medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
1
A Randomised, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial
of Deep Brain Stimulation of the Bed Nucleus of the
Stria Terminalis for Treatment-Resistant ObsessiveCompulsive Disorder
Philip E. Mosley FRANZCP PhD 1,2,3,4, François Windels PhD 3, John Morris PhD 3, Terry
Coyne FRACS 3,5, Rodney Marsh FRANZCP 2,4, Andrea Giorni PhD 3, Adith Mohan
MRCPsych FRANZCP 6,7, Perminder Sachdev FRANZCP PhD 6,7, Emily O’Leary PhD 8,
Mark Boschen PhD 9, Pankaj Sah PhD 3,10 †, Peter A. Silburn FRACP PhD 2,3 †
1
Systems Neuroscience Group, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Herston,
Queensland, Australia
2
Neurosciences Queensland, St Andrew’s War Memorial Hospital, Spring Hill, Queensland,
Australia
3
Queensland Brain Institute, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia
4
Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia
5
Brizbrain and Spine, the Wesley Hospital, Auchenflower, Queensland, Australia
6
Centre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of New South
Wales, Sydney, Australia
7
Neuropsychiatric Institute, The Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales,
Australia.
8
The OCD Clinic, Bulimba, Queensland, Australia
9
School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia
10
Joint Center for Neuroscience and Neural Engineering, and Department of Biology,
Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, P. R. China
† = co-senior author
Correspondence to:
Dr Philip E Mosley, Systems Neuroscience Group, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research
Institute, Herston, Queensland, 4029, Australia
E-mail:
philip.mosley@qimrberghofer.edu.au
Telephone:
+61
(7)
3839
3688
Running Title:
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
3
1 ABSTRACT
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a promising treatment for severe, treatment-resistant
obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Here, nine participants (four females, mean age 47.9
±10.7 years) were implanted with DBS electrodes bilaterally in the bed nucleus of the stria
terminalis (BNST). Following a one-month postoperative recovery phase, participants
entered a three-month randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled phase before a twelvemonth period of open-label stimulation incorporating a course of cognitive behavioural
therapy (CBT). The primary outcome measure was OCD symptoms as rated with the YaleBrown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (YBOCS). In the blinded phase, there was a significant
benefit of active stimulation over sham (p = 0.025, mean difference 4.9 points). After the
open phase, the mean reduction in YBOCS was 16.6 ±1.9 points (߯2 (11) = 39.8, = 3.8 x
10-5), with seven participants classified as responders. CBT resulted in an additive YBOCS
reduction of 4.8 ±3.9 points (p = 0.011). There were two serious adverse events related to the
DBS device, the most severe of which was an infection during the open phase necessitating
device explantation. There were no psychiatric adverse events related to stimulation. An
analysis of the structural connectivity of each participant’s individualised stimulation field
isolated right-hemispheric fibres associated with YBOCS reduction. These included
subcortical tracts incorporating the amygdala, hippocampus and stria terminalis, in addition
to cortical regions in the ventrolateral and ventromedial prefrontal cortex, parahippocampal,
parietal and extrastriate visual cortex. In conclusion, this study provides further evidence
supporting the efficacy and tolerability of DBS for individuals with otherwise treatmentrefractory OCD and identifies a connectivity fingerprint associated with clinical benefit.
Keywords: Deep brain stimulation; obsessive-compulsive disorder; amygdala; connectomic;
prefrontal cortex
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
4
2 INTRODUCTION
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a psychiatric condition with an estimated lifetime
prevalence of between 1-2 % (Kessler et al., 2005). It is characterised by the intrusion of egodystonic, anxiety-provoking thoughts (obsessions). These are accompanied by mental acts or
behaviours (compulsions), which must be carried out to neutralise the obsessions, or to
mitigate anxiety associated with them (American Psychiatric Association., 2013). Remission
of symptoms with pharmacological treatment is rare (Erzegovesi et al., 2001) and persistent
impairment is relatively common even with combination therapy (Bloch et al., 2006).
Psychological treatment is often intolerable for those with a severe illness: deliberate
exposure to obsessive thoughts during cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is aversive and
distressing (Issakidis and Andrews, 2002). These factors mean that OCD is a chronic disorder
with a detrimental effect on functioning across the lifespan, making it a leading
neuropsychiatric cause of global disability (Mathers et al., 2008).
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a reversible and adjustable form of targeted
neuromodulation that has been used successfully for the treatment of movement disorders
such as Parkinson’s disease for over 25 years (Benabid et al., 1994; Schuepbach et al., 2013).
DBS was first employed for the treatment of intractable OCD in the late 1990s (Nuttin et al.,
1999), with initial surgical targeting in the anterior limb of the internal capsule (ALIC)
informed by prior work using ablative neurosurgery (Nuttin et al., 2003). Further work
reproduced these encouraging preliminary outcomes (Abelson et al., 2005; Farrand et al.,
2018; Goodman et al., 2010; Greenberg et al., 2006), finding improved response with
posterior migration of the target to the region of the caudal nucleus accumbens (NAcc)
(Greenberg et al., 2010). The anteromedial segment of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) has
also been a promising target for neuromodulation (Mallet et al., 2008). More recently, two
randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover trials of DBS at the NAcc/ALIC interface (Denys
et al., 2010) and the BNST/ALIC interface (Luyten et al., 2016) demonstrated a statisticallysignificant benefit of active stimulation over sham.
The clinical benefits (and side effects) of DBS for movement disorders arise not only from
the effect of focal stimulation at the target nucleus, but also from the modulation of
distributed brain networks structurally and functionally connected to the stimulation field
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
5
(Accolla et al., 2016; Akram et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2018; Horn et al., 2017; Mosley et al.,
2020a; Vanegas-Arroyave et al., 2016). In a similar manner, brain networks associated with
response to DBS for OCD can be delineated. In prior work, reduction in OCD symptoms 12months after NAcc/ALIC DBS was associated with connectivity of the stimulation site with
the right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, with a fibre tract predictive of symptom reduction
identified in the ventral ALIC bordering the BNST (Baldermann et al., 2019). A randomised
trial directly comparing ALIC and anteromedial STN stimulation found both to be clinically
effective targets but with distinct structural connectivity profiles and dissociable effects on
mood and cognitive flexibility (Tyagi et al., 2019). However, a pooled analysis of four
cohorts employing either STN or ALIC stimulation identified a universal tract associated
with clinical response that could predict outcome in an out-of-sample cross-validation (Li et
al., 2019). This tract traversed both the anteromedial STN and ventral ALIC, projecting to
ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. Overall, these findings suggest that different surgical targets
may act to reduce OCD symptoms through modulation of a shared network, whilst change
amongst more fine-grained behavioural endophenotypes may result from modulation of
networks that are not shared between targets (Dougherty, 2019).
In this study, using a randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled, staggered-onset design, we
investigate the effects of DBS at the BNST/NAcc interface in a sample of Australian
participants with severe, treatment-resistant OCD. We delineate the structural connectivity
profile of effective stimulation and compare this with the aforementioned prior work. We
also add CBT incorporating exposure and response prevention (ERP) to the open phase of the
trial, in order to investigate whether this is now tolerable for our participants and leads to an
additive clinical response, as has been identified in a previous cohort (Mantione et al., 2014).
