Interaction of Neuropeptide Y Genotype and Childhood Emotional Maltreatment on Brain Activity During Emotional Processing.

Interaction of neuropeptide Y genotype and childhood emotional maltreatment on brain activity during emotional processing.

Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2013 Mar 11;
Opmeer EM, Kortekaas R, van Tol MJ, van der Wee NJ, Woudstra S, van Buchem MA, Penninx BW, Veltman DJ, Aleman A

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) has been associated with stress reactivity in affective disorders and is most densely expressed in the amygdala. An important stressor associated with affective disorders is the experience of childhood emotional maltreatment (CEM). We investigated whether the interaction of NPY risk-genotype and CEM would affect brain activation. From the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA) 33 healthy controls (HC) and 85 patients with affective disorders were scanned with functional MRI while making gender decisions of emotional facial expressions. Results showed interactions between genotype and CEM: within carriers of the risk-genotype, CEM was associated with higher amygdala activation, whereas CEM did not influence activation in non-risk carriers. In the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), less activation was seen in those with CEM and the risk-genotype, whereas genotype did not influence PCC activation in those without CEM. In addition, those carrying the risk-genotype and with experience of CEM made a faster gender decision than those without CEM. Thus, the combined effect of carrying NPY risk-genotype and a history of CEM affected amygdala and PCC reactivity, areas related to emotion, self-relevance processing and autobiographical memory. These results are consistent with the notion that the combination of risk-genotype and CEM may cause hypervigilance. HubMed – depression


A patient-level meta-analysis of studies evaluating vagus nerve stimulation therapy for treatment-resistant depression.

Med Devices (Auckl). 2013; 6: 17-35
Berry SM, Broglio K, Bunker M, Jayewardene A, Olin B, Rush AJ

To compare response and remission rates in depressed patients with chronic treatment-resistant depression (TRD) treated with vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) Therapy plus treatment as usual (VNS + TAU) or TAU alone in a meta-analysis using Bayesian hierarchical models.Six outpatient, multicenter, clinical trials that have evaluated VNS + TAU or TAU in TRD, including two single-arm studies of VNS + TAU (n = 60 and n = 74), a randomized study of VNS + TAU versus TAU (n = 235), a randomized study of VNS + TAU comparing different VNS stimulation intensities (n = 331), a nonrandomized registry of VNS + TAU versus TAU (n = 636), and a single-arm study of TAU (n = 124) to provide longer-term, control data for comparison with VNS-treated patients.A systematic review of individual patient-level data based on the intent-to-treat principle, including all patients who contributed more than one post-baseline visit. Response was based on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions scale’s Improvement subscale (CGI-I), as these were the two clinician-rated measures common across all or most studies. Remission was based on the MADRS.Outcomes were compared from baseline up to 96 weeks of treatment with VNS + TAU (n = 1035) versus TAU (n = 425). The MADRS response rate for VNS + TAU at 12, 24, 48, and 96 weeks were 12%, 18%, 28%, and 32% versus 4%, 7%, 12%, and 14% for TAU. The MADRS remission rate for VNS + TAU at 12, 24, 48, and 96 weeks were 3%, 5%, 10%, and 14% versus 1%, 1%, 2%, and 4%, for TAU. Adjunctive VNS Therapy was associated with a greater likelihood of response (odds ratio [OR] = 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.12, 4.66) and remission (OR = 4.99, CI: 2.93, 7.76), compared with TAU. For patients who had responded to VNS + TAU at 24 weeks, sustained response was more likely at 48 weeks (OR = 1.98, CI: 1.34, 3.01) and at 96 weeks (OR = 3.42, CI: 1.78, 7.31). Similar results were observed for CGI-I response.For patients with chronic TRD, VNS + TAU has greater response and remission rates that are more likely to persist than TAU. HubMed – depression


The korean version of the body image scale-reliability and validity in a sample of breast cancer patients.

Psychiatry Investig. 2013 Mar; 10(1): 26-33
Khang D, Rim HD, Woo J

The Body Image Scale (BIS) developed in collaboration with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Study Group is a brief questionnaire for measuring body image concerns in patients with cancer. This study sought to assess the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Body Image Scale (K-BIS).The participants consisted of 155 postoperative breast cancer patients (56 breast conserving surgery, 56 mastectomy, and 43 oncoplastic surgery). Subjects were evaluated using the K-BIS, the Body-Esteem Scale for Adolescents and Adults (BESAA), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale Abbreviated Version (WHOQOL-BREF). Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were examined as a measure of reliability and validity was evaluated by convergent validity, discriminant validity and factor analysis.Cronbach’s ? value was 0.943. The total score of the K-BIS was negatively correlated with the BESAA (r=0.301, p<0.001) and the body image facet in the WHOQOL-BREF (r=0.315, p<0.001). The total score of K-BIS positively correlated with the HADS (HAD-A: r=0.501, p<0.001, HAD-D: r=0.466, p<0.001). As for determining discriminant validity, scores were compared between the BCS subgroup, mastectomy subgroup, and oncoplastic surgery subgroup. Difference between the mastectomy subgroup and oncoplastic surgery subgroup was statistically significant (p=0.017). Factor analysis resulted in a single factor solution in three out of four anlyses, accounting for >59% variance.The K-BIS showed good reliability and validity for assessment of body image in Korean breast cancer patients. HubMed – depression



depression treatment zoloft – What is levitra now online?