Efficacy and safety of a 4-week course of repeated subcutaneous ketamine injections for treatment-resistant depression (KADS study): randomised double-blind active-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Prior trials suggest that intravenous racemic ketamine is a highly effective for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), but phase 3 trials of racemic ketamine are needed. AIMS: To assess the acute efficacy and safety of a 4-week course of subcutaneous racemic ketamine in participants with TRD. Trial registration: ACTRN12616001096448 at www.anzctr.org.au. METHOD: This phase 3, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled multicentre trial was conducted at seven mood disorders centres in Australia and New Zealand. Participants received twice-weekly subcutaneous racemic ketamine or midazolam for 4 weeks. Initially, the trial tested fixed-dose ketamine 0.5 mg/kg versus midazolam 0.025 mg/kg (cohort 1). Dosing was revised, after a Data Safety Monitoring Board recommendation, to flexible-dose ketamine 0.5-0.9 mg/kg or midazolam 0.025-0.045 mg/kg, with response-guided dosing increments (cohort 2). The primary outcome was remission (Montgomery-Åsberg Rating Scale for Depression score ≤10) at the end of week 4. RESULTS: The final analysis (those who received at least one treatment) comprised 68 in cohort 1 (fixed-dose), 106 in cohort 2 (flexible-dose). Ketamine was more efficacious than midazolam in cohort 2 (remission rate 19.6% v. 2.0%; OR = 12.1, 95% CI 2.1-69.2, P = 0.005), but not different in cohort 1 (remission rate 6.3% v. 8.8%; OR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.2-8.2, P = 0.76). Ketamine was well tolerated. Acute adverse effects (psychotomimetic, blood pressure increases) resolved within 2 h. CONCLUSIONS: Adequately dosed subcutaneous racemic ketamine was efficacious and safe in treating TRD over a 4-week treatment period. The subcutaneous route is practical and feasible.

A Clinical Case Series of Acute and Maintenance Home Administered Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Treatment-Resistant Depression.

OBJECTIVES: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive neurostimulation technique being translated clinically for the treatment of depression. There is limited research documenting the longer-term effectiveness and safety of tDCS treatment. This case series is the first report of remotely supervised, home-administered tDCS (HA-tDCS) for depression in a clinical setting. METHODS: We report clinical, cognitive, and safety outcomes from 16 depressed patients who received acute and/or maintenance HA-tDCS. We retrospectively examined clinical data from up to 2.5 years of treatment. Descriptive statistics are reported to document patient outcomes. RESULTS: Twelve patients received acute treatment for a current depressive episode and 4 commenced tDCS maintenance therapy after responding to ECT or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). The cohort was highly treatment-resistant wherein 15 of 16 patients failed 3 trials or more of antidepressant medication in the current episode, and 6 patients failed to gain significant benefit from prior ECT or rTMS. Five of 12 patients responded to acute tDCS within 6 weeks, and 9 patients who received tDCS for more than 12 weeks maintained improvements over several months. Cognitive tests showed no evidence of impairments in cognitive outcomes after up to 2 years of treatment. Two patients were withdrawn from treatment because of blurred vision or exacerbation of tinnitus. Transcranial direct current stimulation was otherwise safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Transcranial direct current stimulation given for at least 6 weeks may be of clinical benefit even in treatment-resistant depression. Results provide support for long-term effectiveness, safety, and feasibility of remotely supervised HA-tDCS and suggest a role for maintenance tDCS after acute treatment with tDCS, rTMS, or ECT.

Ketamine treatment for depression: A model of care.