We report outcomes during the blinded phase and after one year of open stimulation
following completion of CBT.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
6
3 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Participants
All procedures were carried out in accordance with the experimental protocol approved by
the Human Research Ethics Committees of the University of Queensland and UnitingCare
Health. Participants aged 18-70 with severe, treatment-resistant OCD of at least five years
duration were referred by their treating psychiatrists and evaluated independently by two
psychiatrists in the research team (PEM and RM). The diagnosis of OCD was confirmed
according to criteria defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
fifth edition (DSM-V) (American Psychiatric Association., 2013). Severity was denoted by a
mean score of at least 24 on the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (YBOCS)
(Goodman et al., 1989), measured twice at least two weeks apart by separate investigators.
Treatment refractoriness was defined by insufficient response to at least: i) two trials of
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors at maximum tolerated dose for at least 12 weeks, ii)
one trial of clomipramine at maximum tolerated dosage for at least 12 weeks, plus iii) one
augmentation trial with an antipsychotic for at least eight weeks in combination with one of
the aforementioned drugs, plus iv) one complete trial of ERP-based CBT confirmed by a
psychotherapist. Exclusion criteria included pregnancy, a past history of a chronic psychotic
or bipolar disorder, severe personality disorder, suicidality in the previous 12 months,
substance use disorder (except tobacco), major neurological comorbidity or severe head
injury, prior ablative neurosurgery and current implanted cardiac pacemaker, defibrillator or
other neurostimulator. Suitable and consenting candidates were approved by an independent
Mental Health Review Tribunal prior to neurosurgery. Prior to implantation of the first
participant, the trial was registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials
Registry (Universal Trial Number: U1111-1146-0992).
3.2 Device Implantation
Bilateral implantation of Medtronic (Minneapolis, USA) 3389 quadripolar electrodes took
place in a single-stage procedure using a Leksell stereotactic apparatus based on preoperative
structural magnetic resonance neuroimaging (Supplementary Materials). The most ventral
contact was sited posterior and inferior to the NAcc in the region of the lateral hypothalamus,
with more dorsal contacts within the BNST approaching the posterior border of the NAcc.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
7
Postoperative lead placement was confirmed with CT imaging. Electrodes were connected to
an Activa PC+S implantable pulse generator (IPG) in either the pectoral or abdominal fascia.
Analysis of long-term, ambulatory electrophysiological data will be reported in forthcoming
work.
3.3 Timeline, Assessment and Intervention
Following device implantation, participants entered a one-month recovery phase during
which all stimulators were off. Thereafter, participants began a three-month period during
which their stimulators were either turned on or remained switched off whilst both
participants and assessors were blinded to status. After this, participants continued in an
open-label (unblinded) trial where all stimulators were on. Assessments took place at baseline
one week before surgery, fortnightly in the recovery phase, monthly in the blinded phase and
monthly for the first three months of the open phase, with the time between assessments
subsequently extending to two and then three months. The primary outcome measure was
OCD severity as assessed by the YBOCS score, derived from a ten-item semi-structured
interview assessing obsessions and compulsions, with a maximum score of 40. Depressive
symptoms were assessed as a secondary outcome with the Montgomery Åsberg Depression
Rating Scale (MADRS) score, derived from a ten-item semi-structured interview with a
maximum score of 60 (Montgomery and Asberg, 1979; Williams and Kobak, 2008).
Participants were referred for a ten-session course of ERP-based CBT with a clinical
psychologist (EOL or MB) during the open phase once DBS parameters had been optimised
and YBOCS reduction had plateaued.
Stimulation was commenced in an identical manner for participants regardless of whether
they were turned on in either the blinded or open-label phase. Contact 1 (left hemisphere) and
contact 9 (right hemisphere) were selected with an initial stimulation amplitude of 1 Volt, a
pulse-width of 90 microseconds and a frequency of 130 Hertz. Stimulation was increased at
weekly to fortnightly intervals in increments of 0.5-1 Volt to a target of 4.5 Volts.
Stimulation settings were symmetric between hemispheres. If there was a relative lack of
response as assessed with the YBOCS, additional stimulation changes were trialled:
including further increases in amplitude in 0.1 Volt increments, a trial of a pulse-width of 120
microseconds or the activation of a second contact on each electrode. Psychotropic
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
8
medications were unchanged throughout the trial unless requested for clinical reasons by the
participant’s usual psychiatrist.
3.4 Randomisation and Blinding
Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to ‘on’ or ‘off’ groups in the blinded phase
by an external statistician, using an online tool (https://www.sealedenvelope.com). Only the
lead neurologist (PAS) and programming psychiatrist (PEM) were informed of the allocation.
The psychiatrist assessing primary and secondary outcomes (RM) remained blinded to
participant status. To reduce the likelihood of participants becoming unblinded by sensations
associated with active stimulation, no contact testing was performed and the slow titration
protocol was followed in all cases.
3.5 Statistical Analysis
Data analysis was performed in the R software environment (R Core Team, 2014). In the
blinded phase of the trial, the mean change in YBOCS and MADRS score was compared
between groups with a two-sample t-test. After one year of open stimulation and following a
course of CBT, the reduction in YBOCS and MADRS score was assessed with the package
lmerTest (Kuznetsova et al., 2017) using a random-intercept, random-slope, linear mixedeffects model incorporating demographic variables and baseline severity:
YBOCS Score ~ TimeSinceDBS + Age + Gender + YBOCS Baseline + (1|ID) + (1|TimeSinceDBS )
ij
ij
i
i
ij
ij
with i denoting participant and j denoting timepoint and the term in bold (the accrued effect of
DBS over time on obsessive and depressive symptoms) being the coefficient of interest.
Hypothesis testing on a null model (omitting TimeSinceDBS) was performed with the anova
function in the lavaan package.
Consistent with prior work, participants were defined as responders for OCD and depression
if they attained a reduction of 35 % in YBOCS score and 50 % in MADRS score
respectively.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
9
3.6 Electrode Localisation & Volume of Tissue Activation
DBS
electrodes
were
localized
using
the
Lead-DBS
toolbox
version
2.2
(https://github.com/netstim/leaddbs/tree/develop) (Horn and Kuhn, 2015; Horn et al., 2019).
Preoperative structural acquisitions were co-registered with postoperative CT imaging and
then normalized into common ICBM 2009b nonlinear asymmetric space using the SyN
approach implemented in advanced normalization tools (ANTs) (Avants et al., 2008).
Electrode trajectories were reconstructed after correcting for brainshift in postoperative
acquisitions by applying a refined affine transform in a subcortical area of interest calculated
pre- and postoperatively. For each electrode, a volume of activated tissue (VAT) was
estimated using a volume conductor model of the DBS electrode and surrounding tissue,
based on each participant’s individualised stimulation settings and a finite element method to
derive the gradient of the potential distribution (Horn et al., 2019). An electric field (E-field)
distribution was also modelled (Vorwerk et al., 2018).
