Review Steps on How to Help a Patient Suffering From Depression Corey Theory and Practice
Nat Rev Neurosci. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 Oct ane.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC2748674
NIHMSID: NIHMS102348
Cerebral therapy vs. medications for depression: Treatment outcomes and neural mechanisms
Robert J. DeRubeis
University of Pennsylvania
Greg J. Siegle
University of Pittsburgh
Steven D. Hollon
Vanderbilt University
Abstract
Depression is 1 of the most prevalent and debilitating of the psychiatric disorders. Studies have shown that cerebral therapy is every bit efficacious as antidepressant medications at treating low, and it seems to reduce the risk of relapse even after its discontinuation. Cognitive therapy and antidepressant medication probably engage some similar neural mechanisms, as well equally mechanisms that are distinctive to each. A precise specification of these mechanisms might one 24-hour interval be used to guide treatment choice and improve outcomes.
Major depressive disorder is a serious illness that in the United States alone is estimated to affect 13 to fourteen one thousand thousand adults each year. The lifetime prevalence charge per unit (16%) is even higher, with an estimated 32 to 35 1000000 US residents expected to develop the disorder at some point during their lifetime. Non just can depression be debilitating on its own, it also has a loftier charge per unit of co-morbidity with other mental illnesses. Indeed, nearly three-quarters of people who meet the criteria for depression at some point during their lifetime will as well run across the criteria for another psychiatric disorder: approximately three-fifths volition be co-morbid for one of the feet disorders, ane-quarter for substance utilize disorders and i-third for impulse-command disordersi.
Substantial impairment in social and occupational functioning is besides oftentimes observed in depressed individuals2. Not surprisingly, the economic burden of low is enormous. Workplace-related costs in the United States have been estimated at more than fifty billion dollars annually.3 Although most episodes of low resolve without treatment, over one-quarter of all patients endure from chronic low, and the vast bulk of those who do recover from a depressive episode volition experience recurrences. Owing to its prevalence, its chronic and recurrent nature and its frequent co-morbity with other chronic illnesses - both equally a contributing gene and as a effect – low is considered to be the condition that is most responsible for health decrements worldwide. It is therefore a global health priority to sympathise, prevent and care for depression.4
The nature of low
Low tin exist defined as both a syndrome and a disorder. Equally a syndrome it involves episodes of sadness, loss of interest, pessimism, negative beliefs nearly the self, decreased motivation, behavioural passivity, changes in sleep, appetite and sexual interest, and suicidal thoughts and impulses. Every bit a disorder it comes in two forms. The unipolar blazon, which affects approximately ten% of men and twenty% of women, includes only episodes of depression.1 Heritability estimates for this unipolar blazon have ranged from approximately 25% in less-severe samples upwardly to 50% in more than-astringent samples.5
In the bipolar form, which is commonly known every bit manic depression, patients also (or exclusively) feel episodes of mania or hypomania that are in many ways the opposite of depression. Manic episodes are marked by euphoria or irritability, sleeplessness, grandiosity, recklessness and uncontrollable impulses that can pb to buying sprees and sexual promiscuity.6 This Perspective concentrates on unipolar low, as the phenomenology differs from bipolar depression, as exercise the medication and psychological treatments. In addition, more is known about the neural mechanisms that underlie unipolar disorder and its treatment, and it is unclear how these mechanisms are related to those of bipolar disorder.
Current treatment practices
The goal of acute treatment for unipolar low with antidepressant medication (ADM), the current standard of treatment, is generally to provide symptom relief. In this context, response is defined as a noticeable improvement, and remission is defined past the near absence of symptoms.7 Even when remission is accomplished, patients retain a high risk of relapse (that is, the render of symptoms within the same episode). For this reason, patients who have been treated to the point of remission with ADM are brash to continue handling for at least six months (the period of greatest risk of relapse). Patients whose remission lasts for six months are said to take recovered. However, those who recover from depression with ADM but then discontinue the treatment accept a adventure of experiencing a new episode of depression (recurrence) that is 3 to 5 times the chance of a member of the general population experiencing a beginning episode of depression. Consequently, practice guidelines emphasize the benefits of maintaining recovered patients on ADMs indefinitely, especially for patients who take a history of recurrent (or chronic) depression.
In improver to ADM, other treatments are effective in alleviating depression. These include cognitive therapy (CT) and other forms of psychotherapy, such equally interpersonal therapy,8 electroconvulsive therapy9 and electrical stimulation of the vagus nervus.10 Newer interventions, such as behavioural activation,xi neurofeedback,12 , 13 and chronic stimulation of the subgenual cingulate region (Brodmann area 25)14 take as well shown promise in recent clinical trials. The fact that at that place are diverse means through which low tin can be alleviated suggests that different treatments might engage common neural mechanisms, although they might affect a final common pathway through widely differing processes. This Perspective focuses on a comparison of CT and ADM because, amid the common effective treatments, these ii treatments have been the focus of the about intensive research efforts, both with regard to the outcomes that they produce and the mechanisms that might explain their effects. We argue that comparative investigations of CT and ADM hope to further our agreement of the nature of low, equally these treatments utilise very different routes of administration and because CT, merely not ADM, seems to modify the subsequent course of depression.
Antidepressant medication
ADMs fall into a few principal classes, including older types of medication such as monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). More than recently developed treatments include agents that block the reuptake of serotonin, noradrenaline or dopamine – their names refer to the neurotransmitter systems that they are believed to touch the nearly. The selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been the virtually widely prescribed ADMs to date, although the newer serotonin/noradrenaline-reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are likewise now coming into widespread use.
The efficacy of ADM has been established in literally thousands of placebo-controlled clinical trials.15 , 16 Approximately half of all patients will reply to whatever given ADM irrespective of its class, and many of the other one-half will answer to some other ADM or to a combination of ADMs.17 Nonetheless, ADMs seem to be symptom-suppressive rather than curative.18 That is, although ADM is effective in the handling of the acute depressive episode and is preventive and so long as its apply is maintained, no published findings to date suggest that ADMs reduce time to come adventure of depressive episodes one time their use is terminated.19 This suggests that causal mechanisms of depression are unchanged by ADM handling, and and so patients are left with an elevated adventure for subsequent episodes if they stop taking their medications. Because the adventure is not absolute – non all patients experience a return of depression after they stop taking ADM – it is likely that these causal mechanisms take the form of stable diatheses that interact with negative life events to determine the onset of subsequent episodes. These causal diatheses might be represented by neural processes, and research that aims to specify these processes is ongoing.