OBJECTIVE: Ketamine and related compounds are emerging as rapidly acting therapies for treatment-resistant depression. Ketamine differs from standard antidepressants in its speed of action, specific acute and cumulative side effects, risk of dependence and regulatory requirements. However, there is currently little guidance offering translation from research studies into clinical practice. We therefore detail a comprehensive model of care for ketamine treatment of depression. METHOD: We formulated a set of policies and procedures for a 'compassionate use' ketamine programme that developed out of our clinical research in ketamine. These policies and procedures were formulated into a detailed model of care. RESULTS: The current Australian and New Zealand regulatory frameworks and professional bodies' recommendations regarding ketamine are detailed along with clinical governance and infrastructure considerations. We next describe a four-step model comprising initial assessment, pre-treatment, treatment and post-treatment phases. The model comprises thorough psychiatric and medical assessments examining patient suitability, a rigorous consenting process and structured safety monitoring across an acute treatment course or maintenance therapy. Our ketamine dose-titration method is detailed allowing flexible dosing of patients across a treatment course enabling individualised treatment. CONCLUSION: The model of care aims to bridge the gap between efficacy studies and clinical care outside of research settings as ketamine and related compounds become increasingly important therapies for treatment-resistant depression.

Neurocognitive subgroups in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is commonly associated with neurocognitive dysfunction. However, there remains substantial heterogeneity between patients and inconsistent findings regarding the magnitude and prevalence of specific neurocognitive deficits. This study aimed to investigate the potential for different neurocognitive subgroups in patients diagnosed with MDD. METHOD: Data were pooled from 4 different clinical trials that involved adults diagnosed with MDD. Neurocognitive outcomes included measures of verbal learning and memory, executive function, attention, and processing speed. Latent class analysis was conducted to examine for different subgroups based on neurocognitive profiles of performance across outcome measures. Subgroups were compared to a separate sample of age-matched adult healthy controls, across illness factors, and individual mood items on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: Within the MDD cohort (N = 149), 45% of participants were considered relatively "cognitively preserved," with the remainder "cognitively reduced" (39%) or "cognitively impaired" (16%). Verbal memory performance was significantly poorer compared to attention and processing speed only in the "cognitively impaired" subgroup. There was no association between subgroup membership and relevant illness factors, including ratings on individual MADRS items. LIMITATIONS: Data were pooled from several studies that included different neurocognitive measures and cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half of MDD participants had no or minimal objective cognitive difficulties, and neurocognitive functioning was found generally unrelated to illness factors. Future longitudinal research is warranted to determine whether the people who are relatively cognitively impaired are at increased risk for further cognitive decline. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Neurocognitive effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in unipolar and bipolar depression: Findings from an international randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been found to have antidepressant effects and may have beneficial neurocognitive effects. However, prior research has produced an unclear understanding of the neurocognitive effects of repeated exposure to tDCS. The study's aim was to determine the neurocognitive effects following tDCS treatment in participants with unipolar or bipolar depression. METHOD: The study was a triple-masked, randomized, controlled clinical trial across six international academic medical centers. Participants were randomized to high dose (2.5 mA for 30 min) or low dose (0.034 mA, for 30 min) tDCS for 20 sessions over 4 weeks, followed by an optional 4 weeks of open-label high dose treatment. The tDCS anode was centered over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at F3 (10/20 EEG system) and the cathode over F8. Participants completed clinical and neurocognitive assessments before and after tDCS. Genotype (BDNF Val66Met and catechol-o-methyltransferase [COMT] Val158Met polymorphisms) were explored as potential moderators of neurocognitive effects. RESULTS: The study randomized 130 participants. Across the participants, tDCS treatment (high and low dose) resulted in improvements in verbal learning and recall, selective attention, information processing speed, and working memory, which were independent of mood effects. Similar improvements were observed in the subsample of participants with bipolar disorder. There was no observed significant effect of tDCS dose. However, BDNF Val66Met and COMT Val158Met polymorphisms interacted with tDCS dose and affected verbal memory and verbal fluency outcomes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that tDCS could have positive neurocognitive effects in unipolar and bipolar depression. Thus, tDCS stimulation parameters may interact with interindividual differences in BDNF and COMT polymorphisms to affect neurocognitive outcomes, which warrants further investigation.

Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation for the Acute Treatment of Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial electrical stimulation has broad potential as a treatment for depression. Transcranial random noise stimulation, which delivers randomly fluctuating current intensities, may have greater cortical excitatory effects compared with other forms of transcranial electrical stimulation. We therefore aimed to investigate the antidepressant efficacy of transcranial random noise stimulation. METHODS: Depressed participants were randomly assigned by computer number generator to receive 20 sessions of either active or sham transcranial random noise stimulation over 4 weeks in a double-blinded, parallel group randomized-controlled trial. Transcranial random noise stimulation was delivered for 30 minutes with a direct current offset of 2 mA and a random noise range of 2 mA. Primary analyses assessed changes in depression severity using the Montgomery-Asperg Depression Rating Scale. Neuroplasticity, neuropsychological, and safety outcomes were analyzed as secondary measures. RESULTS: Sixty-nine participants were randomized, of which 3 discontinued treatment early, leaving 66 (sham n = 34, active n = 32) for per-protocol analysis. Depression severity scores reduced in both groups (Montgomery-Asperg Depression Rating Scale reduction in sham = 7.0 [95% CI = 5.0-8.9]; and active = 5.2 [95% CI = 3.2-7.3]). However, there were no differences between active and sham groups in the reduction of depressive symptoms or the number of participants meeting response (sham = 14.7%; active = 3.1%) and remission criteria (sham = 5.9%; active = 0%). Erythema, paresthesia, fatigue, and dizziness/light-headedness occurred more frequently in the active transcranial random noise stimulation group. Neuroplasticity, neuropsychological, and acute cognitive effects were comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: Our results do not support the use of transcranial random noise stimulation with the current stimulation parameters as a therapeutic intervention for the treatment of depression. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION AT CLINICALTRIALS: gov/NCT01792414.

Efficacy and acceptability of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for major depressive disorder: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

We evaluated the efficacy and acceptability of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for treating acute depressive episodes using individual patient data that provide more precise estimates than aggregate data meta-analysis. A systematic review of placebo-controlled trials on tDCS as only intervention was conducted until December-2018. Data from each study was collated to estimate odds ratio (OR) and number needed to treat (NNT) of response and remission, and depression improvement. Endpoints were pre-determined. Nine eligible studies (572 participants), presenting moderate/high certainty of evidence, were included. Active tDCS was significantly superior to sham for response (30.9% vs. 18.9% respectively; OR = 1.96, 95%CI [1.30-2.95], NNT = 9), remission (19.9% vs. 11.7%, OR = 1.94 [1.19-3.16], NNT = 13) and depression improvement (effect size of ß = 0.31, [0.15-0.47]). Moreover, continuous clinical improvement was observed even after the end of acute tDCS treatment. There were no differences in all-cause discontinuation rates and no predictors of response were identified. To conclude, active tDCS was statistically superior to sham in all outcomes, although its clinical effects were moderate.

A Pilot Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive Training Combined with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment.

BACKGROUND: There is currently no effective intervention for improving memory in people at increased risk for dementia. Cognitive training (CT) has been promising, though effects are modest, particularly at follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether adjunctive non-invasive brain stimulation (transcranial direct current stimulation, tDCS) could enhance the memory benefits of CT in amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). METHODS: Participants with aMCI were randomized to receive CT with either Active tDCS (2 mA for 30 min and 0.016 mA for 30 min) or Sham tDCS (0.016 mA for 60 min) for 15 sessions over a period of 5 weeks in a double-blind, sham-controlled, parallel group clinical trial. The primary outcome measure was the California Verbal Learning Task 2nd Edition. RESULTS: 68 participants commenced the intervention. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed that the CT+Active tDCS group significantly improved at post treatment (p = 0.033), and the CT+Sham tDCS group did not (p = 0.050), but there was no difference between groups. At the 3-month follow-up, both groups showed large-sized memory improvements compared to pre-treatment (CT+Active tDCS: p < 0.01, d = 0.99; CT+Sham tDCS: p < 0.01, d = 0.74), although there was no significant difference between groups. CONCLUSION: This study found that CT+Active tDCS did not produce greater memory improvement compared to CT+Sham tDCS. Large-sized memory improvements occurred in both conditions at follow-up. One possible interpretation, based on recent novel findings, is that low intensity tDCS (used as 'sham') may have contributed biological effects. Further work should use a completely inert tDCS sham condition.

