Search

Since the introduction of the first antidepressant in the 1950s, biological treatments for unipolar depressive disorders have largely focused on altering monoaminergic neurotransmission, with varying degrees of success. In the [...]

ObjectiveDespite advances in the treatment of psychiatric diseases, currently available therapies do not provide sufficient and durable relief for as many as 30-40% of patients. Neuromodulation, including deep brain stimulation (DBS), has emerged as a potential therapy for persistent disabling disease, however it has not yet gained widespread adoption. In 2016, the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery (ASSFN) convened a meeting with leaders in the field to discuss a roadmap for the path forward. A follow-up meeting in 2022 aimed to review the current state of the field and to identify critical barriers and milestones for progress.DesignThe ASSFN convened a meeting on June 3, 2022 in Atlanta, Georgia and included leaders from the fields of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry along with colleagues from industry, government, ethics, and law. The goal was to review the current state of the field, assess for advances or setbacks in the interim six years, and suggest a future path forward. The participants focused on five areas of interest: interdisciplinary engagement, regulatory pathways and trial design, disease biomarkers, ethics of psychiatric surgery, and resource allocation/prioritization. The proceedings are summarized here.ConclusionThe field of surgical psychiatry has made significant progress since our last expert meeting. Although weakness and threats to the development of novel surgical therapies exist, the identified strengths and opportunities promise to move the field through methodically rigorous and biologically-based approaches. The experts agree that ethics, law, patient engagement, and multidisciplinary teams will be critical to any potential growth in this area.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to catalog and evaluate response biomarkers correlated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms to improve clinical trials.MethodsA systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted in April 2020. Seven criteria were applied to focus on original research that includes quantifiable response biomarkers measured alongside ASD symptoms. Interventional studies or human studies that assessed the correlation between biomarkers and ASD-related behavioral measures were included.ResultsA total of 5,799 independent records yielded 280 articles for review that reported on 940 biomarkers, 755 of which were unique to a single publication. Molecular biomarkers were the most frequently assayed, including cytokines, growth factors, measures of oxidative stress, neurotransmitters, and hormones, followed by neurophysiology (e.g., EEG and eye tracking), neuroimaging (e.g., functional MRI), and other physiological measures. Studies were highly heterogeneous, including in phenotypes, demographic characteristics, tissues assayed, and methods for biomarker detection. With a median total sample size of 64, almost all of the reviewed studies were only powered to identify biomarkers with large effect sizes. Reporting of individual-level values and summary statistics was inconsistent, hampering mega- and meta-analysis. Biomarkers assayed in multiple studies yielded mostly inconsistent results, revealing a "replication crisis."ConclusionsThere is currently no response biomarker with sufficient evidence to inform ASD clinical trials. This review highlights methodological imperatives for ASD biomarker research necessary to make definitive progress: consistent experimental design, correction for multiple comparisons, formal replication, sharing of sample-level data, and preregistration of study designs. Systematic "big data" analyses of multiple potential biomarkers could accelerate discovery.

DBS Think Tank IX was held on August 25-27, 2021 in Orlando FL with US based participants largely in person and overseas participants joining by video conferencing technology. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging deep brain stimulation (DBS) technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank IX speakers was that DBS expanded in its scope and has been applied to multiple brain disorders in an effort to modulate neural circuitry. After collectively sharing our experiences, it was estimated that globally more than 230,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. As such, this year's meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, neuroethics, interventional psychiatry, adaptive DBS, neuromodulation for pain, network neuromodulation for epilepsy and neuromodulation for traumatic brain injury.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), a leading cause of disability, affects ~1-2% of the population, and can be distressing and disabling. About 1/3 of individuals demonstrate poor responsiveness to conventional treatments. A small proportion of these individuals may be deep brain stimulation (DBS) candidates. Candidacy is assessed through a multidisciplinary process including assessment of illness severity, chronicity, and functional impact. Optimization failure, despite multiple treatments, is critical during screening. Few patients nationwide are eligible for OCD DBS and thus a multi-center approach was necessary to obtain adequate sample size. The study was conducted over a six-year period and was a NIH-funded, eight-center sham-controlled trial of DBS targeting the ventral capsule/ventral striatum (VC/VS) region. There were 269 individuals who initially contacted the sites, in order to achieve 27 participants enrolled. Study enrollment required extensive review for eligibility, which was overseen by an independent advisory board. Disabling OCD had to be persistent for ≥5 years despite exhaustive medication and behavioral treatment. The final cohort was derived from a detailed consent process that included consent monitoring. Mean illness duration was 27.2 years. OCD symptom subtypes and psychiatric comorbidities varied, but all had severe disability with impaired quality of life and functioning. Participants were randomized to receive sham or active DBS for three months. Following this period, all participants received active DBS. Treatment assignment was masked to participants and raters and assessments were blinded. The final sample was consistent in demographic characteristics and clinical features when compared to other contemporary published prospective studies of OCD DBS. We report the clinical trial design, methods, and general demographics of this OCD DBS sample.

