rTMS age-dependent response in treatment-resistant depressed subjects: a mini-review

Abstract

Results from this study show that low-frequency rTMS over the right DLPFC, with a relatively low number of pulses (420 pulses per session) and a relatively short period of treatment, is effective in the treatment of resistant patients (in a sample also including elderly patients) in a 3-weeks treatment protocol with a low reduction with the progress of age. Furthermore, we found a greater response in younger patients and an inverse correlation between age and treatment response. Adaptations of the protocol according to age are reviewed.

The lack of association between components of metabolic syndrome and treatment resistance in depression

“…The influence of age on response to nonpharmacological treatment of depression was also reported. Patients at age<60 years had greater response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation compared to older patients (Pallanti et al 2012). On the other hand, our results are in line with data from Amital et al (2012), who found no difference between TRD and non-TRD patients in the prevalence of comorbid somatic disorders, including diabetes, hypertension and ischemic heart disease.…”

The ‘black dog’: depression in old age

“…Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) entails generation of a focal electromagnetic field by a coil positioned over the scalp, with a course of 20 to 40 sessions. While rTMS does not require anaesthesia and has insignificant cognitive side effects, depressed older people appear to be less responsive than younger adults (Pallanti et al, 2012).…”

Neuromodulation Therapies for Geriatric Depression

“…Studies including mixed-age samples (see Table 1 for details) have reported mixed results, with some showing an inverse relationship between age and antidepressant efficacy, whereas others have not reported an association. Studies reporting older age to be associated with lesser efficacy need, however, to be interpreted with caution [76,[78][79][80][81][82][83]. For example, two of these RCTs included a small number of participants in the older range (five women ≥ 55 years [76], nine patients ≥ 45 years [79]), which could have biased results.…”

“…In a large open-label study (n=102), Pallanti et al [80] found that older age (≥60 years) was also associated with lesser efficacy. However, the older patients did in fact show a promising response rate of 47 % after treatment (cf.…”