A randomized controlled trial of a standard 4-week protocol of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in severe treatment resistant depression

The effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 criterion in patients with major depressive disorder without psychotic features: a systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies

AIM

In line with the publication of clinical information related to the therapeutic process of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and the updating of relevant treatment guidelines, the present meta-analysis study was designed and conducted to determine the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 (HDRS-17) criterion in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) without psychotic features.

METHODS

In this study, a systematic search was conducted in electronic databases such as PubMed [Medline], Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials. gov using relevant keywords. The search period in this study was from January 2000 to January 2022, which was updated until May 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that determined the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 (HDRS-17) criterion in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) without psychotic features were included in the analysis. The quality of the included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias checklist. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA (Version 16) and RevMan (Version 5).

RESULTS

Following the combination of results from 16 clinical trial studies in the present meta-analysis, it was found that the mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 (HDRS-17) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) decreases by an average of 1.46 units (SMD: -1.46; % 95 CI: -1.65, -1.27, I square: 45.74%; P heterogeneity: 0.56). Subgroup analysis results indicated that the standardized mean difference of Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 (HDRS-17) varied based on the number of treatment sessions: patients receiving 10 or fewer repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) sessions showed a mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 (HDRS-17) reduction of 2.60 units (SMD: -2.60; % 95 CI: -2.86, -2.33, I square: 55.12%; P heterogeneity: 0.55), while those receiving 11 to 20 sessions showed a mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 (HDRS-17) reduction of 0.28 units (SMD: -0.28; % 95 CI: -0.65, -0.09, I square: 39.91%; P heterogeneity: 0.89).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in reducing depressive symptoms in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients. The complex results of subgroup analysis revealed insight on the possible benefits of a more focused strategy with fewer sessions, as well as the impact of treatment session frequency. These findings add to our understanding of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as a therapeutic intervention for the treatment of major depressive illnesses.

Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) adjunctive therapy for major depressive disorder (MDD) after two antidepressant treatment failures: meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Several meta-analyses demonstrated the efficacy of unilateral High-Frequency Left-sided (HFL) repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) for individuals with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD); however, results are contradictory due to heterogeneity of the included studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) of English language articles published since 2000 was performed in March 2022 on PubMed and Scopus databases. Empirical evidence on the relative efficacy of rTMS treatment compared with standard pharmacotherapy in Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD) were extracted. Random effects models were used to assess the effects of rTMS on response and remission rates.

RESULTS

19 randomized double-blinded sham-controlled studies were included for quantitative analysis for response (n = 854 patients) and 9 studies for remission (n = 551 patients). The risk ratio (RR) for response and remission are 2.25 and 2.78, respectively for patients after two treatment failures using rTMS as add-on treatment compared to standard pharmacotherapy. Cochrane's Q test showed no significant heterogeneity. No publication bias was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

rTMS is significantly more effective than sham rTMS in TRD in response and remission outcomes and may be beneficial as an adjunctive treatment in patients with MDD after two treatment failures. This finding is consistent with previous meta-analyses; however, the effect size was smaller than in the formerly published literature.

Association between daily dose and efficacy of rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in depression: A meta-analysis

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a well-established, safe, and effective brain stimulation technique for depression; however, uniform parameters have not been used in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to identify the parameters that affect rTMS effectiveness and ascertain the range in which that parameter has optimal efficacy. A meta-analysis of sham-controlled trials using rTMS delivered over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in depression was conducted. In the meta-regression and subgroup analyses, all rTMS stimulation parameters were extracted and their association with efficacy was investigated. Of the 17,800 references, 52 sham-controlled trials were included. Compared to sham controls, our results demonstrated a significant improvement in depressive symptoms at the end of treatment. According to the results of meta-regression, the number of pulses and sessions per day correlated with rTMS efficacy; however, the positioning method, stimulation intensity, frequency, number of treatment days, and total pulses did not. Furthermore, subgroup analysis revealed that the efficacy was correspondingly better in the group with higher daily pulses. In clinical practice, increasing the number of daily pulses and sessions may improve the effectiveness of rTMS.

A Systematic Review Assessing Patient-Related Predictors of Response to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Major Depressive Disorder

Objective

The safety and efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the acute treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is well established. However, it is not well understood which patient-related factors are associated with a more robust antidepressant response. Identifying predictive factors for therapeutic response to TMS treatment in depression will guide clinicians in patient selection.

Methods

By systematic review of clinical trial data, the current study aims to identify and analyze reported patient-specific predictors of response to an acute course of TMS treatment for MDD. PubMed was searched for randomized controlled trials of TMS for patients with depression. Studies were appraised for risk of bias using components recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Results

TMS data were available from 375 studies, 18 of which were included in this review. Treatment response is inversely associated with treatment refractoriness and age.

Conclusion

Inadequate sample size and large heterogeneity in study parameters among clinical trials limit any strong conclusions from being drawn; nonetheless, despite these limitations, there is mounting evidence, which points to age and treatment refractoriness as candidate variables for predicting clinical outcome. Implications of these findings for treatment of MDD are discussed.

The Association Between Sample and Treatment Characteristics and the Efficacy of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Depression: A Meta-analysis and Meta-regression of Sham-controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a form of non-invasive neuromodulation that is increasingly used to treat major depressive disorder (MDD). However, treatment with rTMS could be optimized by identifying optimal treatment parameters or characteristics of patients that are most likely to benefit. This meta-analysis and meta-regression aims to identify sample and treatment characteristics that are associated with change in depressive symptom level, treatment response and remission.