BackgroundSocial media holds exciting promise for advancing mental health research recruitment, however, the extent and efficacy to which these platforms are currently in use are underexplored.ObjectiveA systematic review was conducted to characterize the current use and efficacy of social media in recruiting participants for mental health research.MethodA literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychINFO. Only non-duplicative manuscripts written in the English language and published between 1/1/2004-3/31/2019 were selected for further screening. Data extracted included study type and design, participant inclusion criteria, social media platform, advertising strategy, final recruited sample size, recruitment location, year, monetary incentives, comparison to other recruitment methods if performed, and final cost per participant.ResultsA total of 176 unique studies that used social media for mental health research recruitment were reviewed. The majority of studies were cross-sectional (62.5%) in design and recruited adults. Facebook was overwhelmingly the recruitment platform of choice (92.6%), with the use of paid advertisements being the predominant strategy (60.8%). Of the reviewed studies, substance abuse (43.8%) and mood disorders (15.3%) were the primary subjects of investigation. In 68.3% of studies, social media recruitment performed as well as or better than traditional recruitment methods in the number and cost of final enrolled participants. The majority of studies used Facebook for recruitment at a median cost per final recruited study participant of $19.47. In 55.6% of the studies, social media recruitment was the more cost-effective recruitment method when compared to traditional methods (e.g., referrals, mailing).ConclusionSocial media appears to be an effective and economical recruitment tool for mental health research. The platform raises methodological and privacy concerns not covered in current research regulations that warrant additional consideration.

MDMA (i.e., 3,4-methylenedixoymethamphetamine), commonly known as "Ecstasy" or "Molly," has been used since the 1970s both in recreational and therapeutic settings. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) designated MDMA-Assisted Therapy (MDMA-AT) as a Breakthrough Therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in 2017, and the FDA is requiring an additional phase 3 trial after rejecting the initial New Drug Application in 2024. Unlike other psychedelics, MDMA uniquely induces prosocial subjective effects of heightened trust and self-compassion while maintaining ego functioning as well as cognitive and perceptual lucidity. While recreational use in nonmedical settings may still cause harm, especially due to adulterants or when used without proper precautions, conclusions that can be drawn from studies of recreational use are limited by many confounds. This especially limits the extent to which evidence related to recreational use can be extrapolated to therapeutic use. A considerable body of preliminary evidence suggests that MDMA-AT delivered in a controlled clinical setting is a safe and efficacious treatment for PTSD. After a course of MDMA-AT involving three MDMA administrations supported by psychotherapy, 67%–71% of individuals with PTSD no longer meet diagnostic criteria after MDMA-AT versus 32%–48% with placebo-assisted therapy, and effects endure at long-term follow-up. This review primarily aims to distinguish evidence of recreational use in nonclinical settings versus MDMA-AT using pharmaceutical-grade MDMA in controlled clinical settings. This review further describes the putative neurobiological mechanisms of MDMA underlying its therapeutic effects, the clinical evidence of MDMA-AT, considerations at the level of public health and policy, and future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The authors critically examine the evidence base for psilocybin administered with psychological support/therapy (PST) in the treatment of psychiatric disorders and offer practical recommendations to guide future research endeavors. Methods: PubMed was searched for English-language articles from January 1998 to November 2023, using the search term "psilocybin." A total of 1,449 articles were identified and screened through titles and abstracts. Of these, 21 unique open-label or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified that examine psilocybin for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders (N=2), anxiety/depression associated with a cancer diagnosis (N=5), major depressive disorder (MDD; N=8), substance use disorders (N=4), anorexia (N=1), and demoralization (i.e., hopelessness, helplessness, and poor coping) in AIDS survivors (N=1). Results: The most developed evidence base is for the treatment of MDD (three double-blind RCTs with positive signals spanning a range of severities). However, the evidence is tempered by threats to internal and external validity, including unsuccessful blinding, small samples, large variability in dosing and PST procedures, limited sample diversity, and possibly large expectancy effects. Knowledge of mechanisms of action and predictors of response is currently limited. Conclusions: The evidence is currently insufficient to recommend psilocybin with PST as a psychiatric treatment. Additional rigorously designed clinical trials are needed to definitively establish efficacy in larger and more diverse samples, address dosing considerations, improve blinding, and provide information on mechanisms of action and moderators of clinical response. Head-to-head comparisons with other evidence-based treatments will better inform the potential future role of psilocybin with PST in the treatment of major psychiatric disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brain disorders, in particular mental disorders, might be effectively treated by direct electrical brain stimulation, but clinical progress requires understanding of therapeutic mechanisms. Animal models have not helped, because there are no direct animal models of mental illness. Here, we propose a potential path past this roadblock, by leveraging a common ingredient of most mental disorders: impaired cognitive control. We previously showed that deep brain stimulation (DBS) improves cognitive control in humans. We now reverse translate that result using a set-shifting task in rats. DBS-like stimulation of the midstriatum improved reaction times without affecting accuracy, mirroring our human findings. Impulsivity, motivation, locomotor, and learning effects were ruled out through companion tasks and model-based analyses. To identify the specific cognitive processes affected, we applied reinforcement learning drift-diffusion modeling. This approach revealed that DBS-like stimulation enhanced evidence accumulation rates and lowered decision thresholds, improving domain-general cognitive control. Reanalysis of prior human data showed that the same mechanism applies in humans. This reverse/forward translational model could have near-term implications for clinical DBS practice and future trial design. Editor's summary: Because of the complexity of cognitive processes involved in mental disorders, it has proven difficult to test therapeutic strategies in animal models. Here, Reimer et al. used a reverse translational approach to understand how deep brain stimulation (DBS) improves cognitive control, a process impaired in many mental disorders. A combination of learning tasks and computational models showed that striatal stimulation improved information processing needed for decision making in rats. Complementary computational models applied to previously collected clinical data indicate that similar mechanisms were at play in humans. These results suggest that cognitive control could be used as a readout for the preclinical testing of DBS interventions. —Daniela Neuhofer [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a highly prevalent psychiatric disorder that can become chronic and debilitating when left untreated. The most commonly recommended first-line treatments for PTSD among adults are individual trauma-focused psychotherapies. Other evidence-based treatments include specific antidepressant medications and non-trauma-focused psychotherapies. Despite the effectiveness of these available treatments, many patients' symptoms do not remit. This has led to the search for novel treatments for PTSD. In this review, the authors critically evaluate the data supporting several emerging pharmacological and other somatic interventions in the categories of medication-assisted psychotherapy, novel medication monotherapy strategies, and neuromodulation, selected because of the salience of their mechanisms of action to the pathophysiology of PTSD (e.g., MDMA-assisted psychotherapy, ketamine, cannabidiol, transcranial magnetic stimulation). The authors also evaluate the evidence for treatments that are the focus of increasing scientific or public interest (i.e., hyperbaric oxygen therapy, stellate ganglion block, neurofeedback). To date, the evidence supporting most novel pharmacological and somatic treatments for PTSD is preliminary and highly variable; however, the data for several specific treatments, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, are encouraging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveRecent advances in neural engineering have restored mobility to people with paralysis, relieved symptoms of movement disorders, reduced chronic pain, restored the sense of hearing, and provided sensory perception to individuals with sensory deficits.ApproachThis progress was enabled by the team-based, interdisciplinary approaches used by neural engineers. Neural engineers have advanced clinical frontiers by leveraging tools and discoveries in quantitative and biological sciences and through collaborations between engineering, science, and medicine. The movement toward bioelectronic medicines, where neuromodulation aims to supplement or replace pharmaceuticals to treat chronic medical conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes and psychiatric disorders is a prime example of a new frontier made possible by neural engineering. Although one of the major goals in neural engineering is to develop technology for clinical applications, this technology may also offer unique opportunities to gain insight into how biological systems operate.Main resultsDespite significant technological progress, a number of ethical and strategic questions remain unexplored. Addressing these questions will accelerate technology development to address unmet needs. The future of these devices extends far beyond treatment of neurological impairments, including potential human augmentation applications. Our task, as neural engineers, is to push technology forward at the intersection of disciplines, while responsibly considering the readiness to transition this technology outside of the laboratory to consumer products.SignificanceThis article aims to highlight the current state of the neural engineering field, its links with other engineering and science disciplines, and the challenges and opportunities ahead. The goal of this article is to foster new ideas for innovative applications in neurotechnology.