Research on humans and animals indicates that ADMs alter the regulatory processes of monoamine systems, specially the serotonin, noradrenaline and dopamine systems, in such a style as to opposite pathological patterns of performance that arise during the depressive episode. These agents bear upon neurotransmitter degradation (in the case of the MAOIs) or reuptake mechanisms (in the case of the TCAs, SSRIs, and SNRIs), in areas of the limbic system that subserve emotional responses, appetite, sexual involvement and sleep, all of which are notably disordered in depression. Changes in neurotransmitter availability are known to trigger various other changes in the brain, such as decreases in amygdala activity20 and decreases in neurogenesis in the hippocampus.21 They also affect higher cortical processes, through straight projections as well as indirect connections. However, the long-term effects of these changes on cognition and behaviour have not been examined. Moreover, the lack of evidence that in humans ADM treatment reduces the take chances of developing subsequent depressive episodes suggests that the changes in brain part and structure that are idea to effect from ADM treatment practise not confer protection against the return of symptoms once ADM is discontinued.
Cognitive therapy
CT is the best-known and nigh widely tested of a larger family of cognitive behavioural interventions. Like ADM, it is a safe and efficacious treatment for acute episodes of major depressive disorder. CT is based on the premise that inaccurate behavior and maladaptive information processing (forming the bases for repetitive negative thinking) have a causal role in depression. This 'cognitive model' posits that when maladaptive thinking is corrected, both astute distress and the risk for subsequent symptom return volition exist reduced. Contrasting with the lack of show of enduring effects of ADMs is the substantiation of claims that CT provides protection confronting relapse and, perchance, recurrence.18
Aaron T. Beck developed CT for depression in the 1960s. Past 1979 he and his colleagues had codified the treatment in a detailed transmission.22 In CT, therapists aim to help patients acquire the abilities to, first, identify the thoughts and images that accompany and precede the experience of upsetting emotions; second, distance themselves from the beliefs embedded in, or implied by, these thoughts and images; third, question, often through experiments, the validity of their beliefs (for instance., What is the evidence for this belief? Are there alternative explanations for the event that triggered the beliefs?); and fourth, identify the themes in the content of the thoughts and images that occur beyond a range of situations.
Outcomes of CT versus ADM
Findings from initial studies that compared CT with ADM, which were conducted in the 1970s and 1980s, suggested that CT is as efficacious equally ADM in reducing acute distress, and that its effects are more enduring.23 - xxx However, in a major placebo-controlled trial of ADM versus CT, Elkin et al. reported that, for patients who began the trial with severe symptoms, ADM was more efficacious than CT, and CT was non demonstrably more than efficacious than placebo.31 Moreover, there was footling evidence for an enduring effect of CT.32 Even so, in that location were suggestions in these data that the result of CT varied across research sites as a function of therapist experience, which might business relationship for the apparent discrepancy between these findings and those that have been obtained in other randomized trials of CT and ADM.33 Indeed, a mega-assay of information pooled across the major CT-ADM comparisons showed that the 2 types of treatment are comparably effective in severely depressed patients.34
None of the above-cited studies was designed to test these treatments specifically in severely depressed patients. Even in the Elkin et al. written report, the sample sizes of severely depressed patients were under 30 per condition. In a more than recent CT -ADM placebo-controlled comparison, 240 severely depressed patients were randomized to ADM (n=120), CT (n=threescore) or a (pill) placebo control (n=60) treatment.35 ADM involved paroxetine (an SSRI), augmented with lithium or desipramine as needed. The providers of both the ADM and the CT were experienced practitioners who received feedback and supervision throughout the period of the study. Equally shown in FIG. 1, both CT and ADM outperformed placebo at the 8-week cess point (subsequently which the placebo condition was discontinued). At the finish of the 16-week treatment phase of the study, there were no differences in upshot between ADM and CT, with 58% of patients in both treatment groups meeting the criteria for 'response'. Curiously, at that place was no indication that the ii treatments affected different symptom clusters of low: patients treated with either ADM or CT showed comparable rates of change of both cognitive and vegetative symptoms of low.36 This contrasts with results from studies that compared ADM with other psychosocial interventions. For example, one report reported that ADM, when compared with interpersonal psychotherapy, produced a more than rapid resolution of vegetative symptoms such as insomnia, despite the fact that both treatments caused comparable levels of overall improvement in depression-symptom severity.37
Cognitive therapy and antidepressant medication have comparable curt-term effects
This graph shows the response of outpatients who had moderate to astringent low to cognitive therapy (CT), antidepressant medication (ADM) or placebo (PLA). Patients who were assigned to either ADM or to CT showed a significantly higher response rate after 8 weeks of treatment than those who were assigned to PLA. After sixteen of treatment weeks the percentages of patients who responded to ADM and CT were almost identical.35 Figure modified, with permission, from REF #35.
In the continuation phase of the recent CT versus ADM written report, patients who responded to 16 weeks of ADM were randomly assigned to either proceed the treatment or change to a (pill) placebo condition.38 Patients who responded to 16 weeks of CT were withdrawn from treatment and allowed no more than 3 booster sessions (never more one per calendar month) during the offset year of the follow-upwards menstruum. As shown in FIG. 2, 76% of the ADM responders relapsed following medication withdrawal, compared with only 31% of the patients who had been treated with CT.38 Patients who continued ADM also fared meliorate than patients who were assigned to the placebo treatment, with a relapse rate of 47% (which did not differ significantly from the 31% relapse rate in the CT group). After the continuation stage had ended, the patients who had not relapsed while on ADM were withdrawn from medication. Of these patients, 54% experienced a recurrence (the onset of a new depressive episode), compared with simply 17% of the patients who had previously been given CT.
Less relapse after cerebral therapy compared to antidepressant medication. The second phase of the parent study35 followed patients who had responded to antidepressant medication (ADM) or to cognitive therapy (CT).38 Patients who responded to ADM were randomly assigned to either continue ADM handling for one year (beige and cherry lines), or to change to placebo treatment for one year (dark-green line). Patients who responded to CT were allowed three sessions of CT during the 1-year continuation period. In the follow-up period, none of the patients received whatever handling. The effigy shows that prior treatment with CT protected against relapse of depression at to the lowest degree every bit well as the continued provision of ADM, and ameliorate than ADM treatment that was subsequently discontinued. Annotation that the patient group that was given ADM in the continuation year contained a number of patients who did not attach to the medication regimen. The red line indicates the response of the ADM-continuation grouping including these non-compliant patients, whereas the beige line shows the response of the patients in this group afterwards the non-compliant patients had been removed from the assay. Figure modified, with permission, from REF #38, Figure 1 inside that paper – demand to obtain permission from the Archives of General Psychiatry.
These findings, which are consistent with the pattern observed in previous studies, point that CT has an enduring effect that is non found with ADM. This suggests that, whereas the acute responses to CT and ADM might exist due to changes in similar mechanisms (consistent with the similar rates of change of unlike symptom clusters resulting from the two types of handling), CT tin be assumed to also produce changes that ADM does not. Attempts to determine whether the ii types of treatment affect different symptom domains, which could acount for the difference in their enduring effects, have non thus far succeeded. It might therefore be useful to consider differences in more-subtle underlying mechanisms of modify that are not apparent at the symptom level.
