2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of D-Cycloserine on the Effect of Concentrated Exposure and Response Prevention in Difficult-to-Treat Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder : A Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Does D-cycloserine potentiate the effect of concentrated exposure and response prevention in difficult-to-treat obsessive-compulsive disorder?

          Findings

          In this randomized clinical trial of 163 participants, D-cycloserine did not significantly affect treatment outcomes. Most patients responded to the concentrated exposure and response prevention treatment, and nearly 50% were recovered at 1-year follow-up.

          Meaning

          In this study, concentrated exposure and response prevention treatment was effective for patients with difficult-to-treat obsessive-compulsive disorder, but adding D-cycloserine did not potentiate the treatment.

          Abstract

          This randomized clinical trial evaluates whether D-cycloserine potentiates the effect of concentrated exposure and response prevention among patients with difficult-to-treat obsessive-compulsive disorder.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Evidence is lacking for viable treatment options for patients with difficult-to-treat obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). It has been suggested that D-cycloserine (DCS) could potentiate the effect of exposure and response prevention (ERP) treatment, but the hypothesis has not been tested among patients with difficult-to-treat OCD.

          Objective

          To evaluate whether DCS potentiates the effect of concentrated ERP among patients with difficult-to-treat OCD.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          The study was a randomized placebo-controlled triple-masked study with a 12-month follow-up. Participants were adult outpatients with difficult-to-treat OCD. A total of 220 potential participants were referred, of whom 36 did not meet inclusion criteria and 21 declined to participate. Patients had either relapsed after (n = 100) or not responded to (n = 63) previous ERP treatment. A total of 9 specialized OCD teams within the public health care system in Norway participated, giving national coverage. An expert team of therapists from the coordinating site delivered treatment. Inclusion of patients started in January 2016 and ended in August 2017. Data analysis was conducted February to September 2019.

          Interventions

          All patients received individual, concentrated ERP treatment delivered during 4 consecutive days in a group setting (the Bergen 4-day treatment format) combined with 100 mg DCS, 250 mg DCS, or placebo.

          Main outcomes and Measures

          Change in symptoms of OCD and change in diagnostic status. Secondary outcomes measures included self-reported symptoms of OCD, anxiety, depression, and quality of life.

          Results

          The total sample of 163 patients had a mean (SD) age of 34.5 (10.9) years, and most were women (117 [71.8%]). They had experienced OCD for a mean (SD) of 16.2 (10.2) years. A total of 65 patients (39.9%) were randomized to receive 100 mg DCS, 67 (41.1%) to 250 mg of DCS, and 31 (19.0%) to placebo. Overall, 91 (56.5%) achieved remission at posttreatment, while 70 (47.9%) did so at the 12-month follow-up. There was no significant difference in remission rates among groups. There was a significant reduction in symptoms at 12 months, and within-group effect sizes ranged from 3.01 (95% CI, 2.38-3.63) for the group receiving 250 mg DCS to 3.49 (95% CI, 2.78-4.18) for the group receiving 100 mg DCS (all P < .001). However, there was no significant effect of treatment group compared with placebo in obsessive-compulsive symptoms (250 mg group at posttreatment: d = 0.33; 95% CI, −0.10 to 0.76; 100 mg group at posttreatment: d = 0.36; 95% CI, −0.08 to 0.79), symptoms of depression and anxiety (eg, Patient Health Questionnaire–9 score among 250 mg group at 12-month follow-up: d = 0.30; 95% CI, −0.17 to 0.76; Generalized Anxiety Disorder–7 score among 100 mg group at 12-month follow-up: d = 0.27; 95% CI, −0.19 to 0.73), and well-being (250 mg group: d = 0.10; 95% CI, −0.42 to 0.63; 100 mg group: d = 0.34; 95% CI, −0.19 to 0.86). No serious adverse effects were reported.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this study, DCS did not potentiate ERP treatment effect, but concentrated ERP treatment was associated with improvement.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02656342

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The epidemiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder in five US communities.

          The prevalence of obsessive-compulsive disorder was measured in five US communities among more than 18,500 persons in residential settings as part of the National Institute of Mental Health (Bethesda, Md)--sponsored Epidemiologic Catchment Area program. Lifetime prevalence rates ranged from 1.9% to 3.3% across the five Epidemiologic Catchment Area sites for obsessive-compulsive disorder diagnosed without DSM-III exclusions and 1.2% to 2.4% with such exclusions. These rates are about 25 to 60 times greater than had been estimated on the basis of previous studies of clinical populations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Assessment of patient satisfaction: Development and refinement of a Service Evaluation Questionnaire

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cognitive behavioral treatments of obsessive-compulsive disorder. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published 1993-2014.

              Obsessive-compulsive disorder is ranked by the WHO as among the 10 most debilitating disorders and tends to be chronic without adequate treatment. The only psychological treatment that has been found effective is cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). This meta-analysis includes all RCTs (N=37) of CBT for OCD using the interview-based Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, published 1993 to 2014. The effect sizes for comparisons of CBT with waiting-list (1.31), and placebo conditions (1.33) were very large, whereas those for comparisons between individual and group treatment (0.17), and exposure and response prevention vs. cognitive therapy (0.07) were small and non-significant. CBT was significantly better than antidepressant medication (0.55), but the combination of CBT and medication was not significantly better than CBT plus placebo (0.25). The RCTs have a number of methodological problems and recommendations for improving the methodological rigor are discussed as well as clinical implications of the findings.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                13 August 2020
                August 2020
                13 August 2020
                : 3
                : 8
                : e2013249
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Bergen Center for Brain Plasticity, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
                [2 ]Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
                [3 ]Center for Crisis Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
                [4 ]Department of Psychiatry, Molde Hospital, Molde, Norway
                [5 ]Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
                [6 ]Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles
                [7 ]Rogers Memorial Hospital, Oconomowoc, Wisconsin
                [8 ]Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
                [9 ]Nidaros Outpatient Psychiatric Unit, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
                [10 ]School of Social Work, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
                [11 ]Department for Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
                [12 ]Gaustad Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
                [13 ]Solvang Outpatient Psychiatric Unit, Sørlandet Hospital, Kristiansand, Norway
                [14 ]Division of Psychiatry, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
                [15 ]Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
                [16 ]Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
                [17 ]Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: May 18, 2020.
                Published: August 13, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.13249
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Kvale G et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Gerd Kvale, PhD, Bergen Center for Brain Plasticity, Haukeland University Hospital, PB 1400, N-5021 Bergen, Norway ( gerd.kvale@ 123456helse-bergen.no ).
                Author Contributions: Drs Kvale and Solem had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Kvale, Hansen, Hagen, Abramowitz, Børtveit, Craske, Franklin, Haseth, Himle, Kristensen, Launes, Öst.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Kvale, Hansen, Hagen, Børtveit, Franklin, Haseth, Himle, Hystad, Launes, Lund, Solem, Öst.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Kvale, Hansen, Hagen, Børtveit, Franklin, Haseth, Hystad, Launes, Öst.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Kvale, Hansen, Hagen, Abramowitz, Børtveit, Craske, Franklin, Haseth, Himle, Kristensen, Launes, Lund, Solem, Öst.
                Statistical analysis: Kvale, Hagen, Hystad, Solem, Öst.
                Obtained funding: Kvale, Hansen.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Kvale, Børtveit, Haseth, Himle, Kristensen, Launes, Lund, Solem.
                Supervision: Kvale, Hansen, Børtveit, Haseth, Launes, Öst.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
                Funding/Support: This research was supported by project 243675 of the Research Council of Norway, HELSEFORSK.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 3.
                Additional Contributions: We thank Michael Davis, PhD, for recommendations regarding dosages and administration of the D-cycloserine.
                Article
                zoi200503
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.13249
                7426745
                32789516
                3c318ffa-e33e-44fd-a5f2-fbbcab4d4e90
                Copyright 2020 Kvale G et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 26 March 2020
                : 18 May 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Psychiatry

                Comments

                Comment on this article