Search

We compared 3 hypothetical trajectories of change in both general and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-specific anxiety during the first wave of the spread in the state of Israel: panic (very high anxiety, either from the outset or rapidly increasing), complacency (stable and low anxiety), and threat-sensitive (a moderate, linear increase compatible with the increase in threat). A representative sample of 1,018 Jewish-Israeli adults was recruited online. A baseline assessment commenced 2 days prior to the identification of the first case, followed by 6 weekly assessments. Latent mixture modeling analyses revealed the presence of 3 trajectories: 1) "threat-sensitivity" (29% and 66%, for general and virus-specific anxiety, respectively), 2) panic (12% and 25%), and 3) complacency (29% and 9%). For general anxiety only, a fourth class representing a stable mid-level anxiety was identified ("balanced": 30%). For general anxiety, women and the initially anxious—both generally and specifically from the spread of the virus—were more likely to belong to the panic class. Men and older participants were more likely to belong to the complacency class. Findings indicate a marked heterogeneity in anxiety responses to the first wave of the spread of COVID-19, including a large group evincing a "balanced" response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUNDMajor depressive disorder (MDD) can benefit from novel interventions and personalization. Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (Deep TMS) targeting the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) using the H1 coil was FDA cleared for treatment of MDD. However, recent preliminary data indicate that targeting the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) using the H7 coil might induce outcomes that are as good or even better. Here, we explored whether Deep TMS targeting the MPFC is noninferior to targeting the LPFC and whether electrophysiological or clinical markers for patient selection can be identified.METHODSThe present prospective, multicenter, randomized study enrolled 169 patients with MDD for whom antidepressants failed in the current episode. Patients were randomized to receive 24 Deep TMS sessions over 6 weeks, using either the H1 coil or the H7 coil. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline to week 6 in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores.RESULTSClinical efficacy and safety profiles were similar and not significantly different between groups, with response rates of 60.9% for the H1 coil and 64.2% for the H7 coil. Moreover, brain activity measured by EEG during the first treatment session correlated with clinical outcomes in a coil-specific manner, and a cluster of baseline clinical symptoms was found to potentially distinguish between patients who can benefit from each Deep TMS target.CONCLUSIONThis study provides a treatment option for MDD, using the H7 coil, and initial guidance to differentiate between patients likely to respond to LPFC versus MPFC stimulation targets, which require further validation studies.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT03012724.FUNDINGBrainsWay Ltd.