Pilot trial of home-administered transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of depression.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive, neuromodulation approach with promising efficacy for treating depression. To date, tDCS has been limited to clinical or research centre settings with treatment administered by staff. The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy, tolerability and feasibility of home-administered, remotely-supervised tDCS for depression. METHODS: In an open label trial, 34 participants used a Soterix 1 × 1 mini-CT device to self-administer 20-28 tDCS sessions (2 mA, 30 min, F3-anode and F8-cathode montage according to 10-20 EEG placement) over 4 weeks followed by a taper phase of 4 sessions 1 week apart. Participants were initially monitored via video link and then through completion of an online treatment diary. Mixed effects repeated measures analyses assessed change in mood scores. RESULTS: Mood improved significantly from baseline (27.47 on Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) to 1 month after the end of acute treatment (15.48) (p < 0.001). Side effects were largely transient and minor. Outcomes were comparable to those reported in clinic-based trials. Protocol adherence was excellent with a drop-out rate of 6% and 93% of scheduled sessions completed. LIMITATIONS: The tDCS and remote monitoring procedures employed in this study require a level of manual dexterity and computer literacy, which may be challenging for some patients. This study did not have a control condition. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides initial evidence that home-based, remotely-supervised tDCS treatment may be efficacious and feasible for depressed patients and has high translational potential.

Comparison of Site Localization Techniques for Brain Stimulation.

OBJECTIVES: The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is a commonly targeted site using noninvasive brain stimulation techniques. Methods used to localize this site commonly rely on the International 10-20 electroencephalography (EEG) system, including elastic EEG caps, which stretch to accommodate varying head sizes, as well as the Beam F3 algorithm, which uses scalp measurements to calculate the location of the DLPFC. Both methods have been validated against magnetic resonance imaging-based DLPFC localization and are regularly used in research centers and clinics, but an in vivo comparison of reliability has not yet been conducted. This study examines whether Beam F3 and EEG cap methods differ in DLPFC localization, when applied by different practitioners (measurers) on a range of subjects. Further, whether measurer experience or subject head characteristics influence localization. METHODS: Measurers (n = 5) of varying levels of experience identified the location of the left DLFPC on subjects (n = 6) with varying head sizes, using both Beam F3 and EEG cap methods. An independent assessor recorded the measurers' placements along the anterior-posterior and medial-lateral planes. Values were normalized to the subjects' mean nasion-inion and tragus-tragus distances and examined using a mixed effects repeated measures analysis. RESULTS: The Beam F3 method resulted in significantly more anterior placements (~11.5 mm) compared with the EEG cap. Subjects with smaller head sizes had more anterior placements, compared with medium and large heads, regardless of the method used. There was no significant difference between methods along the medial-lateral plane. Measurer experience did not significantly influence DLPFC localization. CONCLUSIONS: Beam F3 and EEG cap methods resulted in similar DLPFC placements, with a small difference along the anterior-posterior plane. Measurer experience did not affect either method, suggesting that 2 weeks of training is sufficient to achieve competency. Training and reliability of DLPFC placement therefore do not represent substantial barriers to application of either method. Special care should be taken with subjects with small heads as both methods resulted in more anterior DLPFC placements.

