Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39473014›Full record

ArticleBioelectronic medicine2024

Machine learning-optimized non-invasive brain stimulation and treatment response classification for major depression.

Alejandro Albizu, Aprinda Indahlastari, Paulo Suen, Ziqian Huang, Jori L Waner, Skylar E Stolte, Ruogu Fang, Andre R Brunoni, Adam J Woods

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioelectronic medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01894815 (Escitalopram and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Major Depressive Disorder), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01894815 phase3completednot on this map

Escitalopram and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Major Depressive Disorder: a Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomized, Non-inferiority Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Sao PauloRan2013 to 2016Enrolled245ConditionsMajor Depressive Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Unspecified, Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode, UnspecifiedArmsEscitalopram oxalate, transcranial direct current stimulation, Sham tDCS + Placebo Pill
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Alejandro AlbizuCenter for Cognitive Aging and Memory, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Aprinda IndahlastariCenter for Cognitive Aging and Memory, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Paulo SuenFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.
Ziqian HuangDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Herbert Wertheim College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Jori L WanerCenter for Cognitive Aging and Memory, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Skylar E StolteJ. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, Herbert Wertheim College of Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Ruogu FangCenter for Cognitive Aging and Memory, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Andre R BrunoniFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.
Adam J WoodsCenter for Cognitive Aging and Memory, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. adam.woods@utdallas.edu.

Funding

Mechanisms, response heterogeneity and dosing from MRI-derived electric field models in tDCS augmented cognitive training: a secondary data analysis of the ACT studyRF1AG071469 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI FANG, RUOGU, WOODS, ADAM J. · 2021 to 2021
$2.2M
Directorate for STEM Education 1842173Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia 2012/20911-5NIA NIH HHS RF1 AG071469NIA NIH HHS RF1AG071469
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation intervention that shows promise as a potential treatment for depression. However, the clinical efficacy of tDCS varies, possibly due to individual differences in head anatomy affecting tDCS dosage. While functional changes in brain activity are more commonly reported in major depressive disorder (MDD), some studies suggest that subtle macroscopic structural differences, such as cortical thickness or brain volume reductions, may occur in MDD and could influence tDCS electric field (E-field) distributions. Therefore, accounting for individual anatomical differences may provide a pathway to optimize functional gains in MDD by formulating personalized tDCS dosage.

methodsTo address the dosing variability of tDCS, we examined a subsample of sixteen active-tDCS participants' data from the larger ELECT clinical trial (NCT01894815). With this dataset, individualized neuroimaging-derived computational models of tDCS current were generated for (1) classifying treatment response, (2) elucidating essential stimulation features associated with treatment response, and (3) computing a personalized dose of tDCS to maximize the likelihood of treatment response in MDD.

resultsIn the ELECT trial, tDCS was superior to placebo (3.2 points [95% CI, 0.7 to 5.5; P = 0.01]). Our algorithm achieved over 90% overall accuracy in classifying treatment responders from the active-tDCS group (AUC = 0.90, F1 = 0.92, MCC = 0.79). Computed precision doses also achieved an average response likelihood of 99.981% and decreased dosing variability by 91.9%.

conclusionThese findings support our previously developed precision-dosing method for a new application in psychiatry by optimizing the statistical likelihood of tDCS treatment response in MDD.

Identifiers

PMID39473014
PMCPMC11524011

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.