Brain mechanisms of cerebral aspects of depression
For two reasons, neuroscience provides an excellent platform for studying the mechanisms that underlie depression and the effects of ADM and CT handling. First, understanding how alterations in brain activity are associated with the initial response to treatment and subsequent symptom return could contribute to a mechanistic explanation for the treatment patterns that have been observed (and which were described above). 2d, initial information are already suggestive, in that changes in brain activity that take been associated with depression accept also been observed in individuals who have recovered from depression but are at risk for recurrence.39 , xl These data advise that assessments of brain role could be used to predict the onset and recurrence of depressive episodes.
The following sections thus introduce one business relationship of how changes in action in encephalon areas that are thought to be involved in low might interact, and also describe some implications for an agreement of the brusk-term similarities and the long-term differences between the effects of CT and ADM. What follows is non meant to be a comprehensive summary of the many investigations that have contributed to our understanding of the nature of brain function in depression. Rather, every bit the straight aim of CT is to bring nearly changes in the way that patients process emotion-relevant information, with the assumption that the behavioural and vegetative features of depression will remit as a event of the cognitive changes, we emphasize show from studies that fabricated use of emotional stimuli or that focused on the brain circuits that have been institute, experimentally, to be involved in emotion regulation. In particular, aspects of emotional information processing that are often observed in patients with low, such equally repetitive negative thinking, have been associated with increased limbic activity and decreased action in the prefrontal cortex. Every bit described below, converging evidence for these associations has been obtained with various neuroimaging methods, predominantly positron-emission tomography (PET) and functional MRI (fMRI).
Increased or sustained amygdala activeness
The amygdala, a limbic region that is important for processing the emotional aspects of information and generating emotional reactions,41 projects to cortical and subcortical regions, such as the hippocampus, which subserves the creation and maintenance of emotional associations in memory.42 Through these connections, increases in amygdala activity could foster sustained repetitive negative associations. Alterations in amygdala volume and activity have been observed in samples of depressed patients,43 with the most-consistent evidence suggesting increased and relatively unmodulated amygdala activity.xx , 44 - 46 Such abnormalities in neural processes and associated cerebral processes are understood to be fundamental to the expression of depressive symptoms,47 although anxiety disorders take also been linked to amygdala dysfunction.48
Decreased prefrontal control
Given that the prefrontal cortex exerts an inhibitory issue on limbic regions such as the amygdala,49 - 54 sustained emotional reactivity might result from decreased prefrontal executive control. The existence of inhibitory connections from the orbital prefrontal cortex (OFC) and ventromedial regions, such equally the rostral and subgenual cingulate gyri, to the amygdala,55 , 56 suggests that these regions might exert a 'damping' effect on the amygdala, and therefore on emotional reactivity. In item, alterations in the activity of the rostral and subgenual cingulate regions (Brodmann areas 24 and 25), which take direct connections to the amygdala, have been consistently implicated in depression.53 , 57 , 58 However, it is likely that these regions are themselves enervated by 'upstream' processes in regions that are directly involved in executive control. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), in detail, is implicated in activating brain mechanisms that are necessary for completing tasks,59 yielding decreased action in other, non-task-relevant regions. The DLPFC might specifically inhibit the amygdala through cortico-cortical connections to the OFC.sixty Consequently, depressed individuals might suffer from decreased control of amygdala activity as a result of deficits in early automatic prefrontal mechanisms and in the higher-level areas that have been implicated in executive command, such as the DLPFC.44 , 50 , 61 , 62 An important upshot of this disinibition is continued increased amygdala activity, potenitally facilitating prolonged emotional reactivity. Inhibitory connections from the amygdala back to the prefrontal cortex could further contribute to these deficits in the regulation of emotion.
In support of the hypothesis of decreased prefrontal control in depression, findings from both resting-state PET imaging and task-related fMRI studies suggest that depressed individuals have decreased prefrontal activity compared with healthy individuals.46 , 52 , 63 - 65 Depressed individuals also perform poorly on tasks that assess executive control and working memory,66 , 67 particularly those that engage the DLPFC.68 , 69 Impairment in these functions in depressed individuals is especially evident under conditions that require sustained activation of executive resources. For case, in a study in which the participants' task was to approximate whether degraded pictures of digits were zeroes, depressed individuals' performance worsened over time, whereas controls' did non.70-In back up of the thought that increased limbic activity interferes with prefrontal regulatory function, processes that engage sustained elaborative emotional processing, such as rumination, besides seem to interfere with cognitive tasks in patients with depression.71 Findings from several studies that examined resting-state electroencephalograms (EEGs) suggest that there is decreased left prefrontal activity in depressed individuals, relative both to depressed participants' right frontal EEG activity and to EEG measures taken from the left prefrontal regions of healthy individuals.60 Consistent with the picture that is suggested by findings from other studies, a recent study used fMRI to demonstrate, in a sample of depressed patients, decreased left DLPFC recruitment during executive control and emotional information-processing tasks, besides equally decreased functional relationships between DLPFC activeness and amygdala action.46
In the following sections we thus consider two mechanisms that could be implicated in maintenaining depressive functioning: abnormally increased and sustained limbic (peculiarly amygdala) activity, and abnormally depression prefrontal control. The amygdala and the prefrontal cortex are but ii of the brain regions for which at that place is evidence of dysfunction in depression,62 and some accounts of brain abnormalities in patients with depression have emphasized the significance of neurochemical systems rather than brain regions.50 , 52 , 58 , 74 - 76 For instance, Mayberg and colleagues accept cited evidence in support of their hypothesis that an extensive brain network is impaired in indivuals with the full syndrome of depression.77 , 78 Their work has included examinations of action in the DLPFC, the rostral and posterior cingulate gyri and the OFC in association with cognitive processes, including attending and cocky-referential focus. They have as well reported testify that links the vegetative and circadian aspects of depression to the insula, the subgenual cingulate gyrus and the hypothalamus.79 These regions take been shown not only to collaborate with the regions that nosotros are concentrating on in this commodity, but also, every bit a full network, to yield insights into differential aspects of remission and recovery in CT and ADM treatments.78 This broader conception has also led this group to consider, for example, non-pharmacological and non-psychotherapeutic interventions that might have specific furnishings on this circuitry.80 Withal, the purpose of this Perspective is to formulate a hypothesis that, on the i hand, describes the encephalon functions that are thought to be disrupted during depression and ameliorated by brusque-term treatments with ADM or CT, and that on the other hand can account for the ascertainment that the effects of CT endure, relative to those of ADM. This approach emphasizes the cognitive and emotion-dysregulation aspects of low rather than the neurovegetative symptoms, and consequently focuses on the brain regions that are typically associated with those features.