3.7 Structural Connectivity Estimation and YBOCS Reduction
Three methods were used to assess the relationship between the structural connectivity of the
stimulation field and the primary outcome measure. Firstly, using the Lead-DBS toolbox,
each participant’s VAT in each hemisphere was integrated with a normative whole-brain
structural connectome incorporating six million fibres derived from 985 participants in the
Human Connectome Project who had undertaken multi-shell diffusion-weighted imaging
(Van Essen et al., 2013). Fibres traversing each participant’s VAT were selected from the
group connectome based on the E-field gradient strength (i.e. fibres in peripheral VAT
regions with a low E-field were down-weighted) and projected to the volumetric surface of
the ICBM 2009b nonlinear asymmetric brain in 1 mm isotropic resolution. A connectivity
profile for each participant was expressed as the weighted number of fibre tracts between the
stimulation site and each brain voxel. Subsequently, each voxel on the corresponding
connectivity profile was correlated with clinical improvement on the YBOCS score using a
Spearman rank correlation coefficient,
forming an ‘R-map’. Combined across all
participants, these maps identify regions to which strong connectivity is associated with good
clinical outcome, modelling ‘optimal’ connectivity from the stimulation field to the rest of
the brain (Horn et al., 2017). To verify these findings, the data were cross-validated in a
leave-one-out design. Each participant was sequentially excluded and the optimal
connectivity profile was computed on the remaining participants. Subsequently, YBOCS
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
10
reduction was predicted for the excluded participant based on comparison between individual
and group connectivity estimates (using a Fisher z-transformed spatial correlation coefficient)
and the empirical outcome was correlated with the predicted outcome derived from the
remaining sample.
Secondly, individual fibres associated with YBOCS reduction were identified. Each wholebrain fibre was tested across the cohort between participants with a stimulation volume that
encompassed the fibre (connected) and those where the fibre did not traverse the volume
(unconnected). If there was a significant difference between YBOCS reduction in participants
with connected and unconnected VATs (using a two-sided, two-sample ݐ-test), then this fibre
was identified as discriminative of outcome. This process yielded a ‘fibre ݐ-score’, with highvalues indicating that this fibre was strongly discriminative of clinical outcome (Baldermann
et al., 2019). Only the top 5 % of fibres positively correlated with the primary outcome
variable were selected for analysis to mitigate the risk of false positive associations.
Finally, to explore whether connectivity to specific cortical regions was related to YBOCS
reduction, a region of interest analysis was informed by findings from the aforementioned
methods. Cortical parcellations were derived from the Desikan-Killiany-Tourville labelling
protocol (Klein and Tourville, 2012; Klein et al., 2017), with connectivity estimates between
each VAT and cortical region entered into the multivariate linear mixed-effects model to
derive an estimate of effect size and statistical significance.
3.8 Data Availability
A de-identified data set containing demographic and outcome data can be provided by Dr
Philip Mosley (Philip.Mosley@qimrberghofer.edu.au) on application, subject to institutional
review board approval. Local ethics caveats and clinical privacy issues prohibit sharing of
individual imaging data but a copy of the Lead-DBS group analysis database can be supplied.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
11
4 RESULTS
4.1 Participants
Nine participants (four females, mean age 47.9 ±10.7 years, mean baseline YBOCS 32.7
±2.6) were recruited, randomised and implanted (Figure 1 and Table 1). The first participant
was implanted in late 2015 and the last in early 2019. Contacts selected for activation were
located in the BNST posterior to the NAcc and inferomedial to the ventral pallidum (Figure
2). All participants completed the blinded phase and data was analysed according to
originally-assigned group. During the open phase, one participant developed an IPG infection
necessitating DBS device explantation and exit from the trial. Scores at trial exit were carried
forward for the two remaining data points. The eight remaining participants completed a
course of ERP-based CBT. One participant (06) switched antidepressants and antipsychotics
during the trial due to non-response to DBS and persistence of clinically-significant
symptoms.
4.2 Outcomes
In the blinded (on versus sham) phase, there was a statistically significant difference in
YBOCS reduction in favour of active stimulation (t = -2.9, p = 0.025, mean difference 4.9
points, 95 % CI = 0.8-8.9) (Figure 3). There was no significant difference in MADRS
reduction (t = -1.1, p = 0.30, mean difference 3.4 points, 95 % CI = -3.7-10.5).
After one year of open-label stimulation and a course of ERP-based CBT, the mean reduction
in YBOCS was 17.4 ±2.0 points (߯2 (11) = 39.9, = 3.7 x 10-5) with no statistically
significant covariates (Figure 3). Seven participants were responders as defined by the 35 %
YBOCS reduction criterion, with a mean percentage reduction across the cohort of 49.6
±23.7. ERP-based CBT commenced an average of 10.1 ±2.6 months after DBS with a mean
additive YBOCS reduction of 4.8 ±3.9 points (t = -3.5, p = 0.011, 95 % CI = 1.5-8.0). The
mean reduction in MADRS was 10.8 ±2.5 points (߯2 (11) = 26.7, = 0.0051) with age (t = 2.7, p = 0.0084) and baseline MADRS (t = 13.4, p = 2.0 x 10-16) being significant covariates.
Six participants were responders as defined by the 50 % MADRS reduction criterion, with a
mean percentage reduction across the cohort of 54.7 ±27.2.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
Figure 1 | Flow Diagram of Participant Recruitment, Randomisation & Treatment
12
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
13
Figure 2 | Localisation of Electrodes & Active Contacts
DBS electrodes were localised with the Lead-DBS toolbox and represented in common ICBM 2009b nonlinear
asymmetric space incorporating a 7-Tesla MRI at 100 micron resolution (Edlow et al., 2019), with subcortical
parcellations derived from a recent high-resolution atlas (Pauli et al., 2018). A: 3-dimensional reconstruction in
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
14
the coronal plane showing electrode trajectories for the nine participants. B: 3-dimensional reconstruction in the
axial plane showing the distribution of the aggregated stimulation field across the cohort (red), which can be
seen to encompass the posterior segment of the nucleus accumbens (light green), the ventral pallidum (yellow)
and the hypothalamus (blue). C: 2-dimensional reconstruction of active contacts in coronal plane. D: 2dimensional reconstruction of active contacts in axial plane. E and F: 2-dimensional reconstruction of active
contacts in sagittal plane. In the 2-dimensional representations coloured circles represent the second most
inferior contact on each electrode (i.e. contact 9 on right electrode and contact 1 on left electrode).
Abbreviations: Ca = caudate, EXA = extended amygdala (BNST), GPe = globus pallidus external segment,
HTH = hypothalamus, NAC = nucleus accumbens, PBP = parabrachial pigmented nucleus, Pu = putamen, SN =
substantia nigra, STH = subthalamic nucleus, RN = red nucleus, VeP = ventral pallidum
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
15
Figure 3 | Participant Outcomes
A and B: Time series of individual participant outcomes for primary (YBOCS) and secondary (MADRS)
variables. Within each graph, group average trajectory is represented by a loess smoothed curve (white) ± 1
standard error (grey). Baseline measurement denoted by green outline, recovery phase by yellow outline and
blinded phase by red outline. C and D: Boxplots of YBOCS and MADRS change by randomised group (on =
green versus off = red) during the blinded phase. E and F: Raincloud plots of YBOCS and MADRS change
across the full trial. Raincloud plots made with code provided by Allen et al. (2019) and van Langen. (2020).
