Cargando…
Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases
OBJECTIVE: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinica...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32670098 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438 |
_version_ | 1783552271215230976 |
---|---|
author | Fornaro, Michele Fusco, Andrea Novello, Stefano Mosca, Pierluigi Anastasia, Annalisa De Blasio, Antonella Iasevoli, Felice de Bartolomeis, Andrea |
author_facet | Fornaro, Michele Fusco, Andrea Novello, Stefano Mosca, Pierluigi Anastasia, Annalisa De Blasio, Antonella Iasevoli, Felice de Bartolomeis, Andrea |
author_sort | Fornaro, Michele |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping of the depressive episodes, which represents the goal of the present study. METHODS: A hundred and thirty-one depressed outpatients underwent psychopathological evaluation using major rating tools, including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which served for subsequent principal component analysis, followed-up by cluster analysis, with the ultimate goal to fetch different clinical subtypes of depression. RESULTS: The cluster analysis identified two clinically interpretable, yet distinctive, groups among 53 bipolar (resistant cases = 15, or 28.3%) and 78 unipolar (resistant cases = 20, or 25.6%) patients. Among the MDD patients, cluster “1” included the following components: “Psychic symptoms, depressed mood, suicide, guilty, insomnia” and “genitourinary, gastrointestinal, weight loss, insight”. Altogether, with broadly defined “mixed features,” this latter cluster correctly predicted treatment outcome in 80.8% cases of MDD. The same “broadly-defined” mixed features of depression (namely, the standard Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition—DSM-5—specifier plus increased energy, psychomotor activity, irritability) correctly classified 71.7% of BD cases, either as TRBD or not. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and high rate of comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Although relying on different operational criteria and treatment history, TRD and TRBD seem to be consistently predicted by broadly defined mixed features among different clinical subtypes of depression, either unipolar or bipolar cases. If replicated by upcoming studies to encompass also biological and neuropsychological measures, the present study may aid in precision medicine and informed pharmacotherapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7326075 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73260752020-07-14 Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases Fornaro, Michele Fusco, Andrea Novello, Stefano Mosca, Pierluigi Anastasia, Annalisa De Blasio, Antonella Iasevoli, Felice de Bartolomeis, Andrea Front Psychiatry Psychiatry OBJECTIVE: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping of the depressive episodes, which represents the goal of the present study. METHODS: A hundred and thirty-one depressed outpatients underwent psychopathological evaluation using major rating tools, including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which served for subsequent principal component analysis, followed-up by cluster analysis, with the ultimate goal to fetch different clinical subtypes of depression. RESULTS: The cluster analysis identified two clinically interpretable, yet distinctive, groups among 53 bipolar (resistant cases = 15, or 28.3%) and 78 unipolar (resistant cases = 20, or 25.6%) patients. Among the MDD patients, cluster “1” included the following components: “Psychic symptoms, depressed mood, suicide, guilty, insomnia” and “genitourinary, gastrointestinal, weight loss, insight”. Altogether, with broadly defined “mixed features,” this latter cluster correctly predicted treatment outcome in 80.8% cases of MDD. The same “broadly-defined” mixed features of depression (namely, the standard Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition—DSM-5—specifier plus increased energy, psychomotor activity, irritability) correctly classified 71.7% of BD cases, either as TRBD or not. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and high rate of comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Although relying on different operational criteria and treatment history, TRD and TRBD seem to be consistently predicted by broadly defined mixed features among different clinical subtypes of depression, either unipolar or bipolar cases. If replicated by upcoming studies to encompass also biological and neuropsychological measures, the present study may aid in precision medicine and informed pharmacotherapy. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7326075/ /pubmed/32670098 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438 Text en Copyright © 2020 Fornaro, Fusco, Novello, Mosca, Anastasia, De Blasio, Iasevoli and de Bartolomeis http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychiatry Fornaro, Michele Fusco, Andrea Novello, Stefano Mosca, Pierluigi Anastasia, Annalisa De Blasio, Antonella Iasevoli, Felice de Bartolomeis, Andrea Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases |
title | Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases |
title_full | Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases |
title_fullStr | Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases |
title_full_unstemmed | Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases |
title_short | Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases |
title_sort | predictors of treatment resistance across different clinical subtypes of depression: comparison of unipolar vs. bipolar cases |
topic | Psychiatry |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32670098 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fornaromichele predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT fuscoandrea predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT novellostefano predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT moscapierluigi predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT anastasiaannalisa predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT deblasioantonella predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT iasevolifelice predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases AT debartolomeisandrea predictorsoftreatmentresistanceacrossdifferentclinicalsubtypesofdepressioncomparisonofunipolarvsbipolarcases |