Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Document Type
- Journal article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Keywords
- Human behaviour (1)
- Personalized medicine (1)
- Prognostic markers (1)
- Psychiatric disorders (1)
- anxiety (1)
- anxiety disorders (1)
- anxious depression (1)
- classical conditioning (1)
- depressive disorder (1)
- discrimination training (1)
Institute
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
Anxiety patients over-generalize fear, possibly because of an incapacity to discriminate threat and safety signals. Discrimination trainings are promising approaches for reducing such fear over-generalization. Here we investigated the efficacy of a fear-relevant vs. a fear-irrelevant discrimination training on fear generalization and whether the effects are increased with feedback during training. Eighty participants underwent two fear acquisition blocks, during which one face (conditioned stimulus, CS+), but not another face (CS−), was associated with a female scream (unconditioned stimulus, US). During two generalization blocks, both CSs plus four morphs (generalization stimuli, GS1–GS4) were presented. Between these generalization blocks, half of the participants underwent a fear-relevant discrimination training (discrimination between CS+ and the other faces) with or without feedback and the other half a fear-irrelevant discrimination training (discrimination between the width of lines) with or without feedback. US expectancy, arousal, valence ratings, and skin conductance responses (SCR) indicated successful fear acquisition. Importantly, fear-relevant vs. fear-irrelevant discrimination trainings and feedback vs. no feedback reduced generalization as reflected in US expectancy ratings independently from one another. No effects of training condition were found for arousal and valence ratings or SCR. In summary, this is a first indication that fear-relevant discrimination training and feedback can improve the discrimination between threat and safety signals in healthy individuals, at least for learning-related evaluations, but not evaluations of valence or (physiological) arousal.
Anxious depression represents a subtype of major depressive disorder and is associated with increased suicidality, severity, chronicity and lower treatment response. Only a few studies have investigated the differences between anxious depressed (aMDD) and non-anxious depressed (naMDD) patients regarding treatment dosage, serum-concentration and drug-specific treatment response. In our naturalistic and prospective study, we investigated whether the effectiveness of therapy including antidepressants (SSRI, SNRI, NaSSA, tricyclics and combinations) in aMDD patients differs significantly from that in naMDD patients. In a sample of 346 patients, we calculated the anxiety somatization factor (ASF) and defined treatment response as a reduction (≥50%) in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS)-21 score after 7 weeks of pharmacological treatment. We did not observe an association between therapy response and the baseline ASF-scores, or differences in therapy outcomes between aMDD and naMDD patients. However, non-responders had higher ASF-scores, and at week 7 aMDD patients displayed a worse therapy outcome than naMDD patients. In subgroup analyses for different antidepressant drugs, venlafaxine-treated aMDD patients showed a significantly worse outcome at week 7. Future prospective, randomized-controlled studies should address the question of a worse therapy outcome in aMDD patients for different psychopharmaceuticals individually.
Background
The need to optimize exposure treatments for anxiety disorders may be addressed by temporally intensified exposure sessions. Effects on symptom reduction and public health benefits should be examined across different anxiety disorders with comorbid conditions.
Methods
This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared two variants of prediction error-based exposure therapy (PeEx) in various anxiety disorders (both 12 sessions + 2 booster sessions, 100 min/session): temporally intensified exposure (PeEx-I) with exposure sessions condensed to 2 weeks (n = 358) and standard nonintensified exposure (PeEx-S) with weekly exposure sessions (n = 368). Primary outcomes were anxiety symptoms (pre, post, and 6-months follow-up). Secondary outcomes were global severity (across sessions), quality of life, disability days, and comorbid depression.
Results
Both treatments resulted in substantial improvements at post (PeEx-I: d\(_{within}\) = 1.50, PeEx-S: d\(_{within}\) = 1.78) and follow-up (PeEx-I: d\(_{within}\) = 2.34; PeEx-S: d\(_{within}\) = 2.03). Both groups showed formally equivalent symptom reduction at post and follow-up. However, time until response during treatment was 32% shorter in PeEx-I (median = 68 days) than PeEx-S (108 days; TR\(_{PeEx-I}\)-I = 0.68). Interestingly, drop-out rates were lower during intensified exposure. PeEx-I was also superior in reducing disability days and improving quality of life at follow-up without increasing relapse.
Conclusions
Both treatment variants focusing on the transdiagnostic exposure-based violation of threat beliefs were effective in reducing symptom severity and disability in severe anxiety disorders. Temporally intensified exposure resulted in faster treatment response with substantial public health benefits and lower drop-out during the exposure phase, without higher relapse. Clinicians can expect better or at least comparable outcomes when delivering exposure in a temporally intensified manner.
Major depressive disorder and the anxiety disorders are highly prevalent, disabling and moderately heritable. Depression and anxiety are also highly comorbid and have a strong genetic correlation (r(g) approximate to 1). Cognitive behavioural therapy is a leading evidence-based treatment but has variable outcomes. Currently, there are no strong predictors of outcome. Therapygenetics research aims to identify genetic predictors of prognosis following therapy. We performed genome-wide association meta-analyses of symptoms following cognitive behavioural therapy in adults with anxiety disorders (n = 972), adults with major depressive disorder (n = 832) and children with anxiety disorders (n = 920; meta-analysis n = 2724). We (h(SNP)(2)) and polygenic scoring was used to examine genetic associations between therapy outcomes and psychopathology, personality and estimated the variance in therapy outcomes that could be explained by common genetic variants learning. No single nucleotide polymorphisms were strongly associated with treatment outcomes. No significant estimate of h(SNP)(2) could be obtained, suggesting the heritability of therapy outcome is smaller than our analysis was powered to detect. Polygenic scoring failed to detect genetic overlap between therapy outcome and psychopathology, personality or learning. This study is the largest therapygenetics study to date. Results are consistent with previous, similarly powered genome-wide association studies of complex traits.