Search

Efforts to develop an individualized treatment rule (ITR) to optimize major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment with antidepressant medication (ADM), psychotherapy, or combined ADM-psychotherapy have been hampered by small samples, small predictor sets, and suboptimal analysis methods. Analyses of large administrative databases designed to approximate experiments followed iteratively by pragmatic trials hold promise for resolving these problems. The current report presents a proof-of-concept study using electronic health records (EHR) of n = 43,470 outpatients beginning MDD treatment in Veterans Health Administration Primary Care Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) clinics, which offer access not only to ADMs but also psychotherapy and combined ADM-psychotherapy. EHR and geospatial databases were used to generate an extensive baseline predictor set (5,865 variables). The outcome was a composite measure of at least one serious negative event (suicide attempt, psychiatric emergency department visit, psychiatric hospitalization, suicide death) over the next 12 months. Best-practices methods were used to adjust for nonrandom treatment assignment and to estimate a preliminary ITR in a 70% training sample and to evaluate the ITR in the 30% test sample. Statistically significant aggregate variation was found in overall probability of the outcome related to baseline predictors (AU-ROC = 0.68, S.E. = 0.01), with test sample outcome prevalence of 32.6% among the 5% of patients having highest predicted risk compared to 7.1% in the remainder of the test sample. The ITR found that psychotherapy-only was the optimal treatment for 56.0% of patients (roughly 20% lower risk of the outcome than if receiving one of the other treatments) and that treatment type was unrelated to outcome risk among other patients. Change in aggregate treatment costs of implementing this ITR would be negligible, as 16.1% fewer patients would be prescribed ADMs and 2.9% more would receive psychotherapy. A pragmatic trial would be needed to confirm the accuracy of the ITR., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Background: Only a limited number of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to a first course of antidepressant medication (ADM). We investigated the feasibility of creating a baseline model to determine which of these would be among patients beginning ADM treatment in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA)., Methods: A 2018-2020 national sample of n = 660 VHA patients receiving ADM treatment for MDD completed an extensive baseline self-report assessment near the beginning of treatment and a 3-month self-report follow-up assessment. Using baseline self-report data along with administrative and geospatial data, an ensemble machine learning method was used to develop a model for 3-month treatment response defined by the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomatology Self-Report and a modified Sheehan Disability Scale. The model was developed in a 70% training sample and tested in the remaining 30% test sample., Results: In total, 35.7% of patients responded to treatment. The prediction model had an area under the ROC curve (s.e.) of 0.66 (0.04) in the test sample. A strong gradient in probability (s.e.) of treatment response was found across three subsamples of the test sample using training sample thresholds for high [45.6% (5.5)], intermediate [34.5% (7.6)], and low [11.1% (4.9)] probabilities of response. Baseline symptom severity, comorbidity, treatment characteristics (expectations, history, and aspects of current treatment), and protective/resilience factors were the most important predictors., Conclusions: Although these results are promising, parallel models to predict response to alternative treatments based on data collected before initiating treatment would be needed for such models to help guide treatment selection.

Background: Fewer than half of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to psychotherapy. Pre-emptively informing patients of their likelihood of responding could be useful as part of a patient-centered treatment decision-support plan., Methods: This prospective observational study examined a national sample of 807 patients beginning psychotherapy for MDD at the Veterans Health Administration. Patients completed a self-report survey at baseline and 3-months follow-up (data collected 2018-2020). We developed a machine learning (ML) model to predict psychotherapy response at 3 months using baseline survey, administrative, and geospatial variables in a 70% training sample. Model performance was then evaluated in the 30% test sample., Results: 32.0% of patients responded to treatment after 3 months. The best ML model had an AUC (SE) of 0.652 (0.038) in the test sample. Among the one-third of patients ranked by the model as most likely to respond, 50.0% in the test sample responded to psychotherapy. In comparison, among the remaining two-thirds of patients, <25% responded to psychotherapy. The model selected 43 predictors, of which nearly all were self-report variables., Conclusions: Patients with MDD could pre-emptively be informed of their likelihood of responding to psychotherapy using a prediction tool based on self-report data. This tool could meaningfully help patients and providers in shared decision-making, although parallel information about the likelihood of responding to alternative treatments would be needed to inform decision-making across multiple treatments.

Background: Although research shows that more depressed patients respond to combined antidepressants (ADM) and psychotherapy than either alone, many patients do not respond even to combined treatment. A reliable prediction model for this could help treatment decision-making. We attempted to create such a model using machine learning methods among patients in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA)., Methods: A 2018-2020 national sample of VHA patients beginning combined depression treatment completed self-report assessments at baseline and 3 months (n = 658). A learning model was developed using baseline self-report, administrative, and geospatial data to predict 3-month treatment response defined by reductions in the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomatology Self-Report and/or in the Sheehan Disability Scale. The model was developed in a 70 % training sample and tested in the remaining 30 % test sample., Results: 30.0 % of patients responded to treatment. The prediction model had a test sample AUC-ROC of 0.657. A strong gradient was found in probability of treatment response from 52.7 % in the highest predicted quintile to 14.4 % in the lowest predicted quintile. The most important predictors were episode characteristics (symptoms, comorbidities, history), personality/psychological resilience, recent stressors, and treatment characteristics., Limitations: Restrictions in sample definition, a low recruitment rate, and reliance on patient self-report rather than clinician assessments to determine treatment response limited the generalizability of results., Conclusions: A machine learning model could help depressed patients and providers predict likely response to combined ADM-psychotherapy. Parallel information about potential harms and costs of alternative treatments would be needed, though, to inform optimal treatment selection., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest In the past 3 years, Dr. Kessler was a consultant for Cambridge Health Alliance, Canandaigua VA Medical Center, Holmusk, Partners Healthcare, Inc., RallyPoint Networks, Inc., and Sage Therapeutics. He has stock options in Cerebral Inc., Mirah, PYM, and Roga Sciences. Dr. Pigeon consulted for CurAegis Technologies and received clinical trial support from Pfizer, Inc. and Abbvie, Inc. Dr. Zubizarreta consulted for Johnson & Johnson Real World Data Analytics. Dr. Cipriani is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Cognitive Health Clinical Research Facility, by an NIHR Research Professorship (grant RP-2017-08-ST2-006), by the NIHR Oxford and Thames Valley Applied Research Collaboration and by the NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre (grant BRC-1215-20005); he has also received research, educational and consultancy fees from INCiPiT (Italian Network for Paediatric Trials), CARIPLO Foundation and Angelini Pharma. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the UK National Health Service, the NIHR, or the UK Department of Health. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)