Dynamical repertoire of brain networks in mindfulness cognitive behavioural therapy during rumination: A randomized controlled trial
Vohryzek, J.; van der Velden, A. M.; Kuyken, W.; Montero-Marin, J.; Collin, G.; Kringelbach, M. L.; Ruhe, E.
Show abstract
BACKGROUNDDepression is a prevalent and debilitating affective disorder characterised by the dominance and persistence of depressive rumination. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an effective treatment for recurrent depression developed specifically to target rumination and recurrence risk by training metacognitive awareness and adaptive attention, emotion and self-regulation skills. Yet, the underlying mechanisms by which mindfulness training impacts maladaptive depressive rumination is not well understood, and a deeper understanding of its effects on the complex brain dynamics during depressive rumination is needed. METHODIn a randomised controlled functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study (N = 80), we used LEiDA (Leading Eigenvector Dynamics Analysis) to determine the key substates during resting state fMRI of an experimentally induced rumination state before and after treatment with MBCT (N = 27) for recurrent depression in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU alone (N = 21). We determined the probability of occurrence (fractional occupancy) and the duration (lifetime) of underlying substates (phase-locking patterns) before and after treatment for both groups. RESULTSWe found that MBCT training compared with TAU altered the fractional occupancy of a Salience-somatomotor substate during the depressive rumination induction. These dynamic network changes in turn were associated with reduced depressive symptoms after treatment and at three months follow up. CONCLUSIONIn a depressive ruminative state, changes in the dynamics of the somatosensory-salience network following mindfulness training was associated with improved clinical outcomes which provides insight into candidate brain mechanisms or markers of treatment response. Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03353493.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Heterogeneity in Depression: evidence for distinct clinical and neurobiological profiles 96%
- Dimensional and Categorical Solutions to Parsing Depression Heterogeneity in a Large Single-Site Sample 95%
- Predictive Patterns of Antidepressant Response from Pre-Treatment Reward Processing using Functional MRI and Deep Learning: Key Results from the EMBARC Randomized Clinical Trial 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Response to Neurofeedback in Major Depression Relates to Subtypes of Whole-Brain Activation Patterns During Training 95%
- Connectome dysfunction in patients at clinical high risk for psychosis and modulation by oxytocin 95%
- Spatiotemporal dynamics of hippocampal-cortical networks underlying the unique phenomenological properties of trauma-related intrusive memories 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Distinct neurofunctional alterations during motivational and hedonic processing of natural and monetary rewards in depression – a neuroimaging meta-analysis 96%
- Effective connectivity during faces processing in major depression – distinguishing markers of pathology, risk, and resilience 96%
- A common symptom geometry of mood improvement under sertraline and placebo associated with distinct neural patterns 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Kynurenines Increase MRS Metabolites in Basal Ganglia and Decrease Resting State Connectivity in Frontostriatal Reward Circuitry in Depression 95%
- Neural Correlates of Positive and Negative Valence System Dysfunction in Adolescents Revealed by Data-Driven Parcellation and Resting-State Network Modeling 95%
- Whole-brain Mechanism of Neurofeedback Therapy: Predictive Modeling of Neurofeedback Outcomes on Repetitive Negative Thinking in Depression 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.