Search

BackgroundEfforts to develop neuroimaging-based biomarkers in major depressive disorder (MDD), at the individual level, have been limited to date. As diagnostic criteria are currently symptom-based, MDD is conceptualized as a disorder rather than a disease with a known etiology; further, neural measures are often confounded by medication status and heterogeneous symptom states.MethodsWe describe a consortium to quantify neuroanatomical and neurofunctional heterogeneity via the dimensions of novel multivariate coordinate system (COORDINATE-MDD). Utilizing imaging harmonization and machine learning methods in a large cohort of medication-free, deeply phenotyped MDD participants, patterns of brain alteration are defined in replicable and neurobiologically-based dimensions and offer the potential to predict treatment response at the individual level. International datasets are being shared from multi-ethnic community populations, first episode and recurrent MDD, which are medication-free, in a current depressive episode with prospective longitudinal treatment outcomes and in remission. Neuroimaging data consist of de-identified, individual, structural MRI and resting-state functional MRI with additional positron emission tomography (PET) data at specific sites. State-of-the-art analytic methods include automated image processing for extraction of anatomical and functional imaging variables, statistical harmonization of imaging variables to account for site and scanner variations, and semi-supervised machine learning methods that identify dominant patterns associated with MDD from neural structure and function in healthy participants.ResultsWe are applying an iterative process by defining the neural dimensions that characterise deeply phenotyped samples and then testing the dimensions in novel samples to assess specificity and reliability. Crucially, we aim to use machine learning methods to identify novel predictors of treatment response based on prospective longitudinal treatment outcome data, and we can externally validate the dimensions in fully independent sites.ConclusionWe describe the consortium, imaging protocols and analytics using preliminary results. Our findings thus far demonstrate how datasets across many sites can be harmonized and constructively pooled to enable execution of this large-scale project.

The deep brain stimulation (DBS) Think Tank X was held on August 17-19, 2022 in Orlando FL. The session organizers and moderators were all women with the theme women in neuromodulation. Dr. Helen Mayberg from Mt. Sinai, NY was the keynote speaker. She discussed milestones and her experiences in developing depression DBS. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging DBS technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank X speakers was that DBS has continued to expand in scope however several indications have reached the "trough of disillusionment." DBS for depression was considered as "re-emerging" and approaching a slope of enlightenment. DBS for depression will soon re-enter clinical trials. The group estimated that globally more than 244,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. This year's meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia, and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, closed loop DBS, DBS tele-health, neuroethics, lesion therapy, interventional psychiatry, and adaptive DBS.

BackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly heterogenous disease, both in terms of clinical profiles and pathobiological alterations. Recently, immunometabolic dysregulations were shown to be correlated with atypical, energy-related symptoms but less so with the Melancholic or Anxious distress symptom dimensions of depression in The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA) study. In this study, we aimed to replicate these immunometabolic associations and to characterize the metabolomic correlates of each of the three MDD dimensions.MethodsUsing three clinical rating scales, Melancholic, and Anxious distress, and Immunometabolic (IMD) dimensions were characterized in 158 patients who participated in the Predictors of Remission to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study and from whom plasma and serum samples were available. The NESDA-defined inflammatory index, a composite measure of interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein, was measured from pre-treatment plasma samples and a metabolomic profile was defined using serum samples analyzed on three metabolomics platforms targeting fatty acids and complex lipids, amino acids, acylcarnitines, and gut microbiome-derived metabolites among other metabolites of central metabolism.ResultsThe IMD clinical dimension and the inflammatory index were positively correlated (r = 0.19, p = 0.019) after controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, whereas the Melancholic and Anxious distress dimensions were not, replicating the previous NESDA findings. The three symptom dimensions had distinct metabolomic signatures using both univariate and set enrichment statistics. IMD severity correlated mainly with gut-derived metabolites and a few acylcarnitines and long chain saturated free fatty acids. Melancholia severity was significantly correlated with several phosphatidylcholines, primarily the ether-linked variety, lysophosphatidylcholines, as well as several amino acids. Anxious distress severity correlated with several medium and long chain free fatty acids, both saturated and polyunsaturated ones, sphingomyelins, as well as several amino acids and bile acids.ConclusionThe IMD dimension of depression appears reliably associated with markers of inflammation. Metabolomics provides powerful tools to inform about depression heterogeneity and molecular mechanisms related to clinical dimensions in MDD, which include a link to gut microbiome and lipids implicated in membrane structure and function.

In this perspective article, we consider the critical issue of data and other research object standardisation and, specifically, how international collaboration, and organizations such as the International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility (INCF) can encourage that emerging neuroscience data be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR). As neuroscientists engaged in the sharing and integration of multi-modal and multiscale data, we see the current insufficiency of standards as a major impediment in the Interoperability and Reusability of research results. We call for increased international collaborative standardisation of neuroscience data to foster integration and efficient reuse of research objects.

DBS Think Tank IX was held on August 25-27, 2021 in Orlando FL with US based participants largely in person and overseas participants joining by video conferencing technology. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging deep brain stimulation (DBS) technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank IX speakers was that DBS expanded in its scope and has been applied to multiple brain disorders in an effort to modulate neural circuitry. After collectively sharing our experiences, it was estimated that globally more than 230,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. As such, this year's meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, neuroethics, interventional psychiatry, adaptive DBS, neuromodulation for pain, network neuromodulation for epilepsy and neuromodulation for traumatic brain injury.

There is great need for coordination around standards and best practices in neuroscience to support efforts to make neuroscience a data-centric discipline. Major brain initiatives launched around the world are poised to generate huge stores of neuroscience data. At the same time, neuroscience, like many domains in biomedicine, is confronting the issues of transparency, rigor, and reproducibility. Widely used, validated standards and best practices are key to addressing the challenges in both big and small data science, as they are essential for integrating diverse data and for developing a robust, effective, and sustainable infrastructure to support open and reproducible neuroscience. However, developing community standards and gaining their adoption is difficult. The current landscape is characterized both by a lack of robust, validated standards and a plethora of overlapping, underdeveloped, untested and underutilized standards and best practices. The International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility (INCF), an independent organization dedicated to promoting data sharing through the coordination of infrastructure and standards, has recently implemented a formal procedure for evaluating and endorsing community standards and best practices in support of the FAIR principles. By formally serving as a standards organization dedicated to open and FAIR neuroscience, INCF helps evaluate, promulgate, and coordinate standards and best practices across neuroscience. Here, we provide an overview of the process and discuss how neuroscience can benefit from having a dedicated standards body.

Lasting effects of adversity, such as exposure to childhood adversity (CA) on disease risk, may be embedded via epigenetic mechanisms but findings from human studies investigating the main effects of such exposure on epigenetic measures, including DNA methylation (DNAm), are inconsistent. Studies in perinatal tissues indicate that variability of DNAm at birth is best explained by the joint effects of genotype and prenatal environment. Here, we extend these analyses to postnatal stressors. We investigated the contribution of CA, cis genotype (G), and their additive (G + CA) and interactive (G × CA) effects to DNAm variability in blood or saliva from five independent cohorts with a total sample size of 1074 ranging in age from childhood to late adulthood. Of these, 541 were exposed to CA, which was assessed retrospectively using self-reports or verified through social services and registries. For the majority of sites (over 50%) in the adult cohorts, variability in DNAm was best explained by G + CA or G × CA but almost never by CA alone. Across ages and tissues, 1672 DNAm sites showed consistency of the best model in all five cohorts, with G × CA interactions explaining most variance. The consistent G × CA sites mapped to genes enriched in brain-specific transcripts and Gene Ontology terms related to development and synaptic function. Interaction of CA with genotypes showed the strongest contribution to DNAm variability, with stable effects across cohorts in functionally relevant genes. This underscores the importance of including genotype in studies investigating the impact of environmental factors on epigenetic marks.

