Fast-acting approaches for treatment-resistant depression: real-world comparative effectiveness of Intranasal Esketamine versus accelerated rTMS.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Michele Prato, Matteo Carminati, Filippo Frizzi, Greta Verri, Mattia Tondello, Barbara Barbini, Cristina Colombo, Zanardi Raffaella
{"title":"Fast-acting approaches for treatment-resistant depression: real-world comparative effectiveness of Intranasal Esketamine versus accelerated rTMS.","authors":"Michele Prato, Matteo Carminati, Filippo Frizzi, Greta Verri, Mattia Tondello, Barbara Barbini, Cristina Colombo, Zanardi Raffaella","doi":"10.1080/13651501.2026.2642680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD) often persists despite adequate pharmacotherapy. Intranasal Esketamine and accelerated repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (aTMS) are rapid-acting options, but head-to-head comparisons remain limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study on TRD patients receiving either aTMS (<i>n</i> = 18) or Intranasal Esketamine (<i>n</i> = 22). Depression severity (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS) was assessed at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months. Primary outcomes were response (≥50% MADRS reduction) and remission (MADRS <10). Longitudinal change was modelled with linear mixed-effects; moderators included clinical and demographics features.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 1 month, aTMS showed higher response (72.2% vs 20%; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and remission (66.6% vs 10%; <i>p</i> = 0.0031) than Esketamine. Between-group differences were not significant at 3 months or 6 months. Mixed-effects models showed greater MADRS reduction with aTMS at 1 (<i>p</i> < 0.001) and 3 months (<i>p</i> = 0.007), but not at 6 months (<i>p</i> = 0.057). Psychiatric comorbidities were associated with greater improvement at 3 and 6 months within the Esketamine subgroup, with no analogous association in the aTMS subgroup.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>aTMS showed a stronger early antidepressant effect, but its advantage over esketamine progressively diminished and was no longer evident at six months. Prospective, well-powered comparative trials are required to validate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14351,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice","volume":" ","pages":"256-263"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13651501.2026.2642680","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD) often persists despite adequate pharmacotherapy. Intranasal Esketamine and accelerated repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (aTMS) are rapid-acting options, but head-to-head comparisons remain limited.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on TRD patients receiving either aTMS (n = 18) or Intranasal Esketamine (n = 22). Depression severity (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS) was assessed at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months. Primary outcomes were response (≥50% MADRS reduction) and remission (MADRS <10). Longitudinal change was modelled with linear mixed-effects; moderators included clinical and demographics features.

Results: At 1 month, aTMS showed higher response (72.2% vs 20%; p < 0.001) and remission (66.6% vs 10%; p = 0.0031) than Esketamine. Between-group differences were not significant at 3 months or 6 months. Mixed-effects models showed greater MADRS reduction with aTMS at 1 (p < 0.001) and 3 months (p = 0.007), but not at 6 months (p = 0.057). Psychiatric comorbidities were associated with greater improvement at 3 and 6 months within the Esketamine subgroup, with no analogous association in the aTMS subgroup.

Conclusions: aTMS showed a stronger early antidepressant effect, but its advantage over esketamine progressively diminished and was no longer evident at six months. Prospective, well-powered comparative trials are required to validate these findings.

治疗难治性抑郁症的速效方法:鼻内艾氯胺酮与加速rTMS的实际比较效果。
背景:难治性抑郁症(TRD)经常持续存在,尽管有充分的药物治疗。鼻内艾氯胺酮和加速重复经颅磁刺激(aTMS)是速效选择,但头对头比较仍然有限。方法:我们对接受aTMS (n = 18)或鼻用艾氯胺酮(n = 22)治疗的TRD患者进行了回顾性研究。抑郁严重程度(蒙哥马利-阿斯伯格抑郁评定量表,MADRS)在基线和1、3和6个月进行评估。主要结局是缓解(MADRS降低≥50%)和缓解(MADRS结果:1个月时,aTMS的缓解率(72.2% vs 20%; p p = 0.0031)高于es氯胺酮。3个月和6个月时,组间差异无统计学意义。混合效应模型显示,aTMS在1个月时(p = 0.007)降低了MADRS,但在6个月时没有(p = 0.057)。在艾氯胺酮亚组中,精神合并症在3个月和6个月时有更大的改善,而在aTMS亚组中没有类似的关联。结论:aTMS具有较强的早期抗抑郁作用,但其优于艾氯胺酮的优势逐渐减弱,6个月后不再明显。需要前瞻性的、有力的比较试验来验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.30%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice provides an international forum for communication among health professionals with clinical, academic and research interests in psychiatry. The journal gives particular emphasis to papers that integrate the findings of academic research into realities of clinical practice. Focus on the practical aspects of managing and treating patients. Essential reading for the busy psychiatrist, trainee and interested physician. Includes original research papers, comprehensive review articles and short communications. Key words: Psychiatry, Neuropsychopharmacology, Mental health, Neuropsychiatry, Clinical Neurophysiology, Psychophysiology, Psychotherapy, Addiction, Schizophrenia, Depression, Bipolar Disorders and Anxiety.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书