Explore the vast range of titles available.

Neurofeedback – learning to modulate brain function through real-time monitoring of current brain state – is both a powerful method to perturb and probe brain function and an exciting potential clinical tool. For neurofeedback effects to be useful clinically, they must persist. Here we examine the time course of symptom change following neurofeedback in two clinical populations, combining data from two ongoing neurofeedback studies. This analysis reveals a shared pattern of symptom change, in which symptoms continue to improve for weeks after neurofeedback. This time course has several implications for future neurofeedback studies. Most neurofeedback studies are not designed to test an intervention with this temporal pattern of response. We recommend that new studies incorporate regular follow-up of subjects for weeks or months after the intervention to ensure that the time point of greatest effect is sampled. Furthermore, this time course of continuing clinical change has implications for crossover designs, which may attribute long-term, ongoing effects of real neurofeedback to the control intervention that follows. Finally, interleaving neurofeedback sessions with assessments and examining when clinical improvement peaks may not be an appropriate approach to determine the optimal number of sessions for an application. •Temporal pattern of symptom change following neurofeedback shared across studies.•Symptoms continued to improve for weeks after neurofeedback.•Neurofeedback studies should follow up subjects to maximize power.•Crossover designs may be contaminated by significant carryover effects.•Optimizing number of sessions by embedding assessments not recommended.

Individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder often identify psychosocial stress as a factor that exacerbates their symptoms, and many trace the onset of symptoms to a stressful period of life or a discrete traumatic incident. However, the pathophysiological relationship between stress and obsessive-compulsive disorder remains poorly characterized: it is unclear whether trauma or stress is an independent cause of obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms, a triggering factor that interacts with a preexisting diathesis, or simply a nonspecific factor that can exacerbate obsessive-compulsive disorder along with other aspects of psychiatric symptomatology. Nonetheless, preclinical research has demonstrated that stress has conspicuous effects on corticostriatal and limbic circuitry. Specifically, stress can lead to neuronal atrophy in frontal cortices (particularly the medial prefrontal cortex), the dorsomedial striatum (caudate), and the hippocampus. Stress can also result in neuronal hypertrophy in the dorsolateral striatum (putamen) and amygdala. These neurobiological effects mirror reported neural abnormalities in obsessive-compulsive disorder and may contribute to an imbalance between goal-directed and habitual behavior, an imbalance that is implicated in the pathogenesis and expression of obsessive-compulsive disorder symptomatology. The modulation of corticostriatal and limbic circuits by stress and the resultant imbalance between habit and goal-directed learning and behavior offers a framework for investigating how stress may exacerbate or trigger obsessive-compulsive disorder symptomatology.

Tailoring treatments to the specific needs and biology of individual patients-personalized medicine-requires delineation of reliable predictors of response. Unfortunately, these have been slow to emerge, especially in neuropsychiatric disorders. We have recently described a real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging (rt-fMRI) neurofeedback protocol that can reduce contamination-related anxiety, a prominent symptom of many cases of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Individual response to this intervention is variable. Here we used patterns of brain functional connectivity, as measured by baseline resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI), to predict improvements in contamination anxiety after neurofeedback training. Activity of a region of the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and anterior prefrontal cortex, Brodmann area (BA) 10, associated with contamination anxiety in each subject was measured in real time and presented as a neurofeedback signal, permitting subjects to learn to modulate this target brain region. We have previously reported both enhanced OFC/BA 10 control and improved anxiety in a group of subclinically anxious subjects after neurofeedback. Five individuals with contamination-related OCD who underwent the same protocol also showed improved clinical symptomatology. In both groups, these behavioral improvements were strongly correlated with baseline whole-brain connectivity in the OFC/BA 10, computed from rs-fMRI collected several days prior to neurofeedback training. These pilot data suggest that rs-fMRI can be used to identify individuals likely to benefit from rt-fMRI neurofeedback training to control contamination anxiety.

Neuroimaging has played an important part in advancing our understanding of the neurobiology of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). At the same time, neuroimaging studies of OCD have had notable limitations, including reliance on relatively small samples. International collaborative efforts to increase statistical power by combining samples from across sites have been bolstered by the ENIGMA consortium; this provides specific technical expertise for conducting multi‐site analyses, as well as access to a collaborative community of neuroimaging scientists. In this article, we outline the background to, development of, and initial findings from ENIGMA's OCD working group, which currently consists of 47 samples from 34 institutes in 15 countries on 5 continents, with a total sample of 2,323 OCD patients and 2,325 healthy controls. Initial work has focused on studies of cortical thickness and subcortical volumes, structural connectivity, and brain lateralization in children, adolescents and adults with OCD, also including the study on the commonalities and distinctions across different neurodevelopment disorders. Additional work is ongoing, employing machine learning techniques. Findings to date have contributed to the development of neurobiological models of OCD, have provided an important model of global scientific collaboration, and have had a number of clinical implications. Importantly, our work has shed new light on questions about whether structural and functional alterations found in OCD reflect neurodevelopmental changes, effects of the disease process, or medication impacts. We conclude with a summary of ongoing work by ENIGMA‐OCD, and a consideration of future directions for neuroimaging research on OCD within and beyond ENIGMA.