It is unknown whether indoles, metabolites of tryptophan that are derived entirely from bacterial metabolism in the gut, are associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Serum samples (baseline, 12 weeks) were drawn from participants (n = 196) randomized to treatment with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), escitalopram, or duloxetine for major depressive disorder. Baseline indoxyl sulfate abundance was positively correlated with severity of psychic anxiety and total anxiety and with resting state functional connectivity to a network that processes aversive stimuli (which includes the subcallosal cingulate cortex (SCC-FC), bilateral anterior insula, right anterior midcingulate cortex, and the right premotor areas). The relation between indoxyl sulfate and psychic anxiety was mediated only through the metabolite's effect on the SCC-FC with the premotor area. Baseline indole abundances were unrelated to post-treatment outcome measures, and changes in symptoms were not correlated with changes in indole concentrations. These results suggest that CBT and antidepressant medications relieve anxiety via mechanisms unrelated to modulation of indoles derived from gut microbiota; it remains possible that treatment-related improvement stems from their impact on other aspects of the gut microbiome. A peripheral gut microbiome-derived metabolite was associated with altered neural processing and with psychiatric symptom (anxiety) in humans, which provides further evidence that gut microbiome disruption can contribute to neuropsychiatric disorders that may require different therapeutic approaches. Given the exploratory nature of this study, findings should be replicated in confirmatory studies.Clinical trial NCT00360399 "Predictors of Antidepressant Treatment Response: The Emory CIDAR" https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00360399 .

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.644593.].

We estimate that 208,000 deep brain stimulation (DBS) devices have been implanted to address neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders worldwide. DBS Think Tank presenters pooled data and determined that DBS expanded in its scope and has been applied to multiple brain disorders in an effort to modulate neural circuitry. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 providing a space where clinicians, engineers, researchers from industry and academia discuss current and emerging DBS technologies and logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The emphasis is on cutting edge research and collaboration aimed to advance the DBS field. The Eighth Annual DBS Think Tank was held virtually on September 1 and 2, 2020 (Zoom Video Communications) due to restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The meeting focused on advances in: (1) optogenetics as a tool for comprehending neurobiology of diseases and on optogenetically-inspired DBS, (2) cutting edge of emerging DBS technologies, (3) ethical issues affecting DBS research and access to care, (4) neuromodulatory approaches for depression, (5) advancing novel hardware, software and imaging methodologies, (6) use of neurophysiological signals in adaptive neurostimulation, and (7) use of more advanced technologies to improve DBS clinical outcomes. There were 178 attendees who participated in a DBS Think Tank survey, which revealed the expansion of DBS into several indications such as obesity, post-traumatic stress disorder, addiction and Alzheimer's disease. This proceedings summarizes the advances discussed at the Eighth Annual DBS Think Tank.

After exposure to a traumatic event, a subset of people develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). One of the key deficits in PTSD is regulation of fear, and impaired inhibition of fear-potentiated startle (FPS) has been identified as a potential physiological biomarker specific to PTSD. As part of a larger clinical trial, this study investigated the effects of a CRF receptor 1 antagonist, GSK561679, on inhibition of fear-potentiated startle during a conditional discrimination fear-conditioning paradigm, termed AX+/BX-. Prior research using this paradigm has demonstrated deficits in inhibition of conditioned fear in several PTSD populations. The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial compared fear inhibition between female PTSD participants taking 350 mg/day GSK561679 (n = 47 pre- and 29 post-treatment) and patients taking a placebo pill (n = 52 pre- and 30 post-treatment) daily for 6 weeks. There was no significant difference between the two groups in their acquisition of fear or discrimination between threat and safety cues, and no pre-post-treatment effect on these measures. However, there was a significant effect of treatment on inhibition of FPS during the AB trials in the AX+/BX- transfer test (p