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
16
4.3 Relationship of Structural Connectivity to YBOCS Reduction
The local dispersion of the stimulation field within neighbouring subcortical structures
including the NAcc, ventral pallidum, hypothalamus and terminal fibres of the stria
terminalis was not related to relief of OCD symptoms (Supplementary Material). Using a
normative connectome to identify white matter fibres connected to the stimulation field in
each hemisphere for each participant, those connections most highly associated with YBOCS
reduction were found in the right hemisphere (Figure 4A). These included a tract passing
through the midbrain, traversing the BNST and onwards to the right ventrolateral prefrontal
cortex. A tract connecting the BNST with the right amygdala was also identified, with
connecting fibres passing through the hippocampal white matter and traversing back into the
BNST via the fornix.
An ‘optimal’ connectivity map derived from correlating each brain voxel (weighted by
structural connectivity) to YBOCS reduction also identified the right ventrolateral and
parahippocampal regions, as well as right extrastriate, parietal and dorsomedial prefrontal
areas (Figure 4B and local maxima Supplementary Table 1). In a leave-one-out crossvalidation, structural connectivity of the stimulation field was significantly associated with
YBOCS reduction (r = 0.76, p = 0.018).
Based on these findings, corresponding cortical regions derived from the Desikan-KillianyTourville labelling protocol were entered into the multivariate, linear mixed-effects model.
Structural connectivity of the right hemispheric stimulation field with right orbitofrontal (t = 3.1, p = 0.013), right parahippocampal (t = -2.4, p = 0.042), right pars triangularis (t = -2.5, p
= 0.036), right pericalcarine (t = -4.3, p = 0.0024) and right supramarginal regions (t = -2.5, p
= 0.035) was significantly associated with YBOCS reduction. Connectivity with the right
paracentral (t = -1.8, p = 0.11) region was not statistically significant. Univariate correlations
displayed in Supplementary Material.
4.4 Adverse Events
There were nine serious adverse events (SAEs) affecting four participants (Table 1). Five of
these were attributable to one participant (06) who was a non-responder and was readmitted
to hospital to manage persistent psychiatric symptoms. A further participant (04) was
readmitted to hospital on two occasions to manage a recurrence of depressive symptoms.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
17
Two SAEs were device-related. One participant (02) required re-siting of a DBS electrode
that had migrated 3 mm from the target during implantation. This was accomplished without
any further complication. One participant (05) developed an infection of the IPG that
migrated to the extension leads necessitating removal of the DBS device. There were four
adverse events affecting two participants (Table 1). These were transient in nature except for
reduced libido (participant 02), which persisted throughout follow up. Notably, there were no
psychiatric adverse effects considered to be device related. All participants (except 05 who
withdrew) required IPG replacement due to battery depletion during the study.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
18
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
19
Figure 4 | Structural Connectivity & YBOCS Reduction
A: White matter fibres connected to the stimulation field and discriminative of outcome were isolated in the
right hemisphere. These included a fibre tract passing through the midbrain to the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex
and a fibre tract connecting the site of stimulation with the amygdala. Fibres in this region also passed through
the hippocampal white matter and returned to the BNST via the stria terminalis adjacent to the fornix.
Subcortical parcellations of the amygdala, hippocampus and fornix were derived from recent automated
segmentation methods (Amaral et al., 2018; Entis et al., 2012; Pipitone et al., 2014). B: An optimal connectivity
profile was generated by identifying those brain voxels structurally connected with the stimulation field and
most highly correlated with YBOCS reduction. Cortical regions implicated in this optimal right-hemispheric ‘Rmap’ included ventromedial and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, medial temporal
cortex, parietal cortex and extrastriate visual cortex. These findings were corroborated in a leave-one-out crossvalidation, in which each participant’s percentage YBOCS reduction was predicted by comparing their
structural connectivity profile with an optimal connectivity map derived from the remaining participants. C: In a
region of interest analysis, cortical regions derived from the R-map were tested in a multivariate linear mixedeffects model for their association with YBOCS reduction.
20
Table 1 | Details of Participants
Participant
Age §
Gender
OCD Phenomenology & Age of Onset
Previous Therapies † &
Comorbidities
YBOCS at Baseline
Psychotropic Medication
Chronic Stimulation
Parameters ‡
Percentage YBOCS
& MADRS
Reduction at End of
Open Phase
Serious Adverse
Events
Adverse Events
1
25-30
Female
Contamination
Onset age 10-15
4 antidepressants / 3 antipsychotics
Major depressive disorder
YBOCS 32
YBOCS = 53.1
MADRS = 57.1
Nil
Parasomnia (sleepwalking)
2
25-30
Male
Harming others / Sexuality / Blasphemy
Onset age 5-10
16 antidepressants / 3 antipsychotics / ECT
Major depressive disorder
YBOCS 33
YBOCS = 69.7
MADRS = 70.6
Deviation of one DBS
electrode during
implantation requiring
removal and reimplantation.
