Restoring Emotion Regulation Networks in Depression Vulnerability

April 25, 2019 updated by: Nils Inge Landrø, University of Oslo

Restoring Emotion Regulation Networks in Depression Vulnerability: An Experimental Study Applying an Attention Bias Modification Procedure

Selective biases in attention can be modified by a simple computerized technique: The Attention Bias Modification Task (ABM) pioneered by MacLeod et al. Cognitive biases may be one reason depression recurs, and altering these biases should reduce risk of recurrence. Recently, evidence has supported this hypothesis . The mechanisms by which ABM works are not well understood. More research is needed to explore how altering an implicit attentional bias can lead to changes in subjective mood. One possible explanation is that positive attentional biases are an important component of explicit methods of emotion regulation. The ability to effectively regulate one's emotions is a fundamental component of mental health and this ability is impaired in depression. It has also been shown that recovered depressed people spontaneously show a more dysfunctional pattern of emotion regulation as compared to never depressed controls. Supporting this, growing evidence implicates dysregulation of a medial/orbitofrontal circuit in mood disorders. This circuit includes the orbitofrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex, the ventral striatum, the ventral pallidum and medial thalamus. Components of this circuit are reciprocally connected with the amygdala, which is implicated in emotional processing in the healthy brain and dysregulated in depression. Negative emotion processing biases depend on both enhanced "bottom-up" responses to emotionally salient stimuli and reduces "top-down" cognitive control mechanisms, required to suppress responses to emotionally salient but task irrelevant information. Cognitive reappraisal and distancing are common strategies to down- or upregulate emotional responses. Reappraisal is an emotion regulation strategy that involves reinterpretation and changing the way one thinks about an event or stimulus with the goal of changing its affective impact. Distancing is a type of reappraisal that involves creating mental space between oneself and the emotional event in order to see things from a different, less self-focused perspective. It has been shown that distancing is a strategy that people can improve at over time compared to reinterpretation. The neural systems which support the explicit regulation of emotion have previously been characterized and include both lateral- and prefrontal cortex. This frontal activity is predicted to downregulate limbic circuitry involving the amygdala during passive viewing of emotional salient stimuli.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
134

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Norway
      • Oslo, Norway, 0317
        • University of Oslo, Department of Psychology

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Currently no-depressed subjects with a history of major depression.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Current or past neurological illness, bipolar disorder, psychosis or drug addiction.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Attentional Bias Modification
ABM dot-probe task with image stimuli (faces) of three valences: positive (happy), neutral, or negative (angry and fearful). In the ABM condition, probes were located behind positive stimuli in 87 % of the trials (valid trials), as opposed to 13% with probes located behind the more negative stimuli (invalid trials). Consequently, participants should implicitly learn to deploy their attention toward positive stimuli, and in this way develop a more positive AB when completing the task.
Behavioral: Attentional Bias Modification
Computerized
Sham Comparator: Sham comparator
Sham condition without modification of attentional bias. These trials are identical in structure to the ABM trials with the exception that target probes replaced negative and positive images with equal frequency.
Behavioral: Sham Comparator
Computerized

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
BOLD response in prefrontal cortical regions
Time Frame: Two weeks after after ABM-training
Stronger fMRI BOLD response in prefrontal cortical regions in ABMT compared to neutral AMB placebo condition.
Two weeks after after ABM-training

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
BOLD response within the amygdala
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
Lower ABM fMRI BOLD response within the amygdala in ABMT compared to neutral ABM placebo condition.
Two weeks after ABM-training
DTI
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
Increased neural integrity as measured by fractional anisotropy values in the uncinate fasciculi (UF) in the active AMBT compared to neutral ABM placebo condition.
Two weeks after ABM-training
RSFC
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
Increased integrity within the attentional networks at rest as measured by independent component analysis (ICA) in ABMT compared to neutral ABM training.
Two weeks after ABM-training
5-HTTLPR + A>G polymorphic variation divided by the triallelic functional "high expressive" versus "low expressive" genotype will moderate the impact from ABMT as measured by whole brain BOLD responses.
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
The low expressive variant will be associated with more frontal BOLD activation and lower amygdala activation after ABMT
Two weeks after ABM-training
BDNF
Time Frame: Two week after ABM-training
Brain Derived Neurotropic Factor (BDNF) val66met polymorphic variation linked to Brain Derived Neurotropic Factor (BDNF) variation will differentiate between ABMT and neutral AMB placebo as measured by fMRI whole brain BOLD responses.
Two week after ABM-training
Serotonergic cumulative genetic score and fMRI
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
A serotonergic cumulative Genetic score, including (5-HHTLPR, HTR1A 8rs6295) and HTR 2A (rs 6311) polymorphisms will moderate the effects of ABM on fMRI BOLD signal compared to a neutral placebo condition.
Two weeks after ABM-training
Serotonergic cumulative genetic score and morphompetry
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
A serotonergic cumulative Genetic score, including (5-HHTLPR, HTR1A 8rs6295) and HTR 2A (rs 6311) polymorphisms will moderate the effects of ABM on structural MRI as measured by total grey matter volume compared to a neutral placebo condition.
Two weeks after ABM-training
Serotonergic cumulative genetic score and fMRI and DTI
Time Frame: Two weeks after ABM-training
A serotonergic cumulative Genetic score, including (5-HHTLPR, HTR1A 8rs6295) and HTR 2A (rs 6311) polymorphisms will moderate the effects of ABM on DTI MRI as measured by fractional anisotropy compared to a neutral placebo condition.
Two weeks after ABM-training

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University of Oslo

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Oslo University Hospital
University of Oxford

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Nils I Landrø, phd, University of Oslo

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
May 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 1, 2016

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
December 1, 2016

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
July 8, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
October 10, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
October 13, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
April 30, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
April 25, 2019

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
April 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • HSØ-2015052

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings