Loading…

Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Frontiers in psychiatry 2020-05, Vol.11, p.438-438
Main Authors: Fornaro, Michele, Fusco, Andrea, Novello, Stefano, Mosca, Pierluigi, Anastasia, Annalisa, De Blasio, Antonella, Iasevoli, Felice, de Bartolomeis, Andrea
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3
container_end_page 438
container_issue
container_start_page 438
container_title Frontiers in psychiatry
container_volume 11
creator Fornaro, Michele
Fusco, Andrea
Novello, Stefano
Mosca, Pierluigi
Anastasia, Annalisa
De Blasio, Antonella
Iasevoli, Felice
de Bartolomeis, Andrea
description Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping of the depressive episodes, which represents the goal of the present study. A hundred and thirty-one depressed outpatients underwent psychopathological evaluation using major rating tools, including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which served for subsequent principal component analysis, followed-up by cluster analysis, with the ultimate goal to fetch different clinical subtypes of depression. The cluster analysis identified two clinically interpretable, yet distinctive, groups among 53 bipolar (resistant cases = 15, or 28.3%) and 78 unipolar (resistant cases = 20, or 25.6%) patients. Among the MDD patients, cluster "1" included the following components: "Psychic symptoms, depressed mood, suicide, guilty, insomnia" and "genitourinary, gastrointestinal, weight loss, insight". Altogether, with broadly defined "mixed features," this latter cluster correctly predicted treatment outcome in 80.8% cases of MDD. The same "broadly-defined" mixed features of depression (namely, the standard Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-DSM-5-specifier plus increased energy, psychomotor activity, irritability) correctly classified 71.7% of BD cases, either as TRBD or not. Small sample size and high rate of comorbidity. Although relying on different operational criteria and treatment history, TRD and TRBD seem to be consistently predicted by broadly defined mixed features among different clinical subtypes of depression, either unipolar or bipolar cases. If replicated by upcoming studies to encompass also biological and neuropsychological measures, the present study may aid in precision medicine and informed pharmacotherapy.
doi_str_mv 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_998f1cb7974e451a995538c7b8196211</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_998f1cb7974e451a995538c7b8196211</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2424439483</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUsFO3DAUjFArQJQ7pyrHXnb7HDuO3UMlGlpAQmpV4GzZzjM1SuLUziLtgX9vkt0i8MUjz5vxs99k2RmBNaVCfnZD2o7rAgpYAzAqDrJjwjlbAWfw7hU-yk5TeoRpUSkpLw-zI1rwCkCK4-z5V8TG2zHElAeX30XUY4f9mP_G5NOoe4v5uY0hpfzCO4dx5urW997qNr_dmHE74CK9wCFiSj70X_I6dIOOPoV-Zu57P4RWx_wprfNve1zrhOlD9t7pNuHpfj_J7n98v6uvVjc_L6_r85uVZbwYV4ZZUVojpORQzhicLJA30zOAUAQOlhhDoXHOgNFMO1mKyjFEwKZ0lp5k1zvfJuhHNUTf6bhVQXu1HIT4oHQcvW1RSSkcsaaSFUNWEi1lWVJhKyOI5AUhk9fXndewMR02dvqQqNs3pm-Z3v9RD-FJVXO7VTkZfNobxPB3g2lUnU8W21b3GDZJFaxgjEom6FQKu9JlAhHdyzUE1BwCtYRAzSFQSwgmycfX7b0I_o-c_gOAKLB9</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2424439483</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Fornaro, Michele ; Fusco, Andrea ; Novello, Stefano ; Mosca, Pierluigi ; Anastasia, Annalisa ; De Blasio, Antonella ; Iasevoli, Felice ; de Bartolomeis, Andrea</creator><creatorcontrib>Fornaro, Michele ; Fusco, Andrea ; Novello, Stefano ; Mosca, Pierluigi ; Anastasia, Annalisa ; De Blasio, Antonella ; Iasevoli, Felice ; de Bartolomeis, Andrea</creatorcontrib><description>Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping of the depressive episodes, which represents the goal of the present study. A hundred and thirty-one depressed outpatients underwent psychopathological evaluation using major rating tools, including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which served for subsequent principal component analysis, followed-up by cluster analysis, with the ultimate goal to fetch different clinical subtypes of depression. The cluster analysis identified two clinically interpretable, yet distinctive, groups among 53 bipolar (resistant cases = 15, or 28.3%) and 78 unipolar (resistant cases = 20, or 25.6%) patients. Among the MDD patients, cluster "1" included the following components: "Psychic symptoms, depressed mood, suicide, guilty, insomnia" and "genitourinary, gastrointestinal, weight loss, insight". Altogether, with broadly defined "mixed features," this latter cluster correctly predicted treatment outcome in 80.8% cases of MDD. The same "broadly-defined" mixed features of depression (namely, the standard Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-DSM-5-specifier plus increased energy, psychomotor activity, irritability) correctly classified 71.7% of BD cases, either as TRBD or not. Small sample size and high rate of comorbidity. Although relying on different operational criteria and treatment