To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) efficacy for psychiatric disorders remains heterogeneous due to incomplete mechanistic insights and insufficient individualized treatment planning. A biologically grounded computational framework is urgently needed to simulate DBS-related differences for treatment-resistant patients.
Methods
Resting-state fMRI data from 11 patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and 11 with major depressive disorder (MDD), scanned in DBS-ON and DBS-OFF states, were used to derive functional connectivity (FC) via network deconvolution. Whole-brain dynamic modeling incorporated stimulation targets, amplitudes, and frequencies to simulate DBS effects in silico.
Results
The model recapitulated syndrome-specific DBS-related network patterns in exploratory analyses. OCD stimulation primarily altered frontal-subcortical connectivity, whereas MDD stimulation predominantly affected default mode network hubs (p < 0.05). Under leave-one-out cross-validation, correlations between predicted and observed clinical outcomes were r = 0.625 in OCD (p = 0.040) and r = 0.659 in MDD (p = 0.028). Applying the same FC signatures to simulated FC yielded r = 0.465 in OCD (p = 0.149) and r = 0.627 in MDD (p = 0.039). In a proof-of-concept application to a separate OCD cohort (N = 92), three individuals showed high model-predicted NAc-response profiles and predicted improvement exceeding 35%.
Conclusions
This hypothesis-generating framework retrospectively models DBS-related network effects using individualized resting-state FC and virtual perturbations. Linking simulated FC states with empirical DBS-ON/OFF patterns may help characterize how baseline functional architecture shapes DBS-related network responses and inform future individualized DBS modeling.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.