Personality traits and response to desipramine

Peselow, Eric D.; Fieve, Ronald R.; Difiglia, Constance

doi:10.1016/0165-0327(92)90105-f

Cited by 44 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…PD subjects experienced a mean 19% decrease in HRSD scores, compared with a mean 43% decline among non-PD subjects. A somewhat similar finding has recently been reported by Peselow and colleagues (Peselow et al, 1992) in a sample of 68 outpatients. These latter investigators computed, for each subject, a dimensional personality disorder score, representing the total number of observed traits characteristic of each of the 11 principal Axis I1 disorders.…”

Section: Treatment Responsesupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Five studies have examined the effect of Axis I1 pathology on treatment response with tricyclic antidepressants (Frank et al, 1987;Peselow et al, 1992;Pilkonis and Frank, 1988;Sauer et al, 1986;Shea et al, 1990). Sauer and colleagues (1986) were among the first to report on the effects of Axis I1 pathology in a sample which received a homogeneous somatic treatment-in this case, the tricyclic amitriptyline.…”

Section: Treatment Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five of the acute treatment outcome studies reviewed above have investigated the relationship between specific Axis I1 clusters and response to somatic treatment. Peselow et al (1992) analyzed the ability of dimensional scores of Axis I1 traits drawn from Clusters A, B, and C to predict treatment response to outpatient desipramine therapy. Only Cluster C scores were found to differentiate between responders and non-responders in this study.…”

Section: Axis II Clusters and Acute Treatment Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Personality pathology and response to somatic treatments for major depression: A critical review

Ilardi

Head

1994

Depression

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report reviews 21 recent empirical investigations of the relationship between personality pathology and patient response to somatic treatments for major depression. The literature review reveals robust evidence, on the basis of 14 studies employing DSM‐III criteria for the diagnosis of Axis II personality disorders, that Axis II co‐morbidity predicts negative outcomes, both acute and longer‐term, among both inpatients and outpatients receiving pharmacological treatment for depression; seven studies utilizing non‐DSM III measures of personality pathology also generally corroborate this finding. A meta‐analysis of three reported studies of ECT response also reveals significantly poorer outcomes among personality disordered inpatients receiving ECT. There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether or not specific Axis II disorders, or clusters of disorders, are associated with particularly poor acute somatic treatment response, though there is modest evidence that Cluster C disorders are differentially predictive of poor acute response among outpatients. Dimensional scores reflecting the total number of Axis II criteria met by the patient are significantly negatively correlated with acute and long‐term somatic treatment response. Numerous methodological difficulties inherent in the study of personality and treatment outcome are addressed. Specific methodological recommendations include the use of structured interviews for personality assessment, the use of continuous rather than dichotomous measures of personality pathology, controlling statistically for differences in initial depression severity among subjects, and ensuring homogeneity of somatic treatment within each evaluated treatment condition. Several possible explanations of the observed relationship between personality pathology and somatic treatment response are also explored. Depression 2:200–217 (1994/1995). © 1995 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Treatment Responsesupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Treatment Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Axis II Clusters and Acute Treatment Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Personality pathology and response to somatic treatments for major depression: A critical review

Ilardi

Head

1994

Depression

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although studies showing a robust impact of the presence of Axis-II, cluster B personality disorder comorbidity on treatment outcome involving the use of newer agents (SSRIs, SNRIs, NDRI bupropion), have not been published to date, two studies do report poorer outcome among patients with MDD who also present with a comorbid cluster C-type Axis-II disorder during TCA therapy than those without (Papakostas et al 2003c ;Peselow et al 1992). In addition, certain elements of temperament including novelty seeking, harm avoidance and reward dependence were found to predict outcome following TCA therapy in one (Joyce et al 1994), but not another (Sato et al 1999) study.…”

Section: Clinical and Demographic Factorsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Surrogate markers of treatment outcome in major depressive disorder

Papakostas

2011

Int. J. Neuropsychopharm.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common medical illness affecting millions worldwide. Despite their widespread use since the 1950s and 1960s, the 'downstream' mechanism by which antidepressants ultimately exert their therapeutic effects remains elusive. In addition, except for a few exceptions such as episode severity and the presence of comorbid Axis-I or Axis-III disorders, biological or clinical characteristics which can accurately quantify the risk of poor treatment outcome are lacking, as are factors which could help patients and clinicians select treatment options that would result in superior outcome. The identification of such markers, termed 'surrogate' markers, could help shed further insights into what constitutes illness and recovery, help identify molecular targets for the development of future antidepressants, and lead the way to the design and refinement of a personalized medicine treatment model for MDD. In the following text, several major areas ('leads') where evidence exists regarding the presence of surrogate markers of efficacy outcome in MDD will be briefly reviewed. Leads include evidence from the role of demographic and clinical factors as surrogate markers, to the role of various biological markers including genotype, brain functional imaging, electroencephalography, dichotic listening, and molecular biology and immunology. The purpose of this work is to focus selectively on areas where there have been findings, as opposed to conducting an exhaustive literature review of studies which have failed to yield any significant breakthrough in our knowledge.

show abstract

“…8,48-55 However, two studies do report poorer outcome among MDD patients with than without a comorbid cluster C personality disorder during TCA treatment. 53 - 56 …”

Section: Clinical Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors, moderators and mediators of symptom improvement in major depressive disorder

Papakostas

2010

Journal of Affective Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personality traits and response to desipramine

Cited by 44 publications

References 23 publications

Personality pathology and response to somatic treatments for major depression: A critical review

Personality pathology and response to somatic treatments for major depression: A critical review

Surrogate markers of treatment outcome in major depressive disorder

Predictors, moderators and mediators of symptom improvement in major depressive disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About