Effects of treatment on brain circuitry
Both CT and ADM probably affect limbic and prefrontal circuitry, although their proximal mechanisms of action might differ. A primary goal of CT is to replace automatic emotional reactivity with more-controlled processing.81 CT might thus increase inhibitory executive command, helping to interrupt or dampen automated limbic reactions. In fact, functions of the PFC that are impaired in depression, such every bit task-related management of attention,82 willful regulation of emotional responses53 , 54.83 , 84, and reappraisal,85 are the focus of therapeutic action in CT. Many of these cerebral processes are also associated with decreased limbic, peculiarly amygdala, activeness.53 , 54 , 83 , 84 Perchance every bit a consequence, likely correlates of sustained limbic reactivity, such as dysfunctional negative cognitions, are decreased following CT,86 - 89 although these causal links have yet to be firmly established.
The few findings that have emerged from neuroimaging studies of changes in emotional reactivity during CT are consistent with this formulation. One of the authors of this Perspective (Thou.J.South.) observed, using fMRI, increased amygdala activity in depressed patients (relative to controls) before CT in a task that required them to rate the personal relevance of emotional information, and decreased DLPFC action (relative to controls) in a task that required them to adjust digits in numerical order.46 , xc As shown in FIG. 3, in a small sample of participants that was assessed following 14 weeks of CT, these abnormalities normalized: amygdala activity in response to emotionally relevant data decreased, and prefrontal action on cognitive tasks increased, nearly to the level that was observed in good for you controls.91 This result is conceptually like to results that have been obtained in fMRI studies of cognitive-behavioural therapy for specific phobia, in which patients who were treated successfully with cognitive-behavioural therapy showed normalization in the activity of structures that have been implicated in emotional reactivity.92 , 93 In further support of the idea that CT is associated with increased functional employ of the DLPFC is the finding that training in prefrontal executive tasks is associated with increased DLPFC action during cognitive tasks and with decreased amygdala reactivity in response to emotional stimuli after therapy.94 Yet Mayberg et al. have described, using resting-land PET studies, that recovery in CT is associated with decreased, rather than increased, resting DLPFC metabolism.95 The apparent contrast between this finding and those that suggest that CT results in greater frontal action during frontal tasks could be resolved if one considers that recovery might involve the lowering of tonic resting-land activity, to allow for greater reactivity when executive control is recruited; however, this hypothesis has still to be tested in the context of neuroimaging investigations.
Changes in Assuming betoken in response to cognitive and emotional tasks associated with cerebral therapy
Nine depressed participants and 24 controls completed tasks that involved rating the personal relevance of negative words and arranging digits in numerical club before and afterwards 12 weeks of cognitive therapy (CT). Equally shown in the figure, CT was associated with normalization of amygdala activity in response to emotional words also equally normalization of dorso-lateral prefrontal activeness during a cognitive task that involved putting digits in numerical social club in working memory.91
ADM might target limbic regions direct, rather than relying on inhibition through the prefrontal cortex. SSRIs increase the availability of serotonin at the synapse, which could lead to inhibition of the amygdala besides as of other ventral limbic regions, equally has been observed in resting-state neuroimaging studies.96 - 103 Although activeness in dorsal prefrontal regions also increased in these studies, such effects could accept resulted from decreased limbo-cortical inhibition. Findings from fMRI studies suggest that symptom decreases produced past SSRIs pb to a functional decrease in limbic reactivity to emotional faces.xx , 104 Increases in DLPFC and perigenual cingulate activity as the consequence of handling with SSRIs and SNRIs accept also been observed,104 , 105 again consistent with the possibility that SSRIs and SNRIs human activity on inhibitory mechanisms. However, direct comparisons of these results with those that accept been obtained with CT have not been made.
FIGURE 4 shows the patterns of response to CT and ADM that we propose on the ground of the evidence and theory that are summarized in this Perspective. Every bit shown in the figure, acutely depressed individuals could be characterized by decreased prefrontal function, possibly arising in part from increased amygdala reactivity. Nosotros suggest that CT operates past bolstering prefrontal function whereas ADM operates more directly on the amygdala. These treatments might thus result in end states that are, in i important respect, similar; normalized amygdala and PFC action might result from either ADM or CT. Further investigation of the differences in brusque-term responses volition be crucial, then, for understanding why CT produces a sustained effect whereas ADM does not. If the amygdala is 'the point of entry' for ecology stressors, abeyance of ADM treatment could leave a person at risk of having strong maladaptive reactions to new environmental insults. By contrast, if CT works by building skills that crave the agile operation of the PFC, the effects of CT on PFC activeness and function might be relatively indelible.
Hypothetical time-course of changes to amygdala and prefrontal office associated with ADM and CT
A. During acute depression, amygdala action is increased (scarlet) and prefrontal activity is decreased (blueish) compared to salubrious individuals; B. CT effectively exercises the PFC, yielding increased inhibitory function; C. ADM targets amygdala office more than direct, decreasing its activity; D. Afterwards ADM or CT, amygdala function is decreased and prefrontal office is increased. The double-headed arrow between the amygdala and PFC represents the bidirectional homeostatic influences which are believed to operate in healthy individuals.
Consistent with this conceptualization, some of the mechanisms of action would be expected to differ betwixt CT and ADM. Findings from randomized comparisons of CT and ADM suggest that they indeed engage dissimilar psychological mechanisms. For case, a change in negative expectations predicts subsequent alter in depression in people treated with CT but non in people treated with ADM,89 and a modify in information-processing biases, such as the kinds of causal attributions that people make for negative life events, predicts absence of relapse following treatment termination and seems to mediate the enduring effect of CT.106 Although in that location are as yet no published fMRI studies that compare patients treated with CT and patients treated with ADM, PET studies accept shown post-treatment differences in resting-state measures of brain function between these groups.78 , 95 , 98 , 107 - 108 Equally discussed previously, the response to CT has been associated with decreased resting-state activity in the prefrontal cortx, and with increased resting-country activity in the hippocampus and the dorsal cingulate.96 This pattern was in some of import respects the reverse of that which was exhibited past a matched group of patients who responded to the ADM paroxetine, in whom prefrontal increases and hippocampal and subgenual cingulate decreases were observed.95 Thus, whereas CT might allow a resetting of tonic prefrontal activity, to yield greater capacity for 'pinnacle-downward' emotion regulation when it is needed (such every bit when skills taught in CT are engaged), ADMs might increase subcortical cingulate metabolism tonically, creating a 'bottom-upward' consequence whereby relevant limbic regions are tonically inhibited during ADM administration.
This interpretation, although speculative, is consistent with fMRI data obtained from patients who had responded to ADMs, in whom decreased amygdala responses to neutral too as emotional faces was observed.20 In another fMRI written report, depressed patients who were treated successfully with SSRIs displayed increased corticolimbic connectivity at rest, merely non in response to emotional stimuli.109 This finding is consistent with the idea that ADM decreases limbic activity, which in turn leads to prefrontal disinhibition.
