Cited by 55Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesTreatment of Major DepressionElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies

Baseline Brain Metabolism in Resistant Depression and Response to Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Open access
Martinot, Marie-Laure Paillère, Martinot, Jean-Luc, Ringuenet, Damien, Galinowski, André, Gallarda, Thierry, Bellivier, Frank, Lefaucheur, Jean-Pascal, Lemaitre, Hervé +1 more·2011·Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Neuroimaging studies of patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) have reported abnormalities in the frontal and temporal regions. We sought to determine whether metabolism in these regions might be related to response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with TRD. Magnetic resonance images and baseline resting-state cerebral glucose uptake index (gluMI) obtained using (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography were analyzed in TRD patients who had participated in a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial of prefrontal 10 Hz TMS. Among the patients randomized to active TMS, 17 responders, defined as having 50% depression score decrease, and 14 nonresponders were investigated for prestimulation glucose metabolism and compared with 39 healthy subjects using a voxel-based analysis. In nonresponders relative to responders, gluMI was lower in left lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), and higher in left amygdala and uncinate fasciculus. OFC and amygdala gluMI negatively correlated in nonresponders, positively correlated in responders, and did not correlate in healthy subjects. Relative to healthy subjects, both responders and nonresponders displayed lower gluMI in right dorsolateral prefrontal (DLPFC), right anterior cingulate (ACC), and left ventrolateral prefrontal cortices. Additionally, nonresponders had lower gluMI in left DLPFC, ACC, left and right insula, and higher gluMI in left amygdala and uncus. Hypometabolisms were partly explained by gray matter reductions, whereas hypermetabolisms were unrelated to structural changes. The findings suggest that different patterns of frontal-temporal-limbic abnormalities may distinguish responders and nonresponders to prefrontal magnetic stimulation. Both preserved OFC volume and amygdala metabolism might precondition response to TMS.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/npp.2011.161

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Antidepressant effects of low-dose ketamine and transcranial magnetic stimulation can improve cerebral glucose metabolism in these regions.

    “Antidepressant effects of low-dose ketamine [56] and transcranial magnetic stimulation can improve the cerebral glucose metabolism in these regions [57–60].”

    From APOE4 genotype exacerbates the depression-like behavior of mice during aging through ATP decline (2021) · cites this paper as [59]

    The Introduction says high-frequency TMS aims to increase metabolism in prefrontal areas and notes its clinical effectiveness in treatment-resistant depression. But the study measured glucose metabolism before stimulation, not whether TMS improved it afterward; it therefore does not establish the claimed metabolic improvement. The ketamine claim is attached to a different citation and is not assessed here. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Herrmann LL, Ebmeier KP (2006). Factors modifying the efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of depression: a review. J Clin Psychiatry 67: 1870-1876.
  2. Hooker CI, Knight RT (2006). The role of the lateral orbitofrontal cortex in the inhibitory control of emotion. In: Zald DH, Rauch SL (eds). The Orbitofrontal Cortex. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 307-324.
  3. Lam RW, Chan P, Wilkins-Ho M, Yatham LN (2008). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant de- pression: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Can J Psychiatry 53: 621-631.
  4. Loo CK, Mitchell PB (2005). A review of the efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) treatment for depression, and current and future strategies to optimize efficacy. J Affect Disord 88: 255-267.
  5. Schmahmann JD, Pandya DN (2006). Uncinate fasciculus. In: Schmahmann JD, Pandya DN (eds). Fiber Pathways of the Brain. Oxford University Press: New York, 419-425.
  6. Talairach J, Tournoux P (1988). Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain: An Approach to Medical Cerebral Imaging. Thieme Medical Publishers: New York.
  7. Videbech P (2000). PET measurements of brain glucose metabo- lism and blood flow in major depressive disorder: a critical review. Acta Psychiatr Scand 101: 11-20.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martinot, M.-L. P., Martinot, J.-L., Ringuenet, D., Galinowski, A., Gallarda, T., Bellivier, F., Lefaucheur, J.-P., Lemaitre, H., & Artiges, E.
Affiliations
  • Sorbonne Paris Cité (FR)
  • Université Paris-Sud (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
  • Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Martinot, Marie-Laure Paillère
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2011-08-17
Volume
36
Issue
13
Pages
2710-2719
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
OpenAlex
W2025577790
Cited by
55
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Keywords
treatment-resistant depression, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, brain glucose metabolism, orbitofrontal cortex, amygdala, uncinate fasciculus, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, insula, treatment response prediction, gray matter reduction
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Brain, Brain Diseases, Metabolic, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Radionuclide Imaging, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review