Pre-treatment attentional processing speed and antidepressant response to transcranial direct current stimulation: Results from an international randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has promising antidepressant effects, however, clinical trials have shown variable efficacy. Pre-treatment neurocognitive functioning has previously been identified as an inter-individual predictor of tDCS antidepressant efficacy. OBJECTIVE: In this international multicentre, sham-controlled study, we investigated this relationship while also assessing the influence of clinical and genotype (BDNF Val66Met and COMT Val158Met polymorphisms) factors as predictors of response to active tDCS. METHODS: The study was a triple-masked, parallel, randomized, controlled design across 6 international academic medical centers. Participants were randomized to active (2.5 mA) or sham (34 µA) tDCS for 30 min each session for 20 sessions. The anode was centered over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at F3 (10/20 EEG system) and the cathode over the lateral right frontal area at F8. RESULTS: Better pre-treatment attentional processing speed on the Ruff 2 & 7 Selective Attention Test (Total Speed: ß = 0.25, p < .05) and concurrent antidepressant medication use (ß = 0.31, p < .05) predicted antidepressant efficacy with active tDCS. Genotype differences in the BDNF Val66Metand COMT Val158Met polymorphisms were not associated with antidepressant effects. Secondary analyses revealed that only participants in the highest performing Ruff 2 & 7 Total Speed group at pre-treatment in both active and sham tDCS conditions showed significantly greater antidepressant response compared to those with lower performance at both the 2 and 4 week treatment time points (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that high pre-treatment attentional processing speed may be relevant for identifying participants more likely to show better tDCS antidepressant response to both high (2.5 mA) and very low (34 µA) current intensity stimulation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01562184.

Repeated intranasal ketamine for treatment-resistant depression - the way to go? Results from a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine research in depression has mostly used intravenous, weight-based approaches, which are difficult to translate clinically. Intranasal (IN) ketamine is a promising alternative but no controlled data has been published on the feasibility, safety and potential efficacy of repeated IN ketamine treatments. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study compared a 4-week course of eight treatments of 100 mg ketamine or 4.5 mg midazolam. Each treatment was given as 10 separate IN sprays, self-administered 5 min apart. The study was stopped early due to poor tolerability after five treatment-resistant depressed participants were included. Feasibility, safety (acute and cumulative), cognitive and efficacy outcomes were assessed. Plasma ketamine and norketamine concentrations were assayed after the first treatment. RESULTS: Significant acute cardiovascular, psychotomimetic and neurological side effects occurred at doses < 100 mg ketamine. No participants were able to self-administer all 10 ketamine sprays due to incoordination; treatment time occasionally had to be extended (>45 min) due to acute side effects. No hepatic, cognitive or urinary changes were observed after the treatment course in either group. There was an approximately two-fold variation in ketamine and norketamine plasma concentrations between ketamine participants. At course end, one participant had remitted in each of the ketamine and midazolam groups. CONCLUSIONS: IN ketamine, with the drug formulation and delivery device used, was not a useful treatment approach in this study. Absorption was variable between individuals and acute tolerability was poor, requiring prolonged treatment administration time in some individuals. The drug formulation, the delivery device, the insufflation technique and individual patient factors play an important role in tolerability and efficacy when using IN ketamine for TRD.

International randomized-controlled trial of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in depression.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has antidepressant effects in unipolar depression, but there is limited information for patients with bipolar depression. Additionally, prior research suggests that brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) Val66Met genotype may moderate response to tDCS. OBJECTIVE: To examine tDCS efficacy in unipolar and bipolar depression and assess if BDNF genotype is associated with antidepressant response to tDCS. METHODS: 130 participants diagnosed with a major depressive episode were randomized to receive active (2.5 milliamps (mA), 30 min) or sham (0.034 mA and two 60-second current ramps up to 1 and 0.5 mA) tDCS to the left prefrontal cortex, administered in 20 sessions over 4 weeks, in a double-blinded, international multisite study. Mixed effects repeated measures analyses assessed change in mood and neuropsychological scores in participants with at least one post-baseline rating in the unipolar (N = 84) and bipolar (N = 36) samples. RESULTS: Mood improved significantly over the 4-week treatment period in both unipolar (p = 0.001) and bipolar groups (p < 0.001). Among participants with unipolar depression, there were more remitters in the sham treatment group (p = 0.03). There was no difference between active and sham stimulation in the bipolar sample. BDNF genotype was unrelated to antidepressant outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study found no antidepressant difference between active and sham stimulation for unipolar or bipolar depression. However, the possibility that the low current delivered in the sham tDCS condition was biologically active cannot be discounted. Moreover, BDNF genotype did not moderate antidepressant outcome. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01562184.