Prediction of change
A neuroimaging-informed understanding of the brain mechanisms that are engaged past CT and ADM handling could lead to the development of algorithms that predict which treatment is more likely to benefit a given patient.76 Moreover, given the testify of enduring effects for CT, there is reason to call up that changes in the encephalon mechanisms that are mobilized by CT should be especially likely to suffer. Measures of alterations in these mechanisms might thus allow one to differentiate between patients who would benefit most from CT or from ADM, and might predict resistance to relapse and recurrence following the termination of treatment.76 Ideally a model such as the one we have proposed could be used to explain the heterogeneity of depressive symptom,s and thereby serve every bit a basis for guiding treatment option. Whereas the ultimate goal of treatment would be to produce the kind of synchronized modulation of the final, common limbic-cortical pathways that is considered to be crucial for illness remission,76 the targeted mechanisms would depend on private vulnerability factors. To the extent that CT and ADM both address abnormal limbic function, high levels of amygdala reactivity should predict recovery in either intervention. In fact, fMRI data propose that high levels of amygdala reactivity to emotional stimuli predict recovery from depression with CT90 as well as with other interventions, including ADM.110 Amygdala reactivity has similarly been shown to predict recovery after both CT and ADM in patients with anxiety pathology.111
CT's focus on helping depressed individuals to increase their emotion-regulation skills could similarly explain why patients with the lowest levels of action in regulatory structures, such every bit the rostral and subgenual anterior cingulate gyri, would do good most from CT.90 , 112 Past contrast, because ADM targets limbic activity directly, patients with decreased rostral and subgenual cingulate activity would not be expected to recover from low on ADM treatment. Rather, increased rostral cingulate activity, both in resting- country studies79 , 113 - 115 and in an fMRI written report of reactivity, has predicted recovery during ADM handling.105 , 113 - 116 Taken together, these findings advise that amygdala activity might represent a general predictor of recovery. Decreased rostral and subgenual cingulate activity might predict a good response to CT, whereas increased rostral and subgenual cingulate might predict a amend response to ADM. An algorithm of this kind might therefore be used for selecting treatments for individual patients.
Conclusions and future directions
The prevalence of depression is high, and the burdens that it places on society are enormous. Research in the past few decades has led to the discovery, refinement and testing of new, constructive treatments for depression. Nevertheless, our all-time treatments currently produce symptom remission in fewer than two-thirds of the patients who receive them, and sustained recovery is achieved in approximately one-tertiary of treated patients. Neuroscience research has the potential to heighten our power to match patients to the treatments that would most benefit them, and to provide clues every bit to how to refine the treatments and then that they can exist delivered more than finer and efficiently.
Hereafter investigations should include, in addition to neuroimaging studies aimed at identifying potential predictors, assessments of other of import low-relevant phenomena, so that imaging, symptom, cognitive, genetic and patient-history variables tin can exist linked to the outcomes of psychotherapeutic or medication treatments. A study past Nemeroff and colleagues provides an excellent example of the prediction of differential outcomes of ADM and Cognitive Behavioural Analysis Arrangement of Psychotherapy (CBASP,117 a variant of CT), using an important early-history variable.118 Adult patients who reported early-childhood trauma before randomization to ADM or CBASP improved more with CBASP than with ADM, suggesting a correspondence between the targets of CBASP and the pathological processes that were set in movement by the early on-babyhood trauma.118 Genetic studies have likewise shown the potential to reveal links between polymorphisms and the cognitive processes that are targeted in psychotherapies such every bit CT,119 suggesting the possibility that in the future genotyping could be used every bit a prognostic tool.
The formulation of low that we have discussed, which focuses on uncontrolled limbic reactivity in conjunction with decreased prefrontal control, could inform the development and refinement of treatments for depression, as well as the differential prediction of response to generally constructive treatments. Detecting such moderating effects for treatment response is in its infancy. The formulation suggests that patients with increased limbic reactivity in the absence of decreased regulatory control would be prime candidates for ADM, whereas those with prominent difficulties in emotion regulation, especially if it is associated with decreased prefrontal function, might benefit more from CT. Equally noted by Kazdin, differential moderation ever implies differences in the mechanisms that are engaged by the treatments.120 Direct comparisons in which patients who are heterogeneous with respect to these underlying neural characteristics are randomized to the corresponding modalities are needed if models such as the one nosotros accept proposed are to be subjected to rigorous tests.
The evidence shows that that CT is as efficacious equally ADM, and that its furnishings are more enduring. Thus, even if CT and ADM work through the same mechanisms in the same temporal club to reduce depressive symptoms, any enduring effects of CT must be produced by mechanisms that are not mobilized in the aforementioned way by ADM. The model that is proposed in this article suggests that CT helps patients acquire to recruit prefrontal regulatory brain mechanisms – a skill that these patients could go along to employ long after treatment ends. Exploring the neural bases of these furnishings should enhance our agreement of the nature of depression and allow united states to develop more powerful and targeted preventive interventions.
Well-nigh of the published inquiry that compared the changes in brain function that are associated with CT and ADM used resting-state assessments. Challenge paradigms, in which emotional stimuli are presented to depressed individuals during neuroimaging assessment after the cease of handling, could elucidate some of the mechanisms of recovery that are associated with online emotion regulation. Such paradigms, alone or in combination with resting-state studies, could besides bespeak which neurocognitive features can be used to predict which patients are nearly likely to benefit from continued treatment.
Another well-nigh unexplored area is the examination of the time-course of recovery from depression after treatment. That is, although CT and ADM might initially work through different mechanisms, the initial increases in PFC activity that are associated with CT could lead, after a prolonged menses of recovery, to stable decreases in the activity or reactivity of the amygdala. Similarly, decreased amygdala activity associated with ADM treatment could disinhibit prefrontal resources and lead, over time, to increased reliance on prefrontal function, so that in the presence of an affective stimulus normal emotion regulation can occur. Thus, examination of encephalon part months or years into recovery could reveal like effects of CT and ADM. Research examining these hypotheses would require the imaging of depressed individuals not only before and immediately following treatment, but likewise long after recovery.
Careful attention to the temporal relations between noesis and emotion and their underlying neural substrates may exist needed to tease apart the mechanisms that underlie different interventions, especially when these interventions produce comparable short-term outcomes, equally seems to be the case for CT and ADM. Different treatments might produce similar outcomes through the same or unlike mechanisms, whereas different outcomes always reflect differential mechanisms or between-treatment differences in the potency of the effects on common mechanisms.121 Given that a mensurate of an underlying process might reverberate a cause of alter in one modality and a result of alter in another, it is important to assess purported mechanisms repeatedly across the form of treatment and to examine temporal patterns of covariation with subsequent outcomes as a function of differential handling.89
Clinical feel suggests that patients treated with CT get-go learn to utilize the CT strategies each time they experience their habitual tendency to process information in a negatively biased manner. That is, they acquire and so implement 'compensatory skills'. Repeated application of these skills seems to result in the alteration of the patient's general beliefs most themselves, as inferred from an increasing tendency, over time, for patients' prepotent reactions to be free of the negative biases that are feature of depressed people and of people who are decumbent to depression. This process is referred to as the 'adaptation' of behavior to new show.122 Information technology is tempting to speculate that this progression in clinical grade reflects, and is reflected by, a progression of changes over time in singled-out neural mechanisms, with initial gains being mediated by increased inhibitory cortical control exercised by witting processes, and the maintenance of these gains resulting from a reduction in the frequency and intensity of maladaptive negative reactions to life events, produced by a tempered reactivity in relevant limbic regions.
