Article

Course of depressive symptoms over follow-up. Findings from the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program.

Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown University, Providence, RI 02906.
Archives of General Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 13.75). 11/1992; 49(10):782-7.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We studied the course of depressive symptoms during an 18-month naturalistic follow-up period for outpatients with Major Depressive Disorder treated in the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program. The treatment phase consisted of 16 weeks of randomly assigned treatment with the following: cognitive behavior therapy, interpersonal therapy, imipramine hydrochloride plus clinical management (CM), or placebo plus CM. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 6, 12, and 18 months after treatment. Of all patients entering treatment and having follow-up data, the percent who recovered (8 weeks of minimal or no symptoms following the end of treatment) and remained well during follow-up (no Major Depressive Disorder relapse) did not differ significantly among the four treatments: 30% (14/46) for those in the cognitive behavior therapy group, 26% (14/53) for those in the interpersonal therapy group, 19% (9/48) for those in the imipramine plus CM group, and 20% (10/51) for those in the placebo plus CM group. Among patients who had recovered, rates of Major Depressive Disorder relapse were 36% (8/22) for those in the cognitive behavior therapy group, 33% (7/21) for those in the interpersonal therapy group, 50% (9/18) for those in the imipramine plus CM group, and 33% (5/15) for those in the placebo plus CM group. The major finding of this study is that 16 weeks of these specific forms of treatment is insufficient for most patients to achieve full recovery and lasting remission. Future research should be directed at improving success rates of initial and maintenance treatments for depression.

2 Followers
 · 
69 Views
  • Source
    Psychosomatic Medicine 01/1999; 61(1):111. DOI:10.1097/00006842-199901000-00149 · 4.09 Impact Factor
  • 01/2012; 10(4):434-441. DOI:10.1176/appi.focus.10.4.434
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent studies have indicated the potential clinical use of near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) as a tool in assisting the diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD); however, it is still unclear whether NIRS signal changes during cognitive task are state- or trait-dependent, and whether NIRS could be a neural predictor of treatment response. Therefore, we conducted a longitudinal study to explore frontal haemodynamic changes following antidepressant treatment in medication-naïve MDD using 52-channel NIRS. This study included 25 medication-naïve individuals with MDD and 62 healthy controls (HC). We performed NIRS scans before and after antidepressant treatment and measured changes of [oxy-Hb] activation during a verbal fluency task (VFT) following treatment. Individuals with MDD showed significantly decreased [oxy-Hb] values during a VFT compared with HC in the bilateral frontal and temporal cortices at baseline. There were no [oxy-Hb] changes between pre- and post-antidepressant treatment time points in the MDD cohort despite significant improvement in depressive symptoms. There was a significant association between mean [oxy-Hb] values during a VFT at baseline and improvement in depressive symptoms following treatment in the bilateral inferior frontal and middle temporal gyri in MDD. These findings suggest that hypofrontality response to a VFT may represent a potential trait marker for depression rather than a state marker. Moreover, the correlation analysis indicates that the NIRS signals before the initiation of treatment may be a biological marker to predict patient's clinical response to antidepressant treatment. The present study provides further evidence to support a potential application of NIRS for the diagnosis and treatment of depression.
    PLoS ONE 03/2015; 10(3):e0120828. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0120828 · 3.53 Impact Factor