Search

Background This randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial examined the antidepressant efficacy of the muscarinic antagonist scopolamine in major depressive disorder subjects with more severe and refractory forms of major depressive disorder relative to previous reports. Methods Participants included 23 medication-free major depressive disorder subjects (12 F/11 M, 20–55 years) currently experiencing a major depressive episode. Subjects had scored ≥20 on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. Following a single-blind, placebo lead-in, participants were randomized to receive 2 counterbalanced blocks of 3 i.v. infusions of scopolamine (4 μg/kg) and placebo in a double-blind manner. The primary and secondary outcomes were the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, respectively. Magnetoencephalography and plasma brain-derived neurotrophic factor concentrations were obtained prior to and after each treatment phase. Results As assessed by both the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, scopolamine had no significant antidepressant or anxiolytic effects relative to placebo. No significant drug vs placebo effects were seen in magnetoencephalography gamma power or brain-derived neurotrophic factor plasma concentrations, and brain-derived neurotrophic factor changes did not correlate with change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale score in response to scopolamine. Conclusions These results do not support the efficacy of scopolamine for more severe or refractory forms of depression. No pre- to post-infusion changes in plasma brain-derived neurotrophic factor were detected, and magnetoencephalography gamma power changed only in the placebo lead-in, suggesting that these biomarker measures were not affected by scopolamine in this cohort. While difficult to interpret given the lack of antidepressant response, the findings suggest that the neurobiological effects of ketamine and scopolamine are at least partly distinct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder, abnormalities in excitatory and/or inhibitory neurotransmission and neuronal plasticity may lead to aberrant functional connectivity patterns within large brain networks. Network dysfunction in association with altered brain levels of glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid have been identified in both animal and human studies of depression. In addition, evidence of an antidepressant response to subanesthetic-dose ketamine has led to a collection of studies that have examined neurochemical (e.g., glutamatergic and gamma-aminobutyric acidergic) and functional imaging correlates associated with such an effect. Results from these studies suggest that an antidepressant response in association with ketamine occurs, in part, by reversing these neurochemical/physiological disturbances. Future studies in depression will require a combination of neuroimaging approaches from which more biologically homogeneous subgroups can be identified, particularly with respect to treatment response biomarkers of glutamatergic modulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last few decades, neuroimaging techniques have advanced the identification of structural, functional, and neurochemical brain abnormalities that are associated with the increased risk, clinical course, and treatment outcomes of major depressive disorder (MDD). This paper reviews specific neuroimaging abnormalities that, on the basis of early studies, may discriminate between MDD patients who do or do not respond to current therapeutic modalities, such as antidepressants, cognitive behavioral therapy, or novel therapies. Differences in gray matter volume, white matter coherence, brain activity via structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging techniques, and concentrations of specific brain metabolites (as measured with magnetic resonance spectroscopy), are potential biomarkers discussed in this review. Given the heterogeneity of MDD, larger, multisite studies with increased statistical power will be needed to identify more precise imaging biomarkers of treatment response in MDD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]