Contributor Information
Robert J. DeRubeis, University of Pennsylvania.
Greg J. Siegle, University of Pittsburgh.
Steven D. Hollon, Vanderbilt University.
References
1. Kessler RC, et al. The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R) JAMA. 2003;289:3095–3105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Murray CJL, Lopez AD. Global mortality, inability, and the contribution of chance factors: Global Burden of Illness Study. Lancet. 1997;349:1436–1442. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Greenberg PE, Burnham HG, Lowe SW, Corey-Lisle PK. The economic burden of low in the United States: how did it change from 1990 to 2000. J Clin Psychiatry. 2003;64:1465–1475. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
four. Moussavi S, et al. Depression, chronic diseases, and decrements in health: rsults from the World Wellness Surveys. Lancet. 2007;370:851–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
v. DeRubeis RJ, Immature PR, Dahlsgaard KK. Affective Disorders. In: Bellack AS, Hersen M, editors. Comprehensive clinical psychology. Vol. 6. Pergamon; Oxford: pp. 339–366. [Google Scholar]
6. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed, Text Rev. American Psychiatric Association Printing; Washington DC: 2000. [Google Scholar]
7. Frank Due east, et al. Conceptualization and rationale for consensus definitions of terms in major depressive disorder: Remission, recovery, relapse, and recurrence. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1991;48:851–855. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. de Mello MF, de Jesus Mari J, Bacaltchuk J, Verdeli H, Neugebauer R. A systematic review of inquiry findings on the efficacy of interpersonal therapy for depressive disorders. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2005;255:75–82. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
ix. United kingdom ECT Review Group. Efficacy and rubber of electroconvulsive therapy in depressive disorders: A systematic review and meta-assay. Lancet. 2003;361:799–808. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Nahas Z, et al. Two-twelvemonth upshot of vagus nervus stimulation (VNS) for handling of major depressive episodes. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66:1097–104. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Dimidjian S, et al. Behavioral activation, cognitive therapy, and anti-depressant medication in the acute treatment of major depression. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006;74:658–670. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Hammond DC. Neurofeedback with feet and affective disorders. Kid Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2005;xiv:105–123. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Baehr E, Rosenfeld JP, Baehr R. The clinical use of an alpha asymmetry protocol in the neurofeedback handling of low: Two case studies. J Neurotherapy. 1997;ii:10–23. [Google Scholar]
xiv. Mayberg HS, et al. Deep brain stimulation for handling-resistant depression. Neuron. 2005;45:651–660. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Depression Guideline Panel. Depression in Master Care, Vol 2: Treatment of Major Depression (Clinical Practise Guideline No v; AHCPR Publ No 93-0551) U.S. Section of Wellness and Human Services, Public Health Service, Bureau for Health Intendance Policy and Research; Rockville, Doc: 1993. [Google Scholar]
sixteen. Agency for Health Care Policy and Enquiry. Handling of depression – newer pharmacotherapies: Summary, prove report/technology assessment number 7. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human being Services; 1999. http://www.ahcpr.gov/clinic/deprsumm.htm. [Google Scholar]
17. Thase ME, Rush AJ. When at first y'all don't succeed…sequential strategies for antidepressant nonresponders. J Clin Psychiatry. 1997;58(Suppl 13):23–29. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Hollon SD, Thase ME, Markowitz JC. Treatment and prevention of low. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2002;3:39–77. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder (revision) Am J Psychiatry. 2000;157(suppl four):1–45. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Sheline YI, et al. Increased amygdala response to masked emotional faces in depressed subjects resolves with antidepressant treatment: an fMRI written report. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;fifty:651–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Warner-Schmidt JL, Duman RS. Hippocampal neurogenesis: opposing effects of stress and antidepressant treatment. Hippocampus. 2006;16:239–49. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Beck AT, Blitz AJ, Shaw BF, Emery M. Cognitive therapy of depression. Guilford; New York: 1979. [Google Scholar]
23. Rush AJ, Brook AT, Kovacs M, Hollon SD. Comparative efficacy of cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy in the treatment of depressed outpatients. Cognit Ther Res. 1977;one:17–38. [Google Scholar]
24. Blackburn IM, Bishop Due south, Glen AIM, Whalley LJ, Christie JE. The efficacy of cerebral therapy in depression: A handling trial using cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy, each alone and in combination. Br J Psychiatry. 1981;139:181–189. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. Murphy GE, Simons Ad, Wetzel RD, Lustman PJ. Cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy, singly and together, in the treatment of low. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1984;41:33–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26. Hollon SD, et al. Cognitive therapy, pharmacotherapy and combined cerebral-pharmacotherapy in the treatment of depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1992;49:774–781. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Kovacs 1000, Blitz AT, Beck AT, Hollon SD. Depressed outpatients treated with cognitive therapy or pharmacotherapy: A one – year follow – up. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1981;38:33–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Blackburn IM, Eunson KM, Bishop South. A two twelvemonth naturalistic follow upwards of depressed patients treated with cognitive therapy, pharmacotherapy and a combination of both. J Melancholia Disorders. 1986;10:67–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Simons AD, Murphy GE, Levine JL, Wetzel RD. Cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy for low: Sustained comeback over one year. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1986;43:43–48. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xxx. Evans Doc, et al. Differential relapse following cerebral therapy, pharmacotherapy, and combined cognitive-pharmacotherapy for low. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1992;49:802–808. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. Elkin I, et al. Initial severity and differential treatment result in the National Constitute of Mental Wellness Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1995;63:841–847. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Shea MT, et al. Course of depressive symptoms over follow-up: Findings from the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Inquiry Program. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1992;49:782–787. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33. Jacobson NS, Hollon SD. Prospects for future comparisons betwixt drugs and psychotherapy: Lessons from the CBT-versus-pharmacotherapy exchange. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1996;64:104–108. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. DeRubeis RJ, Gelfand LA, Tang TZ, Simons Advert. Medications versus cognitive behavioral therapy for severely depressed outpatients: Mega-analysis of iv randomized comparisons. Am J Psychiatry. 1999;156:1007–1013. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. DeRubeis RJ, et al. Cognitive therapy vs. medications in the treatment of moderate to astringent low. Curvation Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62:409–416. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36. Bhar SS, et al. Sequence of comeback in depressive symptoms across cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2008;110:161–168. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
37. DiMascio A, et al. Differential symptom reduction by drugs and psychotherapy in acute depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1979;36:1450–1456. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
38. Hollon SD, et al. Prevention of relapse following cerebral therapy vs medications in moderate to astringent low. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62:417–422. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
39. Ramel W, Goldin PR, Eyler LT, Brown GG, Gotlib IH, McQuaid JR. Amygdala reactivity and mood-congruent memory in individuals at adventure for depressive relapse. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;61:231–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40. Liotti M, Mayberg HS, McGinnis S, Brannan SL, Jerabek P. Unmasking disease-specific cognitive claret flow abnormalities: mood challenge in patients with remitted unipolar depression. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2002;159:1830–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