Pustule at IPG site
Lead tightening behind ear
Reduced libido
3
55-60
Male
Sexuality
Onset age 15-20
12 antidepressants / 7 antipsychotics
Nil
YBOCS 29
Harming others
Onset age 15-20
9 antidepressants / 4 antipsychotics / ECT
Major depressive disorder
YBOCS 35
Clomipramine 150 mg
Quetiapine 100 mg
Olanzapine 5 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 8-9- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 0-1- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Tranylcypromine 30 mg
Nortriptyline 75 mg
Diazepam 5mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 3.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 3.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Clomipramine 50 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Clomipramine 200 mg
Quetiapine XR 400 mg
Clonazepam 1.5 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 10- 4.7 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 2- 4.7 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Sertraline 100 mg
Pregabalin 150 mg
Clonazepam 0.25 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Tranylcypromine 10 mg
Imipramine 50 mg
Clonazepam 0.5 mg
YBOCS = 51.7
MADRS = 50.0
Nil
Nil
YBOCS = 54.3
MADRS = 35.3
Two inpatient psychiatric
admissions to manage
recurrence of depressive
symptoms
Nil
YBOCS = 28.1
MADRS = 46.2
Infection of IPG requiring
DBS device explantation
Nil
YBOCS = 0
MADRS = -4.0
Five inpatient psychiatric
admissions to manage
persistence of obsessive &
Nil
4
50-55
Male
5
55-60
Female
6
45-50
Female
Sexuality / Symmetry
Onset age 5-10
9 antidepressants / 4 antipsychotics / ECT /
rTMS
Major depressive disorder / body
dysmorphic disorder
YBOCS 32
Contamination
Onset aged 5-10
19 antidepressants / 5 antipsychotics / ECT /
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
rTMS
Major depressive disorder
YBOCS 28
7
50-55
Male
Doubt / Perfectionism
Onset aged 5-10
3 antidepressants / 2 antipsychotics
Nil
YBOCS 35
8
45-50
Female
Checking / Magical thinking
Onset aged 5-10
8 antidepressants / 3 antipsychotics / ECT
Major depressive disorder
YBOCS 34
9
55-60
Male
Checking / Doubt
Onset aged 5-10
5 antidepressants / 2 antipsychotics
Nil
YBOCS 36
21
Olanzapine 10 mg
Quetiapine IR 100 mg
Lithium XR 450 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 10- 5.6 V / 120 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 5.6 V / 120 µs / 130 Hz
Clomipramine 50 mg
Sertraline 250 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 10- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 2- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Clomipramine 125 mg
Desvenlafaxine 200 mg
Olanzapine 5mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 10- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 2- 4.5 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
Fluoxetine 80 mg
Dexamphetamine 60 mg
DBS Right Hemisphere:
C+ 9- 10- 5.0 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
DBS Left Hemisphere:
C+ 1- 2- 5.0 V / 90 µs / 130 Hz
depressive symptoms
YBOCS = 48.6
MADRS = 80.0
Nil
Nil
YBOCS = 82.3
MADRS = 78.9
Nil
Nil
YBOCS = 58.3
MADRS = 77.8
Nil
Nil
§ Consistent with MedRxiv stipulations, only 5-year age range is given to prevent participant identification
† For brevity, details of past psychotherapies not listed here
‡ On the quadripolar electrode, contacts are numbered 8-11 in the right hemisphere and 0-3 in the left hemisphere
Abbreviations: ECT = electroconvulsive therapy, IPG = implantable pulse generator, IR = immediate release, MADRS = Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale,
rTMS = repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, XR = extended release, YBOCS = Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
22
5 DISCUSSION
In nine participants with severe, treatment-refractory OCD, we demonstrate that DBS of the
BNST substantially alleviated symptoms, with a mean YBOCS reduction of 49.6 % and
seven participants meeting the threshold for clinically-significant response after 12-months of
open-label stimulation. Moreover, we describe a statistically-significant benefit of active
stimulation over sham during a 3-month, double-blind, delayed-onset phase. Our data adds to
the emerging literature supporting the use of DBS as a therapy in otherwise treatmentresistant OCD and specifically reproduces prior work targeting the BNST. (Luyten et al.,
2016) Open-label stimulation also significantly reduced co-morbid depressive symptoms,
although this result should be viewed with more circumspection as depression was not a
primary target of the intervention and two participants reported only mild symptoms at
baseline.
Extending prior clinical findings, we also characterise a subcortical structural connectivity
profile associated with optimal response to DBS at this target. Here, a right-hemispheric tract
traversing the stimulation field and associated with YBOCS reduction connected the BNST
to the amygdala. Connected fibres also involved the hippocampal formation and fornix,
which form part of the circuit of Papez (Papez, 1995). From a physiological perspective, the
BNST functions as a component of the ‘extended amygdala’ and drives a state of sustained
apprehension (anxiety) (Lebow and Chen, 2016). Of note, recent work has also demonstrated
a central role for the amygdala in mediating a rapid reduction in anxiety symptoms after
ALIC DBS for OCD (Fridgeirsson et al., 2020), which heralds later improvement in
obsessions and compulsions. Overall, this supports the role of DBS in facilitating fear
extinction through reducing anxiety. Aberrant fear conditioning (enhanced acquisition and
impaired extinction) is a central construct in the development and maintenance of OCD
(Geller et al., 2017; Milad et al., 2013), and may explain why more severely affected
individuals cannot tolerate or do not respond to exposure-oriented CBT (Geller et al., 2019).
This may also explain why, after DBS, our participants were now able to tolerate, and accrue
a statistically-significant additional benefit from CBT during open stimulation, consistent
with previous work (Mantione et al., 2014).
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
23
Importantly, this improvement in fear extinction may be mediated via enhanced top-down
input to the amygdala from the prefrontal cortex (Fridgeirsson et al., 2020). In our cohort,
fibres associated with YBOCS reduction were also characterised passing to the prefrontal
cortex and potentially representing a structural correlate of this effect. This connectivity
profile was similar in distribution to that previously described by other centres employing
different targets such as the NAcc / ALIC interface and the STN (Baldermann et al., 2019; Li
et al., 2019). These findings support the existence of a common anatomical substrate that
underpins response across discrete sites, as well as being consistent with prior work
demonstrating that alterations in frontostriatal connectivity are implicated in the response to
NAcc / ALIC DBS (Figee et al., 2011). Moreover, the distribution of connected fibres
associated with YBOCS reduction was strikingly similar to prior research characterising the
structural connectivity of the BNST in healthy participants (Kruger et al., 2015).
Connectivity of the stimulation field with right-hemispheric cortical regions of interest in the
prefrontal, temporal, parietal and occipital lobes was also significantly associated with
YBOCS reduction. Interestingly, these same regions have previously been implicated in
morphometric analyses of structural connectivity, grey matter volume, cortical thickness,
surface area and gyrification amongst individuals with OCD (Fan et al., 2013; Peng et al.,
2014; Rotge et al., 2010; Yun et al., 2020), suggesting that there may be a neuroanatomic
‘fingerprint’ of susceptibility to OCD that is modulated by DBS. Importantly, using crossvalidation, YBOCS reduction could be accurately predicted in a single participant by
comparing their connectivity profile to a pooled analysis of the connectivity amongst the
remainder of the cohort. This suggests that the recruitment of specific fibre pathways by the
stimulation field is an important determinant of outcome. More generally, the right
lateralisation of our findings is interesting given previous work that implicates righthemispheric corticostriatal circuits in inhibition (Aron et al., 2004; Aron et al., 2007; Rae et
al., 2015), impulsivity after subthalamic DBS for Parkinson’s disease (Mosley et al., 2018;
Mosley et al., 2020b), and reduction of OCD symptoms after NAcc / ALIC DBS
(Baldermann et al., 2019).
Serious adverse events were predominantly accounted for by persisting psychiatric symptoms
in a non-responder with repeated readmissions to hospital. It is noteworthy that the
connectivity profile of this individual was most distinct from the rest of the cohort with
electrodes that were more anteromedial and a stimulation field that was less connected to the
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
24
right-hemispheric regions of interest (Figures 2 and 4, Supplementary Figure 2), suggesting a
potential explanation for this lack of response. IPG infection and device removal was the
most significant device-related event, affecting one participant. No participants developed
stimulation-related psychiatric side effects such as agitation, impulsivity and hypomania, as
has previously been reported (Denys et al., 2010; Greenberg et al., 2010; Tyagi et al., 2019).
This may have been attributable to our deliberately slow titration protocol and the use of
lower stimulation amplitudes than have previously been described. However, despite the use
of more modest amplitudes, IPG depletion occurred in all participants before the close of the
trial, necessitating replacement.