Safety of repeated sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Repeated sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are increasingly used for therapeutic applications. However, adverse events (AEs) associated with repeated sessions have not been comprehensively evaluated. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate the safety of repeated sessions of tDCS, examining AE risk relative to tDCS exposure. Further, to identify whether certain participant populations are particularly at risk from tDCS. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis included sham-controlled studies (up to June 2017) involving two or more tDCS sessions, spaced not more than a day apart. Data was extracted on AEs reported, total tDCS exposure (cumulative charge), and diagnostic groups (Healthy, Pain Disorder, Stroke, Neurocognitive Disorder, Neuropsychiatric Disorder, and Other). Univariate simple linear meta-regression analyses examined AE likelihood, comparing active and sham tDCS, with increasing exposure. Rates of AEs were compared for diagnostic groups. RESULTS: 158 studies (total 4130 participants) met inclusion criteria and were included for quantitative analyses. The incidence of AEs (examined per session, by proportion of participants, and by the number of studies reporting AEs) did not increase with higher levels of tDCS exposure. Furthermore, AE rates were not found to be greater for any diagnostic group. CONCLUSIONS: Little evidence was found to suggest that repeated sessions of active tDCS pose increased risk to participants compared to sham tDCS within the limits of parameters used to date. Increased risks associated with greater levels of exposure to tDCS, or rare and under-reported AEs, however, cannot be ruled out.

Studying Acute Coronary Syndrome Through the World Wide Web: Experiences and Lessons.

This study details my viewpoint on the experiences, lessons, and assessments of conducting a national study on care-seeking behavior for heart attack in the United States utilizing the World Wide Web. The Yale Heart Study (YHS) was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Grounded on two prior studies, the YHS combined a Web-based interview survey instrument; ads placed on the Internet; flyers and posters in public libraries, senior centers, and rehabilitation centers; information on chat rooms; a viral marketing strategy; and print ads to attract potential participants to share their heart attack experiences. Along the way, the grant was transferred from Ohio State University (OSU) to Yale University, and significant administrative, information technology, and personnel challenges ensued that materially delayed the study's execution. Overall, the use of the Internet to collect data on care-seeking behavior is very time consuming and emergent. The cost of using the Web was approximately 31% less expensive than that of face-to-face interviews. However, the quality of the data may have suffered because of the absence of some data compared with interviewing participants. Yet the representativeness of the 1154 usable surveys appears good, with the exception of a dearth of African American participants.

Safety and acceptability of transcranial direct current stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes: Analysis of individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation modality that has been increasingly used for major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment. Although studies in healthy volunteers showed that the technique is well-tolerated, tDCS safety and acceptability have not been sufficiently explored in patients with MDD. METHODS: We collected individual patient data from 6 randomized clinical trials that had been previously identified in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Primary outcomes were safety (rate of adverse events) and acceptability (rate of dropouts). Secondary outcomes were clinical, demographic and treatment predictors of the primary outcomes. RESULTS: Dropout rates between active (8.8%) and sham (12%) groups were not significantly different (OR= 0.7, p=0.38). Adverse event rates between active (73.5%) and sham (68.3%) groups were not significantly different (OR= 1.4, p= 0.23). Higher current densities were associated with lower adverse event rates. LIMITATIONS: Dropout reasons were not systematically reported and adverse events were not collected using questionnaires standardized across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Active tDCS is as acceptable and safe as sham tDCS, as found in randomized clinical trials of MDD.

