Cargando…

Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response

OBJECTIVES: Predictors for unfavorable treatment outcome in major depressive disorder (MDD) applicable for treatment selection are still lacking. The database of a longitudinal multicenter study on 1079 acutely depressed patients, performed by the German research network on depression (GRND), allows...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kautzky, Alexander, Möller, Hans‐Juergen, Dold, Markus, Bartova, Lucie, Seemüller, Florian, Laux, Gerd, Riedel, Michael, Gaebel, Wolfgang, Kasper, Siegfried
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7839691/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33141944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/acps.13250
_version_ 1783643433816031232
author Kautzky, Alexander
Möller, Hans‐Juergen
Dold, Markus
Bartova, Lucie
Seemüller, Florian
Laux, Gerd
Riedel, Michael
Gaebel, Wolfgang
Kasper, Siegfried
author_facet Kautzky, Alexander
Möller, Hans‐Juergen
Dold, Markus
Bartova, Lucie
Seemüller, Florian
Laux, Gerd
Riedel, Michael
Gaebel, Wolfgang
Kasper, Siegfried
author_sort Kautzky, Alexander
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Predictors for unfavorable treatment outcome in major depressive disorder (MDD) applicable for treatment selection are still lacking. The database of a longitudinal multicenter study on 1079 acutely depressed patients, performed by the German research network on depression (GRND), allows supervised and unsupervised learning to further elucidate the interplay of clinical and psycho‐sociodemographic variables and their predictive impact on treatment outcome phenotypes. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES: Treatment response was defined by a change of HAM‐D 17‐item baseline score ≥50% and remission by the established threshold of ≤7, respectively, after up to eight weeks of inpatient treatment. After hierarchical symptom clustering and stratification by treatment subtypes (serotonin reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, antipsychotic, and lithium augmentation), prediction models for different outcome phenotypes were computed with random forest in a cross‐center validation design. In total, 88 predictors were implemented. RESULTS: Clustering revealed four distinct HAM‐D subscores related to emotional, anxious, sleep, and appetite symptoms, respectively. After feature selection, classification models reached moderate to high accuracies up to 0.85. Highest accuracies were observed for the SSRI and TCA subgroups and for sleep and appetite symptoms, while anxious symptoms showed poor predictability. CONCLUSION: Our results support a decisive role for machine learning in the management of antidepressant treatment. Treatment‐ and symptom‐specific algorithms may increase accuracies by reducing heterogeneity. Especially, predictors related to duration of illness, baseline depression severity, anxiety and somatic symptoms, and personality traits moderate treatment success. However, prospectives application of machine learning models will be necessary to prove their value for the clinic.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7839691
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78396912021-02-02 Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response Kautzky, Alexander Möller, Hans‐Juergen Dold, Markus Bartova, Lucie Seemüller, Florian Laux, Gerd Riedel, Michael Gaebel, Wolfgang Kasper, Siegfried Acta Psychiatr Scand Original Articles OBJECTIVES: Predictors for unfavorable treatment outcome in major depressive disorder (MDD) applicable for treatment selection are still lacking. The database of a longitudinal multicenter study on 1079 acutely depressed patients, performed by the German research network on depression (GRND), allows supervised and unsupervised learning to further elucidate the interplay of clinical and psycho‐sociodemographic variables and their predictive impact on treatment outcome phenotypes. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES: Treatment response was defined by a change of HAM‐D 17‐item baseline score ≥50% and remission by the established threshold of ≤7, respectively, after up to eight weeks of inpatient treatment. After hierarchical symptom clustering and stratification by treatment subtypes (serotonin reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, antipsychotic, and lithium augmentation), prediction models for different outcome phenotypes were computed with random forest in a cross‐center validation design. In total, 88 predictors were implemented. RESULTS: Clustering revealed four distinct HAM‐D subscores related to emotional, anxious, sleep, and appetite symptoms, respectively. After feature selection, classification models reached moderate to high accuracies up to 0.85. Highest accuracies were observed for the SSRI and TCA subgroups and for sleep and appetite symptoms, while anxious symptoms showed poor predictability. CONCLUSION: Our results support a decisive role for machine learning in the management of antidepressant treatment. Treatment‐ and symptom‐specific algorithms may increase accuracies by reducing heterogeneity. Especially, predictors related to duration of illness, baseline depression severity, anxiety and somatic symptoms, and personality traits moderate treatment success. However, prospectives application of machine learning models will be necessary to prove their value for the clinic. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-11-27 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7839691/ /pubmed/33141944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/acps.13250 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kautzky, Alexander
Möller, Hans‐Juergen
Dold, Markus
Bartova, Lucie
Seemüller, Florian
Laux, Gerd
Riedel, Michael
Gaebel, Wolfgang
Kasper, Siegfried
Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
title Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
title_full Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
title_fullStr Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
title_full_unstemmed Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
title_short Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
title_sort combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7839691/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33141944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/acps.13250
work_keys_str_mv AT kautzkyalexander combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT mollerhansjuergen combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT doldmarkus combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT bartovalucie combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT seemullerflorian combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT lauxgerd combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT riedelmichael combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT gaebelwolfgang combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse
AT kaspersiegfried combiningmachinelearningalgorithmsforpredictionofantidepressanttreatmentresponse