Objective: In this review, the authors update the 2018 position statement of the American Psychiatric Association Council of Research Workgroup on Biomarkers and Novel Treatments on pharmacogenomic (PGx) tools for treatment selection in depression. Methods: The literature was reviewed for new clinical trials and meta-analyses, published from 2017 to 2022, of studies using PGx tools for treatment selection in depression. The blinding and control conditions, as well as primary and secondary outcomes and post hoc analyses, were summarized. Results: Eleven new clinical trials and five meta-analyses were identified; all studies had primary outcome measures related to speed or efficacy of treatment response. Three trials (27%) demonstrated efficacy on the primary outcome measure with statistical significance; the three studies used different PGx tools; one study was open-label and the other two were small single-blind trials. Five trials (45%) did not detect efficacy with statistical significance on either primary or secondary outcome measures. Only one trial (9%) used adverse events as a primary outcome measure. All studies had significant limitations; for example, none adopted a fully blinded study design, only two studies attempted to blind the treating clinician, and none incorporated measures to estimate the effectiveness of the blinds or the influence of lack of blinding on the study results. Conclusions: The addition of these new data do not alter the recommendations of the 2018 report, or the advice of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, that the evidence does not support the use of currently available combinatorial PGx tools for treatment selection in major depressive disorder. Priority efforts for future studies and the development and testing of effective tools include fully blinded study designs, inclusion of promising genetic variants not currently included in any commercially available tests, and investigation of other uses of pharmacogenomics, such as estimating the likelihood of rare adverse drug effects, rather than increasing the speed or magnitude of drug response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]