ImportanceDeveloping more and better diagnostic and therapeutic tools for central nervous system disorders is an ethical imperative. Human research with neural devices is important to this effort and a critical focus of the National Institutes of Health Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. Despite regulations and standard practices for conducting ethical research, researchers and others seek more guidance on how to ethically conduct neural device studies. This article draws on, reviews, specifies, and interprets existing ethical frameworks, literature, and subject matter expertise to address 3 specific ethical challenges in neural devices research: analysis of risk, informed consent, and posttrial responsibilities to research participants.ObservationsResearch with humans proceeds after careful assessment of the risks and benefits. In assessing whether risks are justified by potential benefits in both invasive and noninvasive neural device research, the following categories of potential risks should be considered: those related to surgery, hardware, stimulation, research itself, privacy and security, and financial burdens. All 3 of the standard pillars of informed consent-disclosure, capacity, and voluntariness-raise challenges in neural device research. Among these challenges are the need to plan for appropriate disclosure of information about atypical and emerging risks of neural devices, a structured evaluation of capacity when that is in doubt, and preventing patients from feeling unduly pressured to participate. Researchers and funders should anticipate participants' posttrial needs linked to study participation and take reasonable steps to facilitate continued access to neural devices that benefit participants. Possible mechanisms for doing so are explored here. Depending on the study, researchers and funders may have further posttrial responsibilities.Conclusions and relevanceThis ethical analysis and points to consider may assist researchers, institutional review boards, funders, and others engaged in human neural device research.

IMPORTANCE: Developing more and better diagnostic and therapeutic tools for central nervous system disorders is an ethical imperative. Human research with neural devices is important to this effort and a critical focus of the National Institutes of Health Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. Despite regulations and standard practices for conducting ethical research, researchers and others seek more guidance on how to ethically conduct neural device studies. This article draws on, reviews, specifies, and interprets existing ethical frameworks, literature, and subject matter expertise to address 3 specific ethical challenges in neural devices research: analysis of risk, informed consent, and posttrial responsibilities to research participants. OBSERVATIONS: Research with humans proceeds after careful assessment of the risks and benefits. In assessing whether risks are justified by potential benefits in both invasive and noninvasive neural device research, the following categories of potential risks should be considered: those related to surgery, hardware, stimulation, research itself, privacy and security, and financial burdens. All 3 of the standard pillars of informed consent-disclosure, capacity, and voluntariness-raise challenges in neural device research. Among these challenges are the need to plan for appropriate disclosure of information about atypical and emerging risks of neural devices, a structured evaluation of capacity when that is in doubt, and preventing patients from feeling unduly pressured to participate. Researchers and funders should anticipate participants posttrial needs linked to study participation and take reasonable steps to facilitate continued access to neural devices that benefit participants. Possible mechanisms for doing so are explored here. Depending on the study, researchers and funders may have further posttrial responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This ethical analysis and points to consider may assist researchers, institutional review boards, funders, and others engaged in human neural device research.

BackgroundAwake neurosurgery requires patients to converse and respond to visual or verbal prompts to identify and protect brain tissue supporting essential functions such as language, primary sensory modalities, and motor function. These procedures can be poorly tolerated because of patient anxiety, yet acute anxiolytic medications typically cause sedation and impair cortical function.MethodsIn this study, direct electrical stimulation of the left dorsal anterior cingulum bundle was discovered to reliably evoke positive affect and anxiolysis without sedation in a patient with epilepsy undergoing research testing during standard inpatient intracranial electrode monitoring. These effects were quantified using subjective and objective behavioral measures, and stimulation was found to evoke robust changes in local and distant neural activity.ResultsThe index patient ultimately required an awake craniotomy procedure to confirm safe resection margins in the treatment of her epilepsy. During the procedure, cingulum bundle stimulation enhanced positive affect and reduced the patient's anxiety to the point that intravenous anesthetic/anxiolytic medications were discontinued and cognitive testing was completed. Behavioral responses were subsequently replicated in 2 patients with anatomically similar electrode placements localized to an approximately 1-cm span along the anterior dorsal cingulum bundle above genu of the corpus callosum.ConclusionsThe current study demonstrates a robust anxiolytic response to cingulum bundle stimulation in 3 patients with epilepsy.Trial registrationThe current study was not affiliated with any formal clinical trial.FundingThis project was supported by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and the NIH.

