Title:
Can Medication Free, Treatment-Resistant, Depressed Patients Who Initially Respond to TMS Be Maintained Off Medications? A Prospective, 12-Month Multisite Randomized Pilot Study.
Author:
Philip NS; Dunner DL; Dowd SM; Aaronson ST; Brock DG; Carpenter LL; Demitrack MA; Hovav S; Janicak PG; George MS. Brain Stimulation. 9(2):251-7, 2016 Mar-Apr. [Journal Article. Multicenter Study. Randomized Controlled Trial] UI: 26708778
Background:
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is efficacious for acute treatment of resistant major depressive disorder (MDD), but there is little information on maintenance TMS after acute response.
Objective/Hypothesis:
This pilot feasibility study investigated 12-month outcomes comparing two maintenance TMS approaches–a scheduled, single TMS session delivered monthly (SCH) vs. observation only (OBS).
Methods:
Antidepressant-free patients with unipolar, non-psychotic, treatment-resistant MDD participated in a randomized, openlabel, multisite trial. Patients meeting protocol-defined criteria for improvement after six weeks of acute TMS were randomized to SCH or OBS regimens. TMS reintroduction was available for symptomatic worsening; all patients remained antidepressant-free during the trial.
Results:
Sixty-seven patients enrolled in the acute phase, and 49 (73%) met randomization criteria. Groups were matched, although more patients in the SCH group had failed > 2 antidepressants (p =.035). There were no significant group differences on any outcome measure. SCH patients had nonsignificantly longer time to first TMS reintroduction, 91 +/- 66 days, vs. OBS, 77 +/- 52 days; OBS patients were nonsignificantly more likely to need reintroduction (odds ratio = 1.21, 95% CI .38-3.89). Reintroduction lasted 14.3 +/- 17.8 days (SCH) and 16.9 +/- 18.9 days (OBS); 14/18 (78%) SCH and 17/27 (63%) OBS responded to reintroduction. Sixteen patients (32.7%) completed all 53 weeks of the study.
Conclusion:
Maintaining treatment-resistant depressed patients off medications with periodic TMS appears feasible in some cases. There was no statistical advantage of SCH vs. OBS, although SCH was associated with a nonsignificantly longer time to relapse. Those who initially respond to TMS have a strong chance of re-responding if relapse occurs. Copyright Published by Elsevier Inc.
Institutions:
Institution Philip, Noah S. Center for Neurorestoration and Neurotechnology, Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, RI, USA; Butler Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. Electronic address: Noah_Philip@Brown.edu. Dunner, David L.
Center for Anxiety and Depression, Mercer Island, WA, USA. Dowd, Sheila M. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA. Aaronson, Scott T.
Sheppard-Pratt Health System, Baltimore, MD, USA. Brock, David G. Neuronetics, Inc, Malvern, PA, USA. Carpenter, Linda L.
Butler Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. Demitrack, Mark A. Neuronetics, Inc, Malvern, PA, USA. Hovav, Sarit.
University of Nebraska Medical Center/Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA. Janicak, Philip G. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA. George, Mark S.
Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA; Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC, USA.
