» Articles » PMID: 38800454

Computational Approaches to Treatment Response Prediction in Major Depression Using Brain Activity and Behavioral Data: A Systematic Review

Overview
Journal Netw Neurosci
Publisher MIT Press
Specialty Neurology
Date 2024 May 27
PMID 38800454
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Major depressive disorder is a heterogeneous diagnostic category with multiple available treatments. With the goal of optimizing treatment selection, researchers are developing computational models that attempt to predict treatment response based on various pretreatment measures. In this paper, we review studies that use brain activity data to predict treatment response. Our aim is to highlight and clarify important methodological differences between various studies that relate to the incorporation of domain knowledge, specifically within two approaches delineated as data-driven and theory-driven. We argue that theory-driven generative modeling, which explicitly models information processing in the brain and thus can capture disease mechanisms, is a promising emerging approach that is only beginning to be utilized in treatment response prediction. The predictors extracted via such models could improve interpretability, which is critical for clinical decision-making. We also identify several methodological limitations across the reviewed studies and provide suggestions for addressing them. Namely, we consider problems with dichotomizing treatment outcomes, the importance of investigating more than one treatment in a given study for differential treatment response predictions, the need for a patient-centered approach for defining treatment outcomes, and finally, the use of internal and external validation methods for improving model generalizability.

Citing Articles

The Algorithmic Agent Perspective and Computational Neuropsychiatry: From Etiology to Advanced Therapy in Major Depressive Disorder.

Ruffini G, Castaldo F, Lopez-Sola E, Sanchez-Todo R, Vohryzek J Entropy (Basel). 2024; 26(11).

PMID: 39593898 PMC: 11592617. DOI: 10.3390/e26110953.


Test-retest reliability of behavioral and computational measures of advice taking under volatility.

Karvelis P, Hauke D, Wobmann M, Andreou C, Mackintosh A, de Bock R PLoS One. 2024; 19(11):e0312255.

PMID: 39556555 PMC: 11573178. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312255.


Contribution of resting-state functional connectivity of the subgenual anterior cingulate to prediction of antidepressant efficacy in patients with major depressive disorder.

Wang Y, Wang C, Zhou J, Chen X, Liu R, Zhang Z Transl Psychiatry. 2024; 14(1):399.

PMID: 39353921 PMC: 11445426. DOI: 10.1038/s41398-024-03117-1.


Editorial: Focus feature on consciousness and cognition.

McIntosh R, Hill S, Sporns O Netw Neurosci. 2023; 6(4):934-936.

PMID: 36875014 PMC: 9976637. DOI: 10.1162/netn_e_00273.

References
1.
Symmonds M, Moran C, Leite M, Buckley C, Irani S, Stephan K . Ion channels in EEG: isolating channel dysfunction in NMDA receptor antibody encephalitis. Brain. 2018; 141(6):1691-1702. PMC: 6207885. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awy107. View

2.
Fried E . Moving forward: how depression heterogeneity hinders progress in treatment and research. Expert Rev Neurother. 2017; 17(5):423-425. DOI: 10.1080/14737175.2017.1307737. View

3.
Leon A, Solomon D, Mueller T, Turvey C, Endicott J, Keller M . The Range of Impaired Functioning Tool (LIFE-RIFT): a brief measure of functional impairment. Psychol Med. 1999; 29(4):869-78. DOI: 10.1017/s0033291799008570. View

4.
Katahira K, Toyama A . Revisiting the importance of model fitting for model-based fMRI: It does matter in computational psychiatry. PLoS Comput Biol. 2021; 17(2):e1008738. PMC: 7899379. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008738. View

5.
Altman D, Royston P . The cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ. 2006; 332(7549):1080. PMC: 1458573. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.332.7549.1080. View