METHODS

The databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on the therapeutic efficacy of high-frequent, low-frequent, or bilateral rTMS for MDD compared to sham. Study and sample characteristics as well as rTMS parameters and outcome variables were extracted. Effect sizes were calculated for change in depression score and risk ratios for response and remission.

RESULTS

Sixty-five RCTs with a total of 2982 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Active rTMS resulted in a larger depressive symptom reduction than sham protocol (Hedges' g = -0.791 95% CI -0.977; -0.605). Risk ratios for response and remission were 2.378 (95% CI 1.882; 3.005) and 2.450 (95% CI 1.779; 3.375), respectively. We found no significant association between sample and treatment parameters and rTMS efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

rTMS is an efficacious treatment for MDD. No associations between sample or treatment characteristics and efficacy were found, for which we caution that publication bias, heterogeneity and lack of consistency in the definition of remission might bias these latter null findings. Our results are clinically relevant and support the use of rTMS as a non-invasive and effective treatment option for depression.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Resistant Depression: A Scoping Review

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is associated with significant disability, and due to its high prevalence, it results in a substantive socio-economic burden at a global level. TRD is the inability to accomplish and/or achieve remission after an adequate trial of antidepressant treatments. Studies comparing repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and pharmacotherapy have revealed evidence of the therapeutic efficacy of rTMS in TRD. These findings suggest a crucial role for rTMS in the management of TRD. This article aims to conduct a comprehensive scoping review of the current literature concerning the use of rTMS and its therapeutic efficacy as a treatment modality for TRD. PubMed, PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, and Cinahl were used to identify important articles on rTMS for TRD. The search strategy was limited to English articles within the last five years of data publication. Articles were included if they reported on a completed randomized controlled trial (RCT) of rTMS intervention for TRD. The exclusion criteria involved studies with rTMS for the treatment of conditions other than TRD, and study and experimental protocols of rTMS on TRD. In total, 17 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. The search strategy spanned studies published in the last five years, to the date of the data search (14 February 2022). The regional breakdown of the extracted studies was North American (n = 9), European (n = 5), Asian (n = 2) and Australian (n = 1). The applied frequencies of rTMS ranged from 5 Hz to 50 Hz, with stimulation intensities ranging from 80% MT to 120% MT. Overall, 16 out of the 17 studies suggested that rTMS treatment was effective, safe and tolerated in TRD. For patients with TRD, rTMS appears to provide significant benefits through the reduction of depressive symptoms, and while there is progressive evidence in support of the same, more research is needed in order to define standardized protocols of rTMS application in terms of localization, frequency, intensity, and pulse parameters.

Critical role of rhythms in prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation for depression: A randomized sham-controlled study

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an alternative treatment for depression, but the neural correlates of the treatment are currently inconclusive, which might be a limit of conventional analytical methods. The present study aimed to investigate the neurophysiological evidence and potential biomarkers for rTMS and intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) treatment. A total of 61 treatment‐resistant depression patients were randomly assigned to receive prolonged iTBS (piTBS; N = 19), 10 Hz rTMS (N = 20), or sham stimulation (N = 22). Each participant went through a treatment phase with resting state electroencephalography (EEG) recordings before and after the treatment phase. The aftereffects of stimulation showed that theta‐alpha amplitude modulation frequency (f_am) was associated with piTBS_Responder, which involves repetitive bursts delivered in the theta frequency range, whereas alpha carrier frequency (f_c) was related to 10 Hz rTMS, which uses alpha rhythmic stimulation. In addition, theta‐alpha amplitude modulation frequency was positively correlated with piTBS antidepressant efficacy, whereas the alpha frequency was not associated with the 10 Hz rTMS clinical outcome. The present study showed that TMS stimulation effects might be lasting, with changes of brain oscillations associated with the delivered frequency. Additionally, theta‐alpha amplitude modulation frequency may be as a function of the degree of recovery in TRD with piTBS treatment and also a potential EEG‐based predictor of antidepressant efficacy of piTBS in the early treatment stage, that is, first 2 weeks.

Magnitude of the Placebo Response Across Treatment Modalities Used for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

The placebo effect in depression clinical trials is a substantial factor associated with failure to establish efficacy of novel and repurposed treatments. However, the magnitude of the placebo effect and whether it differs across treatment modalities in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the magnitude of the placebo effect in patients with TRD across different treatment modalities and its possible moderators.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, Web of Science, and PsychInfo from inception to June 21, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they recruited patients with TRD and randomized them to a placebo or sham arm and a pharmacotherapy, brain stimulation, or psychotherapy arm.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent reviewers used standard forms for data extraction and quality assessment. Random-effects analyses and standard pairwise meta-analyses were performed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the Hedges g value for the reported depression scales. Secondary outcomes included moderators assessed via meta-regression and response and remission rates. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 test, and publication bias was evaluated using the Egger test and a funnel plot. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to estimate risks.

RESULTS

Fifty RCTs were included involving various types of placebo or sham interventions with a total of 3228 participants (mean [SD] age, 45.8 [6.0] years; 1769 [54.8%] female). The pooled placebo effect size for all modalities was large (g = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.91-1.1); the placebo effect size in RCTs of specific treatment modalities did not significantly differ. Similarly, response and remission rates associated with placebo were comparable across modalities. Heterogeneity was large. Three variables were associated with a larger placebo effect size: open-label prospective treatment before double-blind placebo randomization (β = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.59; P = .004), later year of publication (β = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.003 to 0.05; P = .03), and industry-sponsored trials (β = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.58; P = .007). The number of failed interventions was associated with the probability a smaller placebo effect size (β = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.23 to -0.01, P = .03). The Egger test result was not significant for small studies' effects.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This analysis may provide a benchmark for past and future clinical RCTs that recruit patients with TRD standardizing an expected placebo effect size.