Brief, unidimensional melancholia rating scales are highly sensitive to the effect of citalopram and may have biological validity: Implications for the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC)

Søren D. Østergaard, Per Bech, Madhukar H. Trivedi, Stephen R. Wisniewski, A. John Rush, Maurizio Fava

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Most depression rating scales are multidimensional and the resulting heterogeneity may impede identification of coherent biomarkers. The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of the multidimensional 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) and the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C30) to that of their unidimensional six-item melancholia subscales (HAM-D6 and IDS-C6). Methods A total of 2242 subjects from level 1 (citalopram) of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study were included in the analysis. Symptom change, response and remission rates were compared for HAM-D6 versus HAM-D17 and for IDS-C6 versus IDS-C30. The changes in total scores on these scales were compared to the change in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (QLES-Q) score using correlation analysis. Results The response to treatment was significantly greater according to the HAM-D 6 and IDS-C6. Furthermore, the correlation of changes in depression-ratings with changes in QLES-Q scores were comparable for the subscales and full scales. Limitations STAR*D was not designed to answer the research questions addressed in this analysis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the HAM-D6 and IDS-C6 melancholia scales capture a coherent construct in depression. The syndrome reflected in these scales is unidimensional, sensitive to specific pharmacological intervention, and therefore likely to have biological validity. We therefore believe that "melancholia" thus defined could be a valuable construct under the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), which specifically aims at identifying the neurobiology underlying mental disorders and providing drugable targets.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)18-24
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Affective Disorders
Volume163
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Citalopram
Depressive Disorder
Depression
Research
Quality of Life
Neurobiology
Psychometrics
Mental Disorders
Therapeutics
Biomarkers
Pharmacology
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Depression
  • Psychometrics
  • Research Domain Criteria

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Clinical Psychology

Cite this

Brief, unidimensional melancholia rating scales are highly sensitive to the effect of citalopram and may have biological validity : Implications for the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). / Østergaard, Søren D.; Bech, Per; Trivedi, Madhukar H.; Wisniewski, Stephen R.; Rush, A. John; Fava, Maurizio.

In: Journal of Affective Disorders, Vol. 163, 2014, p. 18-24.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c63ec1fa38dd43688298303918a8e034,
title = "Brief, unidimensional melancholia rating scales are highly sensitive to the effect of citalopram and may have biological validity: Implications for the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC)",
abstract = "Background Most depression rating scales are multidimensional and the resulting heterogeneity may impede identification of coherent biomarkers. The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of the multidimensional 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) and the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C30) to that of their unidimensional six-item melancholia subscales (HAM-D6 and IDS-C6). Methods A total of 2242 subjects from level 1 (citalopram) of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study were included in the analysis. Symptom change, response and remission rates were compared for HAM-D6 versus HAM-D17 and for IDS-C6 versus IDS-C30. The changes in total scores on these scales were compared to the change in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (QLES-Q) score using correlation analysis. Results The response to treatment was significantly greater according to the HAM-D 6 and IDS-C6. Furthermore, the correlation of changes in depression-ratings with changes in QLES-Q scores were comparable for the subscales and full scales. Limitations STAR*D was not designed to answer the research questions addressed in this analysis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the HAM-D6 and IDS-C6 melancholia scales capture a coherent construct in depression. The syndrome reflected in these scales is unidimensional, sensitive to specific pharmacological intervention, and therefore likely to have biological validity. We therefore believe that {"}melancholia{"} thus defined could be a valuable construct under the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), which specifically aims at identifying the neurobiology underlying mental disorders and providing drugable targets.",
keywords = "Depression, Psychometrics, Research Domain Criteria",
author = "{\O}stergaard, {S{\o}ren D.} and Per Bech and Trivedi, {Madhukar H.} and Wisniewski, {Stephen R.} and Rush, {A. John} and Maurizio Fava",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.jad.2014.03.049",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "163",
pages = "18--24",
journal = "Journal of Affective Disorders",
issn = "0165-0327",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Brief, unidimensional melancholia rating scales are highly sensitive to the effect of citalopram and may have biological validity

T2 - Implications for the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC)

AU - Østergaard, Søren D.

AU - Bech, Per

AU - Trivedi, Madhukar H.

AU - Wisniewski, Stephen R.

AU - Rush, A. John

AU - Fava, Maurizio

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background Most depression rating scales are multidimensional and the resulting heterogeneity may impede identification of coherent biomarkers. The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of the multidimensional 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) and the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C30) to that of their unidimensional six-item melancholia subscales (HAM-D6 and IDS-C6). Methods A total of 2242 subjects from level 1 (citalopram) of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study were included in the analysis. Symptom change, response and remission rates were compared for HAM-D6 versus HAM-D17 and for IDS-C6 versus IDS-C30. The changes in total scores on these scales were compared to the change in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (QLES-Q) score using correlation analysis. Results The response to treatment was significantly greater according to the HAM-D 6 and IDS-C6. Furthermore, the correlation of changes in depression-ratings with changes in QLES-Q scores were comparable for the subscales and full scales. Limitations STAR*D was not designed to answer the research questions addressed in this analysis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the HAM-D6 and IDS-C6 melancholia scales capture a coherent construct in depression. The syndrome reflected in these scales is unidimensional, sensitive to specific pharmacological intervention, and therefore likely to have biological validity. We therefore believe that "melancholia" thus defined could be a valuable construct under the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), which specifically aims at identifying the neurobiology underlying mental disorders and providing drugable targets.

AB - Background Most depression rating scales are multidimensional and the resulting heterogeneity may impede identification of coherent biomarkers. The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of the multidimensional 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) and the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C30) to that of their unidimensional six-item melancholia subscales (HAM-D6 and IDS-C6). Methods A total of 2242 subjects from level 1 (citalopram) of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study were included in the analysis. Symptom change, response and remission rates were compared for HAM-D6 versus HAM-D17 and for IDS-C6 versus IDS-C30. The changes in total scores on these scales were compared to the change in Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (QLES-Q) score using correlation analysis. Results The response to treatment was significantly greater according to the HAM-D 6 and IDS-C6. Furthermore, the correlation of changes in depression-ratings with changes in QLES-Q scores were comparable for the subscales and full scales. Limitations STAR*D was not designed to answer the research questions addressed in this analysis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the HAM-D6 and IDS-C6 melancholia scales capture a coherent construct in depression. The syndrome reflected in these scales is unidimensional, sensitive to specific pharmacological intervention, and therefore likely to have biological validity. We therefore believe that "melancholia" thus defined could be a valuable construct under the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), which specifically aims at identifying the neurobiology underlying mental disorders and providing drugable targets.

KW - Depression

KW - Psychometrics

KW - Research Domain Criteria

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84898776745&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84898776745&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2014.03.049

DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2014.03.049

M3 - Article

C2 - 24836083

AN - SCOPUS:84898776745

VL - 163

SP - 18

EP - 24

JO - Journal of Affective Disorders

JF - Journal of Affective Disorders

SN - 0165-0327

ER -