The use of a staggered-onset rather than a crossover design in the double-blind phase could
be considered a limitation. In previous trials using a crossover design (Denys et al., 2010;
Luyten et al., 2016; Mallet et al., 2008), optimal stimulation settings were already determined
after an open-phase, increasing the likelihood of a treatment effect in the active condition.
However, based on prior work describing a significant rebound of aversive OCD symptoms
after therapy interruption (Ooms et al., 2014), we considered it more ethically acceptable to
delay treatment rather than cease a treatment that had previously been effective. Moreover,
one significant benefit of our approach was that the likelihood of participants becoming
unblinded by sensations associated with active stimulation was minimised.
The use of normative rather than participant-specific connectivity data is a further limitation
and has been discussed elsewhere (Coenen et al., 2019; Li et al., 2019; Treu et al., 2020).
Whilst participant-specific anatomical variability is lost, the quality of these group-average
datasets is high and curated by teams with longstanding expertise. The reliability of analyses
derived from these data may therefore be acceptable, and normative connectomic data has
been employed to make out-of-sample predictions across disorders and treatment modalities
(Al-Fatly et al., 2019; Baldermann et al., 2019; Horn et al., 2017; Joutsa et al., 2018;
Weigand et al., 2018). Thus, whilst normative data should not be the basis for surgical
decision-making in one individual, it may yield important insights into mechanisms of
disease and treatment-response within and across cohorts.
In summary, in a cohort of participants with severe, treatment-refractory OCD, we
demonstrate that active stimulation at the BNST is superior to placebo in a randomised,
double-blind, sham-controlled, delayed-onset clinical trial, with a further significant benefit
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
25
accrued following a longer phase of open-label stimulation incorporating a course of ERPbased CBT. We also delineate a structural connectivity profile associated with clinical
response, which comprised subcortical regions implicated in fear conditioning and emotional
processing, as well as cortical regions implicated in prior morphometric analyses of persons
with OCD. We anticipate that our findings will motivate more precise targeting of
stimulation within these networks, using participant-specific connectivity data to optimise
treatment at the individual level, as has been described in DBS for treatment-resistant major
depression (Riva-Posse et al., 2014; Riva-Posse et al., 2018).
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
26
6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the commitment of participants who contributed their
time to this study. The authors acknowledge the support of St Andrew’s War Memorial
Hospital and the Queensland Mental Health Review Tribunal. The authors thank Dr Greg
Apel, Ms Lisa McKeown, Ms Sara Gottliebsen and Ms Brenda Rosser for their
administrative contributions to the development and operation of the trial. The authors also
thank the data monitoring and safety board members Prof Michael Breakspear, Dr Jim
Rodney and Dr Josh Geffen. Finally, the authors thank Dr Andreas Horn and Dr Ningfei Li
from the Lead-DBS development team for technical assistance with the modelling of fibre
tracts.
7 FUNDING AGENCIES
The trial was funded by the University of Queensland through the Queensland Brain Institute
in partnership with Medtronic. Medtronic provided the PC+S devices, 3389 stimulating
electrodes, physician programmers and related equipment. Medtronic also made a cash
contribution to the research costs. Medtronic had no role in the design of the experimental
protocol, data collection, analysis or writing of the manuscript.
8 FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Dr Mosley has previously received an unrestricted educational grant from Medtronic for
Parkinson’s disease research. He has received an honorarium from Boston Scientific for
speaking at an educational meeting. The authors report no other conflict of interest.
9 ETHICS APPROVAL
Prior to the commencement of data collection, the full protocol was approved by the Human
Research Ethics Committees of the University of Queensland and UnitingCare Health. All
participants gave written, informed consent to participate in the study. All procedures were
carried out in accordance with the approved protocol.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
27
10 REFERENCES
Abelson, J.L., Curtis, G.C., Sagher, O., Albucher, R.C., Harrigan, M., Taylor, S.F., et al.,
2005. Deep brain stimulation for refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder. Biol
Psychiatry. 57, 510-6.
Accolla, E.A., Herrojo Ruiz, M., Horn, A., Schneider, G.H., Schmitz-Hubsch, T., Draganski,
B., et al., 2016. Brain networks modulated by subthalamic nucleus deep brain
stimulation. Brain. 139, 2503-15.
Akram, H., Sotiropoulos, S.N., Jbabdi, S., Georgiev, D., Mahlknecht, P., Hyam, J., et al.,
2017. Subthalamic deep brain stimulation sweet spots and hyperdirect cortical
connectivity in Parkinson's disease. Neuroimage. 158, 332-345.
Al-Fatly, B., Ewert, S., Kubler, D., Kroneberg, D., Horn, A., Kuhn, A.A., 2019. Connectivity
profile of thalamic deep brain stimulation to effectively treat essential tremor. Brain.
142, 3086-3098.
Allen, M., Poggiali, D., Whitaker, K., Marshall, T., Kievit, R., 2019. Raincloud plots: a
multi-platform tool for robust data visualization [version 1; peer review: 2 approved].
Wellcome Open Research. 4.
Amaral, R.S.C., Park, M.T.M., Devenyi, G.A., Lynn, V., Pipitone, J., Winterburn, J., et al.,
2018. Manual segmentation of the fornix, fimbria, and alveus on high-resolution 3T
MRI: Application via fully-automated mapping of the human memory circuit white
and grey matter in healthy and pathological aging. Neuroimage. 170, 132-150.
American Psychiatric Association., 2013. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders: DSM-5, Vol., American Psychiatric Publishing, Washington, DC.
Aron, A.R., Robbins, T.W., Poldrack, R.A., 2004. Inhibition and the right inferior frontal
cortex. Trends Cogn Sci. 8, 170-7.
Aron, A.R., Behrens, T.E., Smith, S., Frank, M.J., Poldrack, R.A., 2007. Triangulating a
cognitive control network using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) and functional MRI. J Neurosci. 27, 3743-52.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
28
Avants, B.B., Epstein, C.L., Grossman, M., Gee, J.C., 2008. Symmetric diffeomorphic image
registration with cross-correlation: evaluating automated labeling of elderly and
neurodegenerative brain. Med Image Anal. 12, 26-41.
Baldermann, J.C., Melzer, C., Zapf, A., Kohl, S., Timmermann, L., Tittgemeyer, M., et al.,
2019. Connectivity Profile Predictive of Effective Deep Brain Stimulation in
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 85, 735-743.
Benabid, A.L., Pollak, P., Gross, C., Hoffmann, D., Benazzouz, A., Gao, D.M., et al., 1994.
Acute and long-term effects of subthalamic nucleus stimulation in Parkinson's
disease. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 62, 76-84.
Bloch, M.H., Landeros-Weisenberger, A., Kelmendi, B., Coric, V., Bracken, M.B., Leckman,
J.F., 2006. A systematic review: antipsychotic augmentation with treatment refractory
obsessive-compulsive disorder. Mol Psychiatry. 11, 622-32.