Increase in PAS-induced neuroplasticity after a treatment course of intranasal ketamine for depression. Report of three cases from a placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Animal studies suggest that neural plasticity may play a role in the antidepressant effects of a single ketamine dose. However, the potential effects of repeated ketamine treatments on human neuroplasticity are unknown. METHODS: This pilot RCT study measured plasticity-induced changes before and after a ketamine course, in three treatment-resistant depressed subjects, who were randomized to receive 8 intranasal treatments of 100mg ketamine or 4.5mg midazolam. Mood ratings were performed by a trained blinded rater at baseline and 24h-48h after the ketamine course, using the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Neuroplasticity was assessed in the motor cortex using a paired associative stimulation (PAS) paradigm at baseline and 24h-48h after the treatment course. No changes in current psychotropic medication or dosage were permitted for 4weeks prior to trial entry and throughout the trial. RESULTS: The subject receiving ketamine, but not those receiving midazolam, presented a marked increase in neural plasticity after the treatment course. However, mood changes were not associated with changes in neural plasticity. LIMITATIONS: Pilot study with small sample size. Concomitant antidepressant medications taken. Plasticity was tested in the motor cortex only, thus the generalizability of these findings to other brain areas cannot be assumed. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a course of intranasal ketamine may enhance synaptic plasticity in subjects with depression, but this was not associated with antidepressant effects. Further research on this topic is warranted.

Study design and methodology for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of transcranial direct current stimulation as a treatment for unipolar and bipolar depression.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a new, non-invasive neuromodulation approach for treating depression that has shown promising efficacy. The aim of this trial was to conduct the first international, multicentre randomised controlled trial of tDCS as a treatment for unipolar and bipolar depression. The study recruited 120 participants across 6 sites in the USA and Australia. Participants received active or sham tDCS (2.5mA, 20 sessions of 30min duration over 4weeks), followed by a 4-week open label active treatment phase and a 4-week taper phase. Mood and neuropsychological outcomes were assessed with the primary antidepressant outcome measure being the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). A neuropsychological battery was administered to assess safety and examine cognitive effects. The study also investigated the possible influence of genetic polymorphisms on outcomes. The trial was triple-blinded. Participants, tDCS treaters and study raters were blinded to each participant's tDCS group allocation in the sham-controlled phase. Specific aspects of tDCS administration, device operation and group allocation were designed to optimise the integrity of blinding. Outcome measures will be tested using a mixed effects repeated measures analysis with the primary factors being Time as a repeated measure, tDCS condition (sham or active) and Diagnosis (unipolar or bipolar). A restricted number of random and fixed factors will be included as required to account for extraneous differences. As a promising treatment, tDCS has excellent potential for translation into widespread clinical use, being cost effective, portable, easy to operate and well tolerated.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for acute major depressive episodes: meta-analysis of individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-pharmacological intervention for depression. It has mixed results, possibly caused by study heterogeneity. AIMS: To assess tDCS efficacy and to explore individual response predictors. METHOD: Systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. RESULTS: Data were gathered from six randomised sham-controlled trials, enrolling 289 patients. Active tDCS was significantly superior to sham for response (34% v. 19% respectively, odds ratio (OR) = 2.44, 95% CI 1.38-4.32, number needed to treat (NNT) = 7), remission (23.1% v. 12.7% respectively, OR = 2.38, 95% CI 1.22-4.64, NNT = 9) and depression improvement (B coefficient 0.35, 95% CI 0.12-0.57). Mixed-effects models showed that, after adjustment for other predictors and confounders, treatment-resistant depression and higher tDCS 'doses' were, respectively, negatively and positively associated with tDCS efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The effect size of tDCS treatment was comparable with those reported for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and antidepressant drug treatment in primary care. The most important parameters for optimisation in future trials are depression refractoriness and tDCS dose.