Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Vagus nerve stimulation in treatment-resistant depression: A one-year, randomized, sham-controlled trial

  • Charles R. Conway
  • , Scott T. Aaronson
  • , Harold A. Sackeim
  • , Mark S. George
  • , John Zajecka
  • , Mark T. Bunker
  • , Walter Duffy
  • , Mary Stedman
  • , Patricio Riva-Posse
  • , Rebecca M. Allen
  • , João Quevedo
  • , Matthew Berger
  • , Gustavo Alva
  • , Mohd A. Malik
  • , David L. Dunner
  • , Ivan Cichowicz
  • , Michael Banov
  • , Lucian Manu
  • , Ziad Nahas
  • , Matthew Macaluso
  • Brian J. Mickey, Yvette Sheline, Christopher L. Kriedt, Ying Chieh (Lisa) Lee, Charles Gordon, Olivia Shy, Quyen Tran, Laura Yates, A. John Rush

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Background: Few treatments are available for individuals with marked treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Objective: Evaluate the safety and effectiveness of FDA-approved adjunctive vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in patients with marked TRD. Methods: This 12-month, multicenter, double-blind, sham-controlled trial included 493 adults with marked treatment-resistant major depression who were randomized to active or no-stimulation sham VNS for 12 months. The primary outcome was percent time in response across months 3–12, with response defined as a ≥50 % change from baseline on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Several secondary endpoints were evaluated. Results: Overall, 88.4 % of participants completed the trial. Percent time in MADRS response did not distinguish active from sham VNS. However, ratings from on-site clinicians (Clinical Global Inventory–Impression [CGI-I]), patients (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomology–Self Report [QIDS-SR]), and offsite masked raters (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomology–Clinician [QIDS-C]) revealed antidepressant benefits significantly favoring active VNS. Active VNS demonstrated significantly more percent time in response on the CGI-I (P = 0.004) and QIDS-SR (P = 0.049), and significantly more percent time in partial response (PR; symptom improvement ≥30 %) on the CGI-I (P < 0.001) and QIDS-C (P = 0.006) versus sham VNS. Active VNS exceeded sham VNS in rate of dyspnea (P = 0.035), a known side effect of VNS. No new adverse events were identified. Conclusions: Percent time in MADRS response did not distinguish the treatment groups, but on multiple instruments time in response and PR showed a positive treatment effect. VNS was found safe and effective in participants with marked TRD.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)676-689
Number of pages14
JournalBrain Stimulation
Volume18
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2025

Keywords

  • Adjunctive therapy
  • Efficacy
  • Partial response
  • Randomized trial
  • Response
  • Treatment-resistant depression
  • Vagus nerve stimulation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Vagus nerve stimulation in treatment-resistant depression: A one-year, randomized, sham-controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this