4.7 Article

Pre-treatment letter fluency performance predicts antidepressant response to transcranial direct current stimulation

期刊

JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
卷 203, 期 -, 页码 130-135

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.05.072

关键词

Transcranial direct current stimulation; Depression; Executive; Neurocognitive; Predictors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising new treatment for depression, however, clinical trials. to-date indicate variable efficacy, thereby raising the need to identify inter-individual predictors of response. In the current study we aimed to investigate pre-treatment neurocognitive performance as a predictor of antidepressant response to tDCS. Methods: Data was pooled from five clinical trials, including two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which investigated the antidepressant effects of anodal tDCS administered to the prefrontal cortex. Data from 57 patients were included in the analysis. Mood was assessed before and after an acute course of treatment using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. The following neurocognitive tests were administered prior to treatment: Simple and choice reaction time, the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), Rey Auditory Verbal Memory Task (RAVLT), Digit Span, and the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT). Results: Better pre-treatment letter fluency performance measured using the COWAT predicted antidepressant response to tDCS after controlling for confounds. Limitations: Small sample size and analysis included data from both RCTs and open label studies. Conclusion: Pre-treatment letter fluency performance, an ability subserved by the left prefrontal cortex, the primary site of stimulation, is a predictor of response for tDCS treatment for depression. This study highlights the importance of inter-individual neurobiological differences in mediating tDCS antidepressant effects. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据