Division of Psychotic Disorders, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Division of Mood Disorders, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 600 South Wan Ping Road, Shanghai, China; Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, 600 South Wan Ping Road, Shanghai, China.
J Affect Disord. 2019 Apr 15;249:82-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.02.005. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
This study aimed to explore subtypes of treatment-resistant depression (TRD).
Latent class analysis (LCA) was performed on clinical and demographic data collected from 375 patients with TRD. Clinical variables were compared across subtypes. Treatment outcomes across subtypes of TRD were compared separately for those within each subtype with anxiety (those with a HRSD-17 anxiety/somatization factor score ≥ 7) and those without anxiety. LCA subtypes were compared using Cochran's and Mantel-Haenszel χ test, respectively. Unordered multinomial logistic regression was used to assess clinical correlates of TRD subtypes.
Three categories were detected: severe depression (66%), moderate depression with anxiety (9%) and mild depression with anxiety/somatization (25%). Gender, age, age at first onset, family monthly income, number of hospitalizations, HRSD-17 and clinical global impression-severity (CGI) scores were significantly different across the three groups. Remission rates were significantly different among anxious cases with severe (43.75%), moderate (22.73%) and mild (26.25%) depression subtypes. Compared to cases in the mild depression group, those in the severe depression group had a greater likelihood of being male, having a later age of first onset, higher numbers of hospitalization, higher HRSD-17 and CGI total scores, and lower family income. Those in the moderate depression group were more likely to be male and have lower family income than those in the mild depression group.
Representative bias, relatively small sample size, unbalanced group size and incomplete indicator variables might have a negative effect on the validity and generalization of the findings.
Depression severity could be a basis for subtype classification of patients with TRD. The classification of latent class of TRD observed in our study was similar to the structure found in MDD. Longitudinal research into the stability of the latent structure of TRD across illness course is merited as is research into treatment outcomes for TRD subtypes.
本研究旨在探索治疗抵抗性抑郁症(TRD)的亚型。
对 375 例 TRD 患者的临床和人口统计学数据进行潜在类别分析(LCA)。比较各亚组间的临床变量。分别比较各 TRD 亚组内伴焦虑(汉密尔顿抑郁量表 17 项[HRSD-17]焦虑/躯体化因子评分≥7 分者)和不伴焦虑者的治疗结局。分别采用 Cochran 和 Mantel-Haenszel χ检验比较潜在类别分析亚组。采用无序多项逻辑回归评估 TRD 亚型的临床相关性。
检测到 3 种类别:重度抑郁(66%)、伴焦虑的中度抑郁(9%)和伴焦虑/躯体化的轻度抑郁(25%)。三组间在性别、年龄、首发年龄、家庭月收入、住院次数、HRSD-17 和临床总体印象严重度(CGI)评分上均有显著差异。伴焦虑的严重(43.75%)、中度(22.73%)和轻度(26.25%)抑郁亚型间的缓解率有显著差异。与轻度抑郁组相比,重度抑郁组中男性、首发年龄较晚、住院次数较多、HRSD-17 和 CGI 总分较高、家庭收入较低的患者比例更高。中度抑郁组中男性和家庭收入较低的患者比例高于轻度抑郁组。
代表性偏差、样本量相对较小、组间大小不平衡、指标变量不完整,可能对研究结果的有效性和推广性产生负面影响。
抑郁严重程度可能是 TRD 患者亚类分类的依据。本研究中观察到的 TRD 潜在类别分类与 MDD 中的结构相似。TRD 潜在结构在疾病过程中的稳定性的纵向研究和 TRD 亚型治疗结果的研究都是值得的。