Citations

Background Psychiatric disorders are increasingly contributing to global disability. Despite advances in conservative management, the prevalence of treatment-resistant cases remains high. Meanwhile, neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders (NPD) remains underused, largely due to strict regulations and historical concerns, particularly those related to neuropsychological side effects (NPSE). Objective To address this issue, we conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to compare NPSE associated with radiofrequency ablative NPD to those observed in neuro-oncological, neurovascular and epilepsy surgeries. Methods PubMed, Embase and LILACS databases were searched in April 2024 for articles published in English/Spanish from 1990 to 2022, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Results A total of 48 articles with 2678 participants were included. The frequency of transient and permanent NPSE in the NPD group ranged from 0.94% to 11.50% and 0.94% to 2.03%, respectively, comparable to the other surgical groups (epilepsy: 0.31–11.70%; vascular: 0.52–22.90%; oncology: 0.94–17.60% for transient NPSE; epilepsy: 0.31–12%; vascular: 0.40–1.96% and oncology: 0.84–1.48% for permanent NPSE). Regarding permanent NPSE, arguably the most critical consideration, the NPD group showed better outcomes in memory, language and social cognition than the epilepsy group, but worse outcomes in executive and perceptual-motor functions. Compared with the vascular group, the NPD group had better executive function but worse complex attention. Finally, the NPD group had fewer permanent deficits than the oncology group in executive function, complex attention and perceptual-motor domains, although language performance was lower. Conclusions Contemporary NPD apparently carries a similar risk of NPSE as other conventional neurosurgical procedures, challenging misconceptions and this unjustified barrier to its broader use.

AbstractBackgroundRegulatory qualification of a biomarker for a defined context of use provides scientifically robust assurances to sponsors and regulators that accelerate appropriate adoption of biomarkers into drug development.MethodsThe Coalition Against Major Diseases submitted a dossier to the Scientific Advice Working Party of the European Medicines Agency requesting a qualification opinion on the use of hippocampal volume as a biomarker for enriching clinical trials in subjects with mild cognitive impairment, incorporating a scientific rationale, a literature review and a de novo analysis of Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative data.ResultsThe literature review and de novo analysis were consistent with the proposed context of use, and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use released an opinion in November 2011.ConclusionsWe summarize the scientific rationale and the data that supported the first qualification of an imaging biomarker by the European Medicines Agency.