history, TRD and TRBD seem to be consistently predicted by broadly defined mixed features among different clinical subtypes of depression, either unipolar or bipolar cases. If replicated by upcoming studies to encompass also biological and neuropsychological measures, the present study may aid in precision medicine and informed pharmacotherapy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1664-0640</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1664-0640</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32670098</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Switzerland: Frontiers Media S.A</publisher><subject>bipolar disorder ; depression ; mixed features ; mixed states ; Psychiatry ; treatment-resistance</subject><ispartof>Frontiers in psychiatry, 2020-05, Vol.11, p.438-438</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2020 Fornaro, Fusco, Novello, Mosca, Anastasia, De Blasio, Iasevoli and de Bartolomeis.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 Fornaro, Fusco, Novello, Mosca, Anastasia, De Blasio, Iasevoli and de Bartolomeis 2020 Fornaro, Fusco, Novello, Mosca, Anastasia, De Blasio, Iasevoli and de Bartolomeis</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326075/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326075/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32670098$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fornaro, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fusco, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Novello, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mosca, Pierluigi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anastasia, Annalisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Blasio, Antonella</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iasevoli, Felice</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Bartolomeis, Andrea</creatorcontrib><title>Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases</title><title>Frontiers in psychiatry</title><addtitle>Front Psychiatry</addtitle><description>Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping of the depressive episodes, which represents the goal of the present study. A hundred and thirty-one depressed outpatients underwent psychopathological evaluation using major rating tools, including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which served for subsequent principal component analysis, followed-up by cluster analysis, with the ultimate goal to fetch different clinical subtypes of depression. The cluster analysis identified two clinically interpretable, yet distinctive, groups among 53 bipolar (resistant cases = 15, or 28.3%) and 78 unipolar (resistant cases = 20, or 25.6%) patients. Among the MDD patients, cluster "1" included the following components: "Psychic symptoms, depressed mood, suicide, guilty, insomnia" and "genitourinary, gastrointestinal, weight loss, insight". Altogether, with broadly defined "mixed features," this latter cluster correctly predicted treatment outcome in 80.8% cases of MDD. The same "broadly-defined" mixed features of depression (namely, the standard Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-DSM-5-specifier plus increased energy, psychomotor activity, irritability) correctly classified 71.7% of BD cases, either as TRBD or not. Small sample size and high rate of comorbidity. Although relying on different operational criteria and treatment history, TRD and TRBD seem to be consistently predicted by broadly defined mixed features among different clinical subtypes of depression, either unipolar or bipolar cases. If replicated by upcoming studies to encompass also biological and neuropsychological measures, the present study may aid in precision medicine and informed pharmacotherapy.</description><subject>bipolar disorder</subject><subject>depression</subject><subject>mixed features</subject><subject>mixed states</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>treatment-resistance</subject><issn>1664-0640</issn><issn>1664-0640</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpVUsFO3DAUjFArQJQ7pyrHXnb7HDuO3UMlGlpAQmpV4GzZzjM1SuLUziLtgX9vkt0i8MUjz5vxs99k2RmBNaVCfnZD2o7rAgpYAzAqDrJjwjlbAWfw7hU-yk5TeoRpUSkpLw-zI1rwCkCK4-z5V8TG2zHElAeX30XUY4f9mP_G5NOoe4v5uY0hpfzCO4dx5urW997qNr_dmHE74CK9wCFiSj70X_I6dIOOPoV-Zu57P4RWx_wprfNve1zrhOlD9t7pNuHpfj_J7n98v6uvVjc_L6_r85uVZbwYV4ZZUVojpORQzhicLJA30zOAUAQOlhhDoXHOgNFMO1mKyjFEwKZ0lp5k1zvfJuhHNUTf6bhVQXu1HIT4oHQcvW1RSSkcsaaSFUNWEi1lWVJhKyOI5AUhk9fXndewMR02dvqQqNs3pm-Z3v9RD-FJVXO7VTkZfNobxPB3g2lUnU8W21b3GDZJFaxgjEom6FQKu9JlAhHdyzUE1BwCtYRAzSFQSwgmycfX7b0I_o-c_gOAKLB9</recordid><startdate>20200515</startdate><enddate>20200515</enddate><creator>Fornaro, Michele</creator><creator>Fusco, Andrea</creator><creator>Novello, Stefano</creator><creator>Mosca, Pierluigi</creator><creator>Anastasia, Annalisa</creator><creator>De Blasio, Antonella</creator><creator>Iasevoli, Felice</creator><creator>de Bartolomeis, Andrea</creator><general>Frontiers Media