Chen, Y., Ge, S., Li, Y., Li, N., Wang, J., Wang, X., et al., 2018. Role of the CorticoSubthalamic Hyperdirect Pathway in Deep Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of
Parkinson Disease: A Diffusion Tensor Imaging Study. World Neurosurg. 114,
e1079-e1085.
Coenen, V.A., Schlaepfer, T.E., Varkuti, B., Schuurman, P.R., Reinacher, P.C., Voges, J., et
al., 2019. Surgical decision making for deep brain stimulation should not be based on
aggregated normative data mining. Brain Stimul. 12, 1345-1348.
Denys, D., Mantione, M., Figee, M., van den Munckhof, P., Koerselman, F., Westenberg, H.,
et al., 2010. Deep brain stimulation of the nucleus accumbens for treatment-refractory
obsessive-compulsive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 67, 1061-8.
Dougherty, D.D., 2019. Will Deep Brain Stimulation Help Move Precision Medicine to the
Clinic in Psychiatry? Biol Psychiatry. 85, 706-707.
Edlow, B.L., Mareyam, A., Horn, A., Polimeni, J.R., Witzel, T., Tisdall, M.D., et al., 2019. 7
Tesla MRI of the ex vivo human brain at 100 micron resolution. Sci Data. 6, 244.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
29
Entis, J.J., Doerga, P., Barrett, L.F., Dickerson, B.C., 2012. A reliable protocol for the
manual segmentation of the human amygdala and its subregions using ultra-high
resolution MRI. Neuroimage. 60, 1226-35.
Erzegovesi, S., Cavallini, M.C., Cavedini, P., Diaferia, G., Locatelli, M., Bellodi, L., 2001.
Clinical predictors of drug response in obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Clin
Psychopharmacol. 21, 488-92.
Fan, Q., Palaniyappan, L., Tan, L., Wang, J., Wang, X., Li, C., et al., 2013. Surface
anatomical profile of the cerebral cortex in obsessive-compulsive disorder: a study of
cortical thickness, folding and surface area. Psychol Med. 43, 1081-91.
Farrand, S., Evans, A.H., Mangelsdorf, S., Loi, S.M., Mocellin, R., Borham, A., et al., 2018.
Deep brain stimulation for severe treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder:
An open-label case series. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 52, 699-708.
Figee, M., Vink, M., de Geus, F., Vulink, N., Veltman, D.J., Westenberg, H., et al., 2011.
Dysfunctional reward circuitry in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 69,
867-74.
Fridgeirsson, E.A., Figee, M., Luigjes, J., van den Munckhof, P., Schuurman, P.R., van
Wingen, G., et al., 2020. Deep brain stimulation modulates directional limbic
connectivity in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Brain. 143, 1603-1612.
Geller, D.A., McGuire, J.F., Orr, S.P., Pine, D.S., Britton, J.C., Small, B.J., et al., 2017. Fear
conditioning and extinction in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder. Ann Clin
Psychiatry. 29, 17-26.
Geller, D.A., McGuire, J.F., Orr, S.P., Small, B.J., Murphy, T.K., Trainor, K., et al., 2019.
Fear extinction learning as a predictor of response to cognitive behavioral therapy for
pediatric obsessive compulsive disorder. J Anxiety Disord. 64, 1-8.
Goodman, W.K., Price, L.H., Rasmussen, S.A., Mazure, C., Fleischmann, R.L., Hill, C.L., et
al., 1989. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and
reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 46, 1006-11.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
30
Goodman, W.K., Foote, K.D., Greenberg, B.D., Ricciuti, N., Bauer, R., Ward, H., et al.,
2010. Deep brain stimulation for intractable obsessive compulsive disorder: pilot
study using a blinded, staggered-onset design. Biol Psychiatry. 67, 535-42.
Greenberg, B.D., Malone, D.A., Friehs, G.M., Rezai, A.R., Kubu, C.S., Malloy, P.F., et al.,
2006. Three-year outcomes in deep brain stimulation for highly resistant obsessivecompulsive disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology. 31, 2384-93.
Greenberg, B.D., Gabriels, L.A., Malone, D.A., Jr., Rezai, A.R., Friehs, G.M., Okun, M.S., et
al., 2010. Deep brain stimulation of the ventral internal capsule/ventral striatum for
obsessive-compulsive disorder: worldwide experience. Mol Psychiatry. 15, 64-79.
Horn, A., Kuhn, A.A., 2015. Lead-DBS: a toolbox for deep brain stimulation electrode
localizations and visualizations. Neuroimage. 107, 127-35.
Horn, A., Reich, M., Vorwerk, J., Li, N., Wenzel, G., Fang, Q., et al., 2017. Connectivity
Predicts deep brain stimulation outcome in Parkinson disease. Ann Neurol. 82, 67-78.
Horn, A., Li, N., Dembek, T.A., Kappel, A., Boulay, C., Ewert, S., et al., 2019. Lead-DBS
v2: Towards a comprehensive pipeline for deep brain stimulation imaging.
Neuroimage. 184, 293-316.
Issakidis, C., Andrews, G., 2002. Service utilisation for anxiety in an Australian community
sample. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 37, 153-63.
Joutsa, J., Horn, A., Hsu, J., Fox, M.D., 2018. Localizing parkinsonism based on focal brain
lesions. Brain. 141, 2445-2456.
Kessler, R.C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R., Merikangas, K.R., Walters, E.E., 2005.
Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the
National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 62, 593-602.
Klein, A., Tourville, J., 2012. 101 labeled brain images and a consistent human cortical
labeling protocol. Front Neurosci. 6, 171.
Klein, A., Ghosh, S.S., Bao, F.S., Giard, J., Hame, Y., Stavsky, E., et al., 2017.
Mindboggling morphometry of human brains. PLoS Comput Biol. 13, e1005350.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
31
Kruger, O., Shiozawa, T., Kreifelts, B., Scheffler, K., Ethofer, T., 2015. Three distinct fiber
pathways of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis to the amygdala and prefrontal
cortex. Cortex. 66, 60-8.
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P.B., Christensen, R.H.B., 2017. lmerTest Package: Tests in
Linear Mixed Effects Models. 2017. 82, 26.
Lebow, M.A., Chen, A., 2016. Overshadowed by the amygdala: the bed nucleus of the stria
terminalis emerges as key to psychiatric disorders. Mol Psychiatry. 21, 450-63.
Li, N., Baldermann, J.C., Kibleur, A., Treu, S., Elias, G., Boutet, A., et al., 2019. Toward a
unified connectomic target for deep brain stimulation in obsessive-compulsive
disorder, Vol., 10.1101/608786.
Luyten, L., Hendrickx, S., Raymaekers, S., Gabriels, L., Nuttin, B., 2016. Electrical
stimulation in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis alleviates severe obsessivecompulsive disorder. Mol Psychiatry. 21, 1272-80.
Mallet, L., Polosan, M., Jaafari, N., Baup, N., Welter, M.L., Fontaine, D., et al., 2008.
Subthalamic nucleus stimulation in severe obsessive-compulsive disorder. N Engl J
Med. 359, 2121-34.
