vlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Editorial
July 27, 2022

The Search for Clinically Useful Neuroimaging Markers of Depression—A Worthwhile Pursuit or a Futile Quest?

Author Affiliations
  • 1Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  • 2Orygen, Parkville, Australia
JAMA Psychiatry. 2022;79(9):845-846. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.1606

A key objective in the field of translational psychiatry over the past few decades has been to identify brain biomarkers of major depressive disorder (MDD) to support the development of more effective interventions. Considerable progress has been made toward this aim; however, despite its initial promise, neuroimaging has not been widely translated into clinical practice. Various barriers have impeded the detection of clinically relevant neuroimaging markers, including (1) many studies have been conducted with small samples, which has led to a lack of reproducible findings; (2) advances in understanding the pathophysiology of depression have been made at a group level, lacking predictive value at the individual patient level; and (3) most studies have not evaluated the predictive value of potential neuroimaging biomarkers for future clinical outcomes.

Add or change institution
2 Comments for this article
Author has a strong interest in imaging studies continuing
David Curtis, MD PhD FRCPsych | University College London
The article purports to address the question of whether further imaging studies in depression are worthwhile. On the author's web page, https://www.orygen.org.au/About/Our-Leaders/Researchers/Dr-Lianne-Schmaal, it states: "Lianne leads the two largest neuroimaging consortia on depression and suicidal behaviours worldwide, i.e. the ENIGMA Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and the ENIGMA Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviours (STB) consortia." One might think that somebody in this position would be reluctant to conclude that continuing imaging studies of affective disorder constitute a futile quest.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
Scholars follow their data
Robert Rubin, MD, PhD | David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
Dr. Curtis expresses an unfortunately common ethos – that scientists often question the harm or advantage to themselves before expressing a scientific opinion. This transactional approach robs science of its epistemological value. As expressed by Pope John Paul II, “…when research takes a utilitarian turn, its speculative dimension, which is the inner dynamic of man's intellectual journey, will be diminished or stifled.” Dr. Schmaal honors this perspective, allows the data to shape her opinion, and in doing so is indeed a scholar.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
×