Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35722550›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2022

Intrinsic Connectivity Networks of Glutamate-Mediated Antidepressant Response: A Neuroimaging Review.

Ilya Demchenko, Vanessa K Tassone, Sidney H Kennedy, Katharine Dunlop, Venkat Bhat

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ilya DemchenkoInterventional Psychiatry Program, Mental Health and Addictions Service, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Vanessa K TassoneInterventional Psychiatry Program, Mental Health and Addictions Service, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sidney H KennedyInterventional Psychiatry Program, Mental Health and Addictions Service, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Katharine DunlopInterventional Psychiatry Program, Mental Health and Addictions Service, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Venkat BhatInterventional Psychiatry Program, Mental Health and Addictions Service, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
St. Michael's Hospital · CAUnity Health TorontoUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional monoamine-based pharmacotherapy, considered the first-line treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), has several challenges, including high rates of non-response. To address these challenges, preclinical and clinical studies have sought to characterize antidepressant response through monoamine-independent mechanisms. One striking example is glutamate, the brain's foremost excitatory neurotransmitter: since the 1990s, studies have consistently reported altered levels of glutamate in MDD, as well as antidepressant effects following molecular targeting of glutamatergic receptors. Therapeutically, this has led to advances in the discovery, testing, and clinical application of a wide array of glutamatergic agents, particularly ketamine. Notably, ketamine has been demonstrated to rapidly improve mood symptoms, unlike monoamine-based interventions, and the neurobiological basis behind this rapid antidepressant response is under active investigation. Advances in brain imaging techniques, including functional magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and positron emission tomography, enable the identification of the brain network-based characteristics distinguishing rapid glutamatergic modulation from the effect of slow-acting conventional monoamine-based pharmacology. Here, we review brain imaging studies that examine brain connectivity features associated with rapid antidepressant response in MDD patients treated with glutamatergic pharmacotherapies in contrast with patients treated with slow-acting monoamine-based treatments. Trends in recent brain imaging literature suggest that the activity of brain regions is organized into coherent functionally distinct networks, termed intrinsic connectivity networks (ICNs). We provide an overview of major ICNs implicated in depression and explore how treatment response following glutamatergic modulation alters functional connectivity of limbic, cognitive, and executive nodes within ICNs, with well-characterized anti-anhedonic effects and the enhancement of "top-down" executive control. Alterations within and between the core ICNs could potentially exert downstream effects on the nodes within other brain networks of relevance to MDD that are structurally and functionally interconnected through glutamatergic synapses. Understanding similarities and differences in brain ICNs features underlying treatment response will positively impact the trajectory and outcomes for adults suffering from MDD and will facilitate the development of biomarkers to enable glutamate-based precision therapeutics.

Indexed as

antidepressive agentsbiomarkersconnectomefunctional neuroimagingglutamateintrinsic connectivity networksketaminemajor depressive disorder

Identifiers

PMID35722550
PMCPMC9199367
OpenAlexW4283394366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.