The annual deep brain stimulation (DBS) Think Tank aims to create an opportunity for a multidisciplinary discussion in the field of neuromodulation to examine developments, opportunities and challenges in the field. The proceedings of the Sixth Annual Think Tank recapitulate progress in applications of neurotechnology, neurophysiology, and emerging techniques for the treatment of a range of psychiatric and neurological conditions including Parkinsons disease, essential tremor, Tourette syndrome, epilepsy, cognitive disorders, and addiction. Each section of this overview provides insight about the understanding of neuromodulation for specific disease and discusses current challenges and future directions. This years report addresses key issues in implementing advanced neurophysiological techniques, evolving use of novel modulation techniques to deliver DBS, ans improved neuroimaging techniques. The proceedings also offer insights into the new era of brain network neuromodulation and connectomic DBS to define and target dysfunctional brain networks. The proceedings also focused on innovations in applications and understanding of adaptive DBS (closed-loop systems), the use and applications of optogenetics in the field of neurostimulation and the need to develop databases for DBS indications. Finally, updates on neuroethical, legal, social, and policy issues relevant to DBS research are discussed.

BACKGROUND: We have previously evaluated the efficacy of the CRF1 receptor antagonist GSK561679 in female PTSD patients. While GSK561679 was not superior to placebo overall, it was associated with a significantly stronger symptom reduction in a subset of patients with probable CRF system hyperactivity, i.e., patients with child abuse and CRHR1 SNP rs110402 GG carriers. Here, we test whether blood-based DNA methylation levels within CRHR1 and other PTSD-relevant genes would be associated with treatment outcome, either overall or in the high CRF activity subgroup. RESULTS: Therefore, we measured CRHR1 genotypes as well as baseline and post-treatment DNA methylation from the peripheral blood in the same cohort of PTSD-diagnosed women treated with GSK561679 (N = 43) or placebo (N = 45). In the same patients, we assessed DNA methylation at the PTSD-relevant genes NR3C1 and FKBP5, shown to predict or associate with PTSD treatment outcome after psychotherapy. We observed significant differences in CRHR1 methylation after GSK561679 treatment in the subgroup of patients with high CRF activity. Furthermore, NR3C1 baseline methylation significantly interacted with child abuse to predict PTSD symptom change following GSK561679 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support a possible role of CRHR1 methylation levels as an epigenetic marker to track response to CRF1 antagonist treatment in biologically relevant subgroups. Moreover, pre-treatment NR3C1 methylation levels may serve as a potential marker to predict PTSD treatment outcome, independent of the type of therapy. However, to establish clinical relevance of these markers, our findings require replication and validation in larger studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01018992 . Registered 6 November 2009.

ObjectiveRefractory psychiatric disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and there is a great need for new treatments. In the last decade, investigators piloted novel deep brain stimulation (DBS)-based therapies for depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Results from recent pivotal trials of these therapies, however, did not demonstrate the degree of efficacy expected from previous smaller trials. To discuss next steps, neurosurgeons, neurologists, psychiatrists and representatives from industry convened a workshop sponsored by the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery in Chicago, Illinois, in June of 2016.DesignHere we summarise the proceedings of the workshop. Participants discussed a number of issues of importance to the community. First, we discussed how to interpret results from the recent pivotal trials of DBS for OCD and depression. We then reviewed what can be learnt from lesions and closed-loop neurostimulation. Subsequently, representatives from the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and industry discussed their views on neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders. In particular, these third parties discussed their criteria for moving forward with new trials. Finally, we discussed the best way of confirming safety and efficacy of these therapies, including registries and clinical trial design. We close by discussing next steps in the journey to new neuromodulatory therapies for these devastating illnesses.ConclusionInterest and motivation remain strong for deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disease. Progress will require coordinated efforts by all stakeholders.