Department of Educational Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Department of Biomedical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
PLoS One. 2023 Feb 15;18(2):e0276822. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276822. eCollection 2023.
The purpose of this study is to use a dynamic network approach as an innovative way to identify distinct patterns of interacting symptoms in patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and patients with Bipolar Type I Disorder (BD). More precisely, the hypothesis will be testing that the phenotype of patients is driven by disease specific connectivity and interdependencies among various domains of functioning even in the presence of underlying common mechanisms. In a prospective observational cohort study, hundred-forty-three patients were recruited at the Psychiatric Clinic "Villa dei Gerani" (Catania, Italy), 87 patients with MDD and 56 with BD with a depressive episode. Two nested sub-groups were treated for a twelve-week period, which allowed us to explore differences in the pattern of symptom distribution (central vs. peripheral) and their connectedness (strong vs weak) before (T0) and after (T1) treatment. All patients underwent a complete neuropsychological evaluation at baseline (T0) and at T1. A network structure was computed for MDD and BD patients at T0 and T1 from a covariance matrix of 17 items belonging to three domains-neurocognitive, psychosocial, and mood-related (affective) to identify what symptoms were driving the networks. Clinically relevant differences were observed between MDD and BD, at T0 and after 12 weeks of pharmacological treatment. At time T0, MDD patients displayed an affective domain strongly connected with the nodes of psychosocial functioning, while direct connectivity of the affective domain with the neurocognitive cluster was absent. The network of patients with BD, in contrast, revealed a cluster of highly interconnected psychosocial nodes but was guided by neurocognitive functions. The nodes related to the affective domain in MDD are less connected and placed in the periphery of the networks, whereas in BD they are more connected with psychosocial and neurocognitive nodes. Noteworthy is that, from T0 to T1 the "Betweenness" centrality measure was lower in both disorders which means that fewer "shortest paths" between nodes pass through the affective domain. Moreover, fewer edges were connected directly with the nodes in this domain. In MDD patients, pharmacological treatment primarily affected executive functions which seem to improve with treatment. In contrast, in patients with BD, treatment resulted in improvement of overall connectivity and centrality of the affective domain, which seems then to affect and direct the overall network. Though different network structures were observed for MDD and BD patients, data suggest that treatment should include tailored cognitive therapy, because improvement in this central domain appeared to be fundamental for better outcomes in other domains. In sum, the advantage of network analysis is that it helps to predict the trajectory of future phenotype related disease manifestations. In turn, this allows new insights in how to balance therapeutic interventions, involving different fields of function and combining pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment modalities.
本研究旨在采用动态网络方法作为一种创新方式,来识别重度抑郁症(MDD)和双相情感障碍 I 型(BD)患者的交互症状的不同模式。更确切地说,该假设将检验即使在存在潜在的共同机制的情况下,患者的表型是否是由特定于疾病的连通性和各种功能领域之间的相互依存关系驱动的。在一项前瞻性观察性队列研究中,在意大利卡塔尼亚的“Villa dei Gerani”精神病诊所招募了 143 名患者,其中 87 名患有 MDD,56 名患有 BD 伴抑郁发作。两组嵌套子组接受了为期 12 周的治疗,这使我们能够在治疗前(T0)和治疗后(T1)探索症状分布模式(中心与周边)及其连接性(强与弱)的差异。所有患者在基线(T0)和 T1 时都接受了完整的神经心理学评估。从属于三个领域的 17 个项目的协方差矩阵中,为 MDD 和 BD 患者在 T0 和 T1 时计算了网络结构,以确定哪些症状是网络的驱动力。在 T0 和 12 周药物治疗后,MDD 和 BD 之间观察到了临床相关的差异。在 T0 时,MDD 患者的情感域与心理社会功能节点强烈相连,而情感域与神经认知簇的直接连接则不存在。相比之下,BD 患者的网络显示出一组高度互联的心理社会节点,但受神经认知功能的指导。在 MDD 中,与情感域相关的节点连接较少,位于网络的周边,而在 BD 中,它们与心理社会和神经认知节点的连接更多。值得注意的是,从 T0 到 T1,两种疾病的“中间中心性”度量值均较低,这意味着节点之间的“最短路径”较少通过情感域。此外,与该域中的节点直接连接的边缘较少。在 MDD 患者中,药物治疗主要影响执行功能,这些功能似乎随着治疗而改善。相比之下,在 BD 患者中,治疗导致情感域的整体连通性和中心性提高,这似乎会影响和指导整个网络。尽管观察到 MDD 和 BD 患者的网络结构不同,但数据表明治疗应包括量身定制的认知疗法,因为该中心域的改善似乎对于其他领域的更好结果至关重要。总之,网络分析的优势在于它有助于预测未来表型相关疾病表现的轨迹。反过来,这使我们能够深入了解如何平衡治疗干预措施,涉及不同的功能领域,并结合药物和非药物治疗方式。