Mantione, M., Nieman, D.H., Figee, M., Denys, D., 2014. Cognitive-behavioural therapy
augments the effects of deep brain stimulation in obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Psychol Med. 10.1017/S0033291714000956, 1-8.
Mathers, C., Fat, D.M., Boerma, J.T., 2008. The global burden of disease 2004 update, Vol.,
World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Milad, M.R., Furtak, S.C., Greenberg, J.L., Keshaviah, A., Im, J.J., Falkenstein, M.J., et al.,
2013. Deficits in conditioned fear extinction in obsessive-compulsive disorder and
neurobiological changes in the fear circuit. JAMA Psychiatry. 70, 608-18; quiz 554.
Montgomery, S.A., Asberg, M., 1979. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to
change. Br J Psychiatry. 134, 382-9.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
32
Mosley, P., Paliwal, S., Robinson, K., Coyne, T., Silburn, P., Tittgemeyer, M., et al., 2020a.
The Structural Connectivity of Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation Correlates with
Impulsivity in Parkinson's. Brain. 10.1093/brain/awaa148, In Press.
Mosley, P.E., Smith, D., Coyne, T., Silburn, P., Breakspear, M., Perry, A., 2018. The site of
stimulation moderates neuropsychiatric symptoms after subthalamic deep brain
stimulation for Parkinson's disease. NeuroImage: Clinical. 18, 996-1006.
Mosley, P.E., Paliwal, S., Robinson, K., Coyne, T., Silburn, P., Tittgemeyer, M., et al.,
2020b. The structural connectivity of subthalamic deep brain stimulation correlates
with impulsivity in Parkinson's. Brain. 10.1093/brain/awaa148, In Press.
Nuttin, B., Cosyns, P., Demeulemeester, H., Gybels, J., Meyerson, B., 1999. Electrical
stimulation in anterior limbs of internal capsules in patients with obsessivecompulsive disorder. Lancet. 354, 1526.
Nuttin, B.J., Gabriels, L.A., Cosyns, P.R., Meyerson, B.A., Andreewitch, S., Sunaert, S.G., et
al., 2003. Long-term electrical capsular stimulation in patients with obsessivecompulsive disorder. Neurosurgery. 52, 1263-72; discussion 1272-4.
Ooms, P., Blankers, M., Figee, M., Mantione, M., van den Munckhof, P., Schuurman, P.R., et
al., 2014. Rebound of affective symptoms following acute cessation of deep brain
stimulation in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Brain Stimul. 7, 727-31.
Papez, J.W., 1995. A proposed mechanism of emotion. 1937. J Neuropsychiatry Clin
Neurosci. 7, 103-12.
Pauli, W.M., Nili, A.N., Tyszka, J.M., 2018. A high-resolution probabilistic in vivo atlas of
human subcortical brain nuclei. Sci Data. 5, 180063.
Peng, Z., Shi, F., Shi, C., Yang, Q., Chan, R.C., Shen, D., 2014. Disrupted cortical network
as a vulnerability marker for obsessive-compulsive disorder. Brain Struct Funct. 219,
1801-12.
Pipitone, J., Park, M.T., Winterburn, J., Lett, T.A., Lerch, J.P., Pruessner, J.C., et al., 2014.
Multi-atlas segmentation of the whole hippocampus and subfields using multiple
automatically generated templates. Neuroimage. 101, 494-512.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
33
R Core Team, 2014. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vol.,
ed.^eds. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Rae, C.L., Hughes, L.E., Anderson, M.C., Rowe, J.B., 2015. The prefrontal cortex achieves
inhibitory control by facilitating subcortical motor pathway connectivity. J Neurosci.
35, 786-94.
Riva-Posse, P., Choi, K.S., Holtzheimer, P.E., McIntyre, C.C., Gross, R.E., Chaturvedi, A., et
al., 2014. Defining Critical White Matter Pathways Mediating Successful Subcallosal
Cingulate Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression. Biol
Psychiatry. 10.1016/j.biopsych.2014.03.029.
Riva-Posse, P., Choi, K.S., Holtzheimer, P.E., Crowell, A.L., Garlow, S.J., Rajendra, J.K., et
al., 2018. A connectomic approach for subcallosal cingulate deep brain stimulation
surgery: prospective targeting in treatment-resistant depression. Mol Psychiatry. 23,
843-849.
Rotge, J.Y., Langbour, N., Guehl, D., Bioulac, B., Jaafari, N., Allard, M., et al., 2010. Gray
matter alterations in obsessive-compulsive disorder: an anatomic likelihood
estimation meta-analysis. Neuropsychopharmacology. 35, 686-91.
Schuepbach, W.M., Rau, J., Knudsen, K., Volkmann, J., Krack, P., Timmermann, L., et al.,
2013. Neurostimulation for Parkinson's disease with early motor complications. N
Engl J Med. 368, 610-22.
Treu, S., Strange, B., Oxenford, S., Neumann, W.J., Kuhn, A., Li, N., et al., 2020. Deep
Brain
Stimulation:
Imaging
on
a
group
level.
Neuroimage.
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117018, 117018.
Tyagi, H., Apergis-Schoute, A.M., Akram, H., Foltynie, T., Limousin, P., Drummond, L.M.,
et al., 2019. A Randomized Trial Directly Comparing Ventral Capsule and
Anteromedial Subthalamic Nucleus Stimulation in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder:
Clinical and Imaging Evidence for Dissociable Effects. Biol Psychiatry. 85, 726-734.
Van Essen, D.C., Smith, S.M., Barch, D.M., Behrens, T.E., Yacoub, E., Ugurbil, K., et al.,
2013. The WU-Minn Human Connectome Project: an overview. Neuroimage. 80, 6279.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
34
van Langen, J., 2020. Open-visualizations in R and Python (Version v.1.0.4). Vol.,
http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3715576, ed.^eds.
Vanegas-Arroyave, N., Lauro, P.M., Huang, L., Hallett, M., Horovitz, S.G., Zaghloul, K.A.,
et al., 2016. Tractography patterns of subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation.
Brain. 139, 1200-10.
Vorwerk, J., Oostenveld, R., Piastra, M.C., Magyari, L., Wolters, C.H., 2018. The FieldTripSimBio pipeline for EEG forward solutions. Biomed Eng Online. 17, 37.
Weigand, A., Horn, A., Caballero, R., Cooke, D., Stern, A.P., Taylor, S.F., et al., 2018.
Prospective Validation That Subgenual Connectivity Predicts Antidepressant Efficacy
of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Sites. Biol Psychiatry. 84, 28-37.
Williams, J.B., Kobak, K.A., 2008. Development and reliability of a structured interview
guide for the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (SIGMA). Br J
Psychiatry. 192, 52-8.
Yun, J.Y., Boedhoe, P.S.W., Vriend, C., Jahanshad, N., Abe, Y., Ameis, S.H., et al., 2020.
Brain structural covariance networks in obsessive-compulsive disorder: a graph
analysis from the ENIGMA Consortium. Brain. 143, 684-700.
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.24.20218024; this version posted October 27, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint
(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license .
RCT of BNST DBS for OCD
35