41. LeDoux J. The Emotional Brain. Simon Schuster; New York: 1996. [Google Scholar]
42. Sheline YI, Sanghavi G, Mintun MA, Gado MH. Depression duration but not age predicts hippocampal book loss in medically healthy women with recurrent major depression. Journal of Neuroscience. 1999;xix:5034–5043. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
43. Abercrombie H, et al. Metabolic rate in the right amygdala predicts negative touch on in depressed patients. Neuroreport. 1998;9:3301–3307. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44. Siegle GJ, Steinhauer SR, Thase ME, Stenger VA, Carter CS. Tin't shake that feeling: fMRI assessment of sustained amygdala action in response to emotional information in depressed individuals. Biol Psychiatry. 2002;51:693–707. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45. Drevets WC. Prefrontal cortical amygdalar metabolism in major depression. Annals of the New York University of Sciences. 1999;877:614–637. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
46. Siegle GJ, Thompson W, Carter CS, Steinhauer SR, Thase ME. Increased amygdala and decreased dorsolateral prefrontal BOLD responses in unipolar depression: Related and independent features. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;61 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47. Dougherty D, Rauch South. Neuroimaging and neurobiological models of depression. Harvard Review of Psychiatry. 1997;5:138–159. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48. Evans KC, Wright CI, Wedig MM, Gold AL, Pollack MH, Rauch SL. A functional MRI study of amygdala responses to angry schematic faces in social anxiety disorder. Depress Anxiety. 2007;25:496–505. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49. Metcalfe J, Mischel W. A hot/cool-system analysis of delay of gratification: dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review. 1999;106:3–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50. Davidson RJ. Affective style psychopathology and resilience: Brain mechanisms and plasticity. American Psychologist. 2000;55:1196–1214. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
51. Drevets WC, Raichle G. Reciprocal suppression of regional cerebral claret period during emotional versus college cognitive processes: Implications for interactions between emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion. 1998;12:353–385. [Google Scholar]
52. Mayberg HS, et al. Reciprocal limbic cortical function and negative mood Converging PET findings in depression and normal sadness. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1999;156:675–682. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
53. Ochsner KN, Bunge SA, Gross JJ, Gabrieli JDE. Rethinking feelings: An fMRI study of the cerebral regulation of emotion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2002;fourteen:1215–1229. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
54. Ochsner Grand, et al. For better or for worse: neural systems supporting the cognitive downwardly- and up-regulation of negative emotion. Neuroimage. 2004;23:483–99. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
55. Ray JP, Price JL. The system of projections from the mediodorsal nucleus of the thalamus to orbital and medial prefrontal cortex in macaque monkeys. Journal of Comparative Neurology. 1993;337:1–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
56. Ghashghaei HT, Barbas H. Pathways for emotion: interactions of prefrontal and anterior temporal pathways in the amygdala of the rhesus monkey. Neuroscience. 2002;115:1261–79. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
57. Mayberg HS. Limbic Cortical Dysregulation A proposed model of depression. Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. 1997;nine:471–481. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
58. Drevets WC. Neuroimaging studies of mood disorders. Biological Psychiatry. 2000;48:813–29. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
59. Carter CS, et al. Parsing executive processes: strategic vs evaluative functions of the anterior cingulate cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United states of america of America. 2000;97:1944–1948. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
60. Davidson RJ. Melancholia neuroscience and psychophysiology: Toward a synthesis. Psychophysiology. 2003;40:655–665. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
61. Phillips ML, Ladouceur CD, Drevets WC. A neural model of voluntary and automatic emotion regulation: implications for agreement the pathophysiology and neurodevelopment of bipolar disorder. Mol Psychiatry. 2008 June 24; doi: 10.1038/mp.2008.65. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
62. Brook AT. The development of the cerebral model of depression and its neurobiological correlates. Am J of Psychiatry. 2008;165:969–977. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
63. Davidson RJ. Assymetric encephalon function affective style and psychopathology: The role of early feel and plasticity. Dev Psychopathol. 1994;6:741–758. [Google Scholar]
64. Baxter L, et al. Reduction of prefrontal glucose metabolism common to three types of depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1989;46:243–250. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
65. Bench CJ, Friston KJ, Dark-brown RG, Frackowiak RS, Dolan RJ. Regional cerebral blood flow in depression measured past positron emission tomography the relationship with clinical dimensions. Psychol Med. 1993;23:579–590. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
66. Ottowitz WE, Dougherty DD, Vicious CR. The neural network footing for abnormalities of attention and executive function in major depressive disorder: Implications for application of the medical disease model to psychiatric disorders. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2002;10:86–99. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
67. Liotti Thousand, Mayberg HS. The function of functional neuroimaging in the neuropsychology of depression. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2001;23:121–36. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
68. Cohen JD, et al. Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task. Nature. 1997;386:604–608. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
69. Harvey PO, et al. Executive functions and updating of the contents of working retentivity in unipolar low. J Psychiatr Res. 2004;38:567–76. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
lxx. Egeland J, et al. Attention contour in schizophrenia compared with depression: differential furnishings of processing speed, selective attending and vigilance. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2003;108:276–84. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
71. Watkins E, Brownish RG. Rumination and executive function in depression: an experimental study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;72:400–2. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
72. Phillips ML, Drevets WC, Rauch SL, Lane R. Neurobiology of emotion perception Two: Implications for major psychiatric disorders. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54:515–28. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
73. Charney DS. Monoamine dysfunction and the pathophysiology and treatment of depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(Suppl fourteen):11–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
74. Mayberg HS. Modulating dysfunctional limbic-cortical circuits in low: towards evolution of brain-based algorithms for diagnosis and optimised handling. Br Med Bull. 2003;65:193–207. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
75. Seminowicz DA, Mayberg HS, McIntosh AR, Goldapple K, Kennedy South, Segal Z, Rafi-Tari S. Limbic-frontal circuitry in major depression: a path modeling metanalysis. Neuroimage. 2004;22:409–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
76. Mayberg HS. Positron emission tomography imaging in depression: a neural systems perspective. Neuroimaging Clin North Am. 2003;13:805–815. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
77. Ingram RE, Hollon SD. In: Information Processing Approaches to Clinical Psychology. Ingram RE, editor. Bookish Printing; New York: 1986. pp. 261–284. [Google Scholar]
78. Ohira H, Nomura M, Ichikawa N, Isowa T, Iidaka T, Sato A, Fukuyama S, Nakajima T, Yamada J. Association of neural and physiological responses during voluntary emotion suppression. Neuroimage. 2006;29:721–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
79. O'Reardon JP, Brotman MA, DeRubeis RJ, Wang J, Detre JA, Egeth MJ, Cornew LA, Fara MJ. Prefrontal-amygdala interactions and mood regulation: A perfusion fMRI report. Brain Cogn. 2003;51:185. [Google Scholar]