Current knowledge about functional connectivity in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is based on small-scale studies, limiting the generalizability of results. Moreover, the majority of studies have focused only on predefined regions or functional networks rather than connectivity throughout the entire brain. Here, we investigated differences in resting-state functional connectivity between OCD patients and healthy controls (HC) using mega-analysis of data from 1024 OCD patients and 1028 HC from 28 independent samples of the ENIGMA-OCD consortium. We assessed group differences in whole-brain functional connectivity at both the regional and network level, and investigated whether functional connectivity could serve as biomarker to identify patient status at the individual level using machine learning analysis. The mega-analyses revealed widespread abnormalities in functional connectivity in OCD, with global hypo-connectivity (Cohen’s d : -0.27 to -0.13) and few hyper-connections, mainly with the thalamus (Cohen’s d : 0.19 to 0.22). Most hypo-connections were located within the sensorimotor network and no fronto-striatal abnormalities were found. Overall, classification performances were poor, with area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) scores ranging between 0.567 and 0.673, with better classification for medicated (AUC = 0.702) than unmedicated (AUC = 0.608) patients versus healthy controls. These findings provide partial support for existing pathophysiological models of OCD and highlight the important role of the sensorimotor network in OCD. However, resting-state connectivity does not so far provide an accurate biomarker for identifying patients at the individual level.

White matter pathways, typically studied with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), have been implicated in the neurobiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, due to limited sample sizes and the predominance of single-site studies, the generalizability of OCD classification based on diffusion white matter estimates remains unclear. Here, we tested classification accuracy using the largest OCD DTI dataset to date, involving 1336 adult participants (690 OCD patients and 646 healthy controls) and 317 pediatric participants (175 OCD patients and 142 healthy controls) from 18 international sites within the ENIGMA OCD Working Group. We used an automatic machine learning pipeline (with feature engineering and selection, and model optimization) and examined the cross-site generalizability of the OCD classification models using leave-one-site-out cross-validation. Our models showed low-to-moderate accuracy in classifying (1) “OCD vs. healthy controls” (Adults, receiver operator characteristic-area under the curve = 57.19 ± 3.47 in the replication set; Children, 59.8 ± 7.39), (2) “unmedicated OCD vs. healthy controls” (Adults, 62.67 ± 3.84; Children, 48.51 ± 10.14), and (3) “medicated OCD vs. unmedicated OCD” (Adults, 76.72 ± 3.97; Children, 72.45 ± 8.87). There was significant site variability in model performance (cross-validated ROC AUC ranges 51.6–79.1 in adults; 35.9–63.2 in children). Machine learning interpretation showed that diffusivity measures of the corpus callosum, internal capsule, and posterior thalamic radiation contributed to the classification of OCD from HC. The classification performance appeared greater than the model trained on grey matter morphometry in the prior ENIGMA OCD study (our study includes subsamples from the morphometry study). Taken together, this study points to the meaningful multivariate patterns of white matter features relevant to the neurobiology of OCD, but with low-to-moderate classification accuracy. The OCD classification performance may be constrained by site variability and medication effects on the white matter integrity, indicating room for improvement for future research.

Larger thalamic volume has been found in children with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and children with clinical-level symptoms within the general population. Particular thalamic subregions may drive these differences. The ENIGMA-OCD working group conducted mega- and meta-analyses to study thalamic subregional volume in OCD across the lifespan. Structural T 1 -weighted brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans from 2649 OCD patients and 2774 healthy controls across 29 sites (50 datasets) were processed using the FreeSurfer built-in ThalamicNuclei pipeline to extract five thalamic subregions. Volume measures were harmonized for site effects using ComBat before running separate multiple linear regression models for children, adolescents, and adults to estimate volumetric group differences. All analyses were pre-registered ( https://osf.io/73dvy ) and adjusted for age, sex and intracranial volume. Unmedicated pediatric OCD patients (<12 years) had larger lateral ( d  = 0.46), pulvinar ( d  = 0.33 ) , ventral ( d  = 0.35) and whole thalamus ( d  = 0.40) volumes at unadjusted p -values <0.05. Adolescent patients showed no volumetric differences. Adult OCD patients compared with controls had smaller volumes across all subregions (anterior, lateral, pulvinar, medial, and ventral) and smaller whole thalamic volume ( d  =  − 0.15 to −0.07) after multiple comparisons correction, mostly driven by medicated patients and associated with symptom severity. The anterior thalamus was also significantly smaller in patients after adjusting for thalamus size. Our results suggest that OCD-related thalamic volume differences are global and not driven by particular subregions and that the direction of effects are driven by both age and medication status.

Brain imaging communities focusing on different diseases have increasingly started to collaborate and to pool data to perform well-powered meta- and mega-analyses. Some methodologists claim that a one-stage individual-participant data (IPD) mega-analysis can be superior to a two-stage aggregated data meta-analysis, since more detailed computations can be performed in a mega-analysis. Before definitive conclusions regarding the performance of either method can be drawn, it is necessary to critically evaluate the methodology of, and results obtained by, meta- and mega-analyses. Here, we compare the inverse variance weighted random-effect meta-analysis model with a multiple linear regression mega-analysis model, as well as with a linear mixed-effects random-intercept mega-analysis model, using data from 38 cohorts including 3,665 participants of the ENIGMA-OCD consortium. We assessed the effect sizes and standard errors, and the fit of the models, to evaluate the performance of the different methods. The mega-analytical models showed lower standard errors and narrower confidence intervals than the meta-analysis. Similar standard errors and confidence intervals were found for the linear regression and linear mixed-effects random-intercept models. Moreover, the linear mixed-effects random-intercept models showed better fit indices compared to linear regression mega-analytical models. Our findings indicate that results obtained by meta- and mega-analysis differ, in favor of the latter. In multi-center studies with a moderate amount of variation between cohorts, a linear mixed-effects random-intercept mega-analytical framework appears to be the better approach to investigate structural neuroimaging data.