Kennard, Betsy D.

Introduction: The Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale is widely used in clinical research to assess symptoms and functioning in the context of treatment. The correlates of the CGI-I with efficacy scales for adolescent major depressive disorder are poorly understood. This study focused on benchmarking CGI-I scores with changes in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Adolescent (17-item) Self-Report (QIDS-A17-SR). Methods: We examined three datasets with the clinician-rated CDRS-R to ascertain equivalent percent changes in total scores and CGI-I ratings. Exploratory analyses examined corresponding percentage changes in the QIDS-A17-SR and the CGI-I ratings. The CGI-I was the reference scale for nonparametric equipercentile linking with the Equate package in R. Results: CGI-I scores of 1 mapped to ≥78%–95% change in CDRS-R scores at 4–6 weeks across three datasets. CGI-I scores of 2 mapped to 56%–94% change in CDRS-R scores at 4–6 weeks across three studies. CGI-I scores of 3 mapped to 30%–68% changes in CDRS-R scores at 4–6 weeks across three studies. CGI-I scores of 4 mapped to a range of 29%–44% at 4–6 weeks across three studies. There was no significant difference ( p ≥ 0.6) between treatment groups in both the Treatment of Adolescents with Depression and Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents studies, for each CGI-I score ( = 1, or = 2 or = 3, or ≥4), associated mapping of total depression severity score, or associated percent change from baseline for corresponding follow-up visits. There was no significant sex difference ( p > 0.2) in CGI-I linkages to CDRS-R total or percentage changes. Conclusions: These findings establish clear relationships among CGI-I scores and the CDRS-R and the QIDS-A17-SR. These benchmarks have utility for clinical trial study design, inter-rater reliability training, and clinical implementation.

Background The treatment of depression in children and adolescents is a substantial public health challenge. This study examined artificial intelligence tools for the prediction of early outcomes in depressed children and adolescents treated with fluoxetine, duloxetine, or placebo. Methods The study samples included training datasets ( N = 271) from patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with fluoxetine and testing datasets from patients with MDD treated with duloxetine ( N = 255) or placebo ( N = 265). Treatment trajectories were generated using probabilistic graphical models (PGMs). Unsupervised machine learning identified specific depressive symptom profiles and related thresholds of improvement during acute treatment. Results Variation in six depressive symptoms (difficulty having fun, social withdrawal, excessive fatigue, irritability, low self‐esteem, and depressed feelings) assessed with the Children’s Depression Rating Scale‐Revised at 4–6 weeks predicted treatment outcomes with fluoxetine at 10–12 weeks with an average accuracy of 73% in the training dataset. The same six symptoms predicted 10–12 week outcomes at 4–6 weeks in (a) duloxetine testing datasets with an average accuracy of 76% and (b) placebo‐treated patients with accuracies of 67%. In placebo‐treated patients, the accuracies of predicting response and remission were similar to antidepressants. Accuracies for predicting nonresponse to placebo treatment were significantly lower than antidepressants. Conclusions PGMs provided clinically meaningful predictions in samples of depressed children and adolescents treated with fluoxetine or duloxetine. Future work should augment PGMs with biological data for refined predictions to guide the selection of pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment in children and adolescents with depression.