., electroconvulsive therapy) and invasive modalities (e.g., deep brain stimulation) were less represented. 72% of trials featured approved or cleared interventions. Characteristic inter-modality differences were observed with respect to enrollment size, trial design/phase, and funding. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex accounted for over half of focal neuromodulation trial targets. The proportion of trials examining biological correlates of neuromodulation has increased. CONCLUSION(S): These results provide a comprehensive overview of the state of psychiatric neuromodulation research, revealing the growing scope and internationalism of this field.

Potential optimization of focused ultrasound capsulotomy for obsessive compulsive disorder.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder is a debilitating and often refractory psychiatric disorder. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound is a novel, minimally invasive neuromodulatory technique that has shown promise in treating this condition. We investigated the relationship between lesion location and long-term outcome in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder treated with focused ultrasound to discern the optimal lesion location and elucidate the efficacious network underlying symptom alleviation. Postoperative images of 11 patients who underwent focused ultrasound capsulotomy were used to correlate lesion characteristics with symptom improvement at 1-year follow-up. Normative resting-state functional MRI and normative diffusion MRI-based tractography analyses were used to determine the networks associated with successful lesions. Patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder treated with inferior thalamic peduncle deep brain stimulation (n = 5) and lesions from the literature implicated in obsessive-compulsive disorder (n = 18) were used for external validation. Successful long-term relief of obsessive-compulsive disorder was associated with lesions that included a specific area in the dorsal anterior limb of the internal capsule. Normative resting-state functional MRI analysis showed that lesion engagement of areas 24 and 46 was significantly associated with clinical outcomes (R = 0.79, P = 0.004). The key role of areas 24 and 46 was confirmed by (i) normative diffusion MRI-based tractography analysis, showing that streamlines associated with better outcome projected to these areas; (ii) association of these areas with outcomes in patients receiving inferior thalamic peduncle deep brain stimulation (R = 0.83, P = 0.003); and (iii) the connectedness of these areas to obsessive-compulsive disorder-causing lesions, as identified using literature-based lesion network mapping. These results provide considerations for target improvement, outlining the specific area of the internal capsule critical for successful magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound outcome and demonstrating that discrete frontal areas are involved in symptom relief. This could help refine focused ultrasound treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder and provide a network-based rationale for potential alternative targets.