80. Ray RD, Ochsner KN, Cooper JC, Robertson ER, Gabrieli JD, Gross JJ. Individual differences in trait rumination and the neural systems supporting cognitive reappraisal. Cogn Touch Behav Neurosci. 2005;five:156–68. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
81. Rush AJ, Beck AT, Kovacs Thou, Weissenburger J, Hollon SD. Comparing of the furnishings of cerebral therapy and pharmacotherapy on hopelessness and self-concept. Am J Psychiatry. 1982;139:862–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
82. Blackburn IM, Bishop Due south. Changes in noesis with pharmacotherapy and cognitive therapy. Br J Psychiatry. 1983;143:609–17. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
83. Garamoni GL, Reynolds CF, 3rd, Thase ME, Frank E, Fasiczka AL. Shifts in affective residuum during cerebral therapy of major depression. J Consul Clin Psychol. 1992;60:260–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
84. DeRubeis RJ, Evans MD, Hollon SD, Garvey MJ, Grove WM, Tuason VB. How does cerebral therapy work? Cognitive alter and symptom alter in cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy for depression. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1990;58:862–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
85. Siegle GJ, Carter CS, Thase ME. Use of fMRI to predict recovery from unipolar depression with cerebral beliefs therapy. Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163:735–738. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
86. Siegle GJ, Thompson West, Horner MS, Carter CS, Thase ME. Neural mechanisms of executive control in unipolar depression: Relationships to emotional reactivity and recovery in Cognitive Behavior Therapy. In: Weissman A, editor. Executive role: From basic research to clinical practice; Symp. Meet. Assoc. Behav. Cogn.Ther; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: 2007. [Google Scholar]
87. Straube T, Glauer One thousand, Dilger S, Mentzel HJ, Miltner WH. Effects of cognitive-behavioral therapy on encephalon activation in specific phobia. Neuroimage. 2006;29:125–35. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
88. Paquette 5, Levesque J, Mensour B, Leroux JM, Beaudoin G, Bourgouin P, Beauregard M. "Modify the listen and y'all modify the brain": Effects of cognitive-behavioral therapy on the neural correlates of spider phobia. Neuroimage. 2003;18:401–nine. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
89. Siegle GJ, Ghinassi F, Thase ME. Neurobehavioral therapies in the 21st century: Summary of an emerging field and an extended example of Cerebral Control Grooming for depression. Cogn Ther Res. 2007;31:235–262. [Google Scholar]
90. Goldapple Thousand, Segal Z, Garson C, Lau M, Bieling P, Kennedy S, Mayberg H. Modulation of cortical-limbic pathways in major low: handling-specific effects of cognitive behavior therapy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004;61:34–41. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
91. Saxena S, et al. Differential cerebral metabolic changes with paroxetine treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder vs major depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2002;59:250–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
92. Brody AL, et al. Brain metabolic changes in major depressive disorder from pre- to mail service-handling with paroxetine. Psychiatry Res. 1999;91:127–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
93. Brody AL, et al. Encephalon metabolic changes associated with symptom factor improvement in major depressive disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;fifty:171–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
94. Brody AL, et al. Regional brain metabolic changes in patients with major depression treated with either paroxetine or interpersonal therapy: preliminary findings. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58:631–40. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
95. Kennedy SH, et al. Changes in regional brain glucose metabolism measured with positron emission tomography later paroxetine handling of major depression. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158:899–905. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
96. Mayberg HS, et al. Regional metabolic effects of fluoxetine in major depression: serial changes and human relationship to clinical response. Biol Psychiatry. 2000;48:830–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
97. Buchsbaum MS, et al. Effect of sertraline on regional metabolic rate in patients with affective disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 1997;41:15–22. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
98. Nobler MS, Olvet KR, Sackeim HA. Effects of medications on cognitive claret catamenia in late-life low. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2002;4:51–eight. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
99. Fu CH, et al. Attenuation of the neural response to sad faces in major depression by antidepressant handling: a prospective, upshot-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004;61:877–89. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
100. Davidson RJ, Irwin Due west, Anderle MJ, Kalin NH. The neural substrates of affective processing in depressed patients treated with venlafaxine. Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160:64–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
101. Hollon SD, Evans MD, DeRubeis RJ. In: Contemporary Psychological Approaches to Low: Theory Enquiry, and Handling. Ingram R, editor. Plenum; New York: 1990. pp. 117–136. [Google Scholar]
102. Brody AL, et al. FDG-PET predictors of response to behavioral therapy and pharmacotherapy in obsessive compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Res. 1998;84:1–vi. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
103. Urry HL, et al. Amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex are inversely coupled during regulation of negative touch on and predict the diurnal pattern of cortisol secretion among older adults. J Neurosci. 2006;26:4415–25. [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
104. Anand A, et al. Antidepressant effect on connectivity of the mood-regulating excursion: an FMRI written report. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2005;30:1334–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
105. Canli T, et al. Amygdala reactivity to emotional faces predicts improvement in major depression. Neuroreport. 2005;xvi:1267–70. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
106. McClure EB, et al. fMRI predictors of treatment consequence in pediatric feet disorders. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2007;191:97–105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
107. Fu CH, et al. Neural Responses to Sad Facial Expressions in Major Depression Following Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Biol Psychiatry. 2008 June 10; doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.04.033. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
108. Mayberg HS, et al. Cingulate function in depression: A potential predictor of treatment response. Neuroreport. 1997;8:1057–1061. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
109. Pizzagalli D, et al. Anterior cingulate activity as a predictor of degree of treatment response in major low: evidence from brain electrical tomography assay. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158:405–415. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
110. Chen CH, et al. Brain Imaging Correlates of Depressive Symptom Severity and Predictors of Symptom Improvement After Antidepressant Treatment. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
111. McCullough JP. Treatment for Chronic Depression: Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy (CBASP) Guilford; New York: 2003. [Google Scholar]
112. Nemeroff CB, et al. Differential responses to psychotherapy versus pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic forms of major depression and childhood trauma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:14293–14296. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
113. Hayden EP, et al. Early-emerging cognitive vulnerability to depression and the serotonin transporter promoter region polymorphism. J Affect Dis. 2008;107:227–230. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
114. Kazdin AE. Developing a research calendar for kid adolescent psychotherapy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57:829–840. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
115. Hollon SD, DeRubeis RJ, Evans MD. Causal arbitration of modify in treatment for depression: Discriminating between nonspecificity and noncausality. Psychol Balderdash. 1987;102:139–149. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
116. Hairdresser JP, DeRubeis RJ. On second idea: Where the action is in cognitive therapy for depression. Cognit Ther Res. 1989;13:441–457. [Google Scholar]
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2748674/
0 Response to "Review Steps on How to Help a Patient Suffering From Depression Corey Theory and Practice"
Enviar um comentário