S.A</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200515</creationdate><title>Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases</title><author>Fornaro, Michele ; Fusco, Andrea ; Novello, Stefano ; Mosca, Pierluigi ; Anastasia, Annalisa ; De Blasio, Antonella ; Iasevoli, Felice ; de Bartolomeis, Andrea</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>bipolar disorder</topic><topic>depression</topic><topic>mixed features</topic><topic>mixed states</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>treatment-resistance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fornaro, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fusco, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Novello, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mosca, Pierluigi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anastasia, Annalisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Blasio, Antonella</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iasevoli, Felice</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Bartolomeis, Andrea</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Frontiers in psychiatry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fornaro, Michele</au><au>Fusco, Andrea</au><au>Novello, Stefano</au><au>Mosca, Pierluigi</au><au>Anastasia, Annalisa</au><au>De Blasio, Antonella</au><au>Iasevoli, Felice</au><au>de Bartolomeis, Andrea</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases</atitle><jtitle>Frontiers in psychiatry</jtitle><addtitle>Front Psychiatry</addtitle><date>2020-05-15</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>11</volume><spage>438</spage><epage>438</epage><pages>438-438</pages><issn>1664-0640</issn><eissn>1664-0640</eissn><abstract>Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD) poses a significant clinical and societal burden, relying on different operational definitions and treatment approaches. The detection of clinical predictors of resistance is elusive, soliciting clinical subtyping of the depressive episodes, which represents the goal of the present study. A hundred and thirty-one depressed outpatients underwent psychopathological evaluation using major rating tools, including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, which served for subsequent principal component analysis, followed-up by cluster analysis, with the ultimate goal to fetch different clinical subtypes of depression. The cluster analysis identified two clinically interpretable, yet distinctive, groups among 53 bipolar (resistant cases = 15, or 28.3%) and 78 unipolar (resistant cases = 20, or 25.6%) patients. Among the MDD patients, cluster "1" included the following components: "Psychic symptoms, depressed mood, suicide, guilty, insomnia" and "genitourinary, gastrointestinal, weight loss, insight". Altogether, with broadly defined "mixed features," this latter cluster correctly predicted treatment outcome in 80.8% cases of MDD. The same "broadly-defined" mixed features of depression (namely, the standard Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-DSM-5-specifier plus increased energy, psychomotor activity, irritability) correctly classified 71.7% of BD cases, either as TRBD or not. Small sample size and high rate of comorbidity. Although relying on different operational criteria and treatment history, TRD and TRBD seem to be consistently predicted by broadly defined mixed features among different clinical subtypes of depression, either unipolar or bipolar cases. If replicated by upcoming studies to encompass also biological and neuropsychological measures, the present study may aid in precision medicine and informed pharmacotherapy.</abstract><cop>Switzerland</cop><pub>Frontiers Media S.A</pub><pmid>32670098</pmid><doi>10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1664-0640
ispartof Frontiers in psychiatry, 2020-05, Vol.11, p.438-438
issn 1664-0640
1664-0640
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_998f1cb7974e451a995538c7b8196211
source PubMed Central
subjects bipolar disorder
depression
mixed features
mixed states
Psychiatry
treatment-resistance
title Predictors of Treatment Resistance Across Different Clinical Subtypes of Depression: Comparison of Unipolar vs. Bipolar Cases
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T02%3A51%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Predictors%20of%20Treatment%20Resistance%20Across%20Different%20Clinical%20Subtypes%20of%20Depression:%20Comparison%20of%20Unipolar%20vs.%20Bipolar%20Cases&rft.jtitle=Frontiers%20in%20psychiatry&rft.au=Fornaro,%20Michele&rft.date=2020-05-15&rft.volume=11&rft.spage=438&rft.epage=438&rft.pages=438-438&rft.issn=1664-0640&rft.eissn=1664-0640&rft_id=info:doi/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00438&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2424439483%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-b4c85cb8996054c850f92e6d326013e060c1bb30dffb0ba4af9587f4ee0ed5fc3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2424439483&rft_id=info:pmid/32670098&rfr_iscdi=true