It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Although highly effective on average, exposure-based treatments do not work equally well for all patients with anxiety disorders. The identification of pre-treatment response-predicting patient characteristics may enable patient stratification. Preliminary research highlights the relevance of inhibitory fronto-limbic networks as such. We aimed to identify pre-treatment neural signatures differing between exposure treatment responders and non-responders in spider phobia and to validate results through rigorous replication. Data of a bi-centric intervention study comprised clinical phenotyping and pre-treatment resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) data of n = 79 patients with spider phobia (discovery sample) and n = 69 patients (replication sample). RsFC data analyses were accomplished using the Matlab-based CONN-toolbox with harmonized analyses protocols at both sites. Treatment response was defined by a reduction of >30% symptom severity from pre- to post-treatment (Spider Phobia Questionnaire Score, primary outcome). Secondary outcome was defined by a reduction of >50% in a Behavioral Avoidance Test (BAT). Mean within-session fear reduction functioned as a process measure for exposure. Compared to non-responders and pre-treatment, results in the discovery sample seemed to indicate that responders exhibited stronger negative connectivity between frontal and limbic structures and were characterized by heightened connectivity between the amygdala and ventral visual pathway regions. Patients exhibiting high within-session fear reduction showed stronger excitatory connectivity within the prefrontal cortex than patients with low within-session fear reduction. Whereas these results could be replicated by another team using the same data (cross-team replication), cross-site replication of the discovery sample findings in the independent replication sample was unsuccessful. Results seem to support negative fronto-limbic connectivity as promising ingredient to enhance response rates in specific phobia but lack sufficient replication. Further research is needed to obtain a valid basis for clinical decision-making and the development of individually tailored treatment options. Notably, future studies should regularly include replication approaches in their protocols.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details









1 University of Münster, Institute for Translational Psychiatry, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288)
2 University Hospital of Würzburg, Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics, and Psychotherapy, Center for Mental Health, Würzburg, Germany (GRID:grid.411760.5) (ISNI:0000 0001 1378 7891); University of Heidelberg, Department of General Psychiatry, Heidelberg, Germany (GRID:grid.7700.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2190 4373)
3 University of Münster, Institute of Medical Psychology and Systems Neuroscience, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288)
4 University of Münster, Institute of Medical Psychology and Systems Neuroscience, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288); University of Münster, Otto-Creutzfeld Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288)
5 University of Münster, Otto-Creutzfeld Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288); University of Siegen, Institute for Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Siegen, Germany (GRID:grid.5836.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2242 8751); University of Münster, Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288); University of Osnabrück, Institute of Psychology, Unit of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy in Childhood and Adolescence, Osnabrück, Germany (GRID:grid.10854.38) (ISNI:0000 0001 0672 4366)
6 University of Münster, Otto-Creutzfeld Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288); University of Münster, Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis, Münster, Germany (GRID:grid.5949.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2172 9288)
7 University Hospital of Würzburg, Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics, and Psychotherapy, Center for Mental Health, Würzburg, Germany (GRID:grid.411760.5) (ISNI:0000 0001 1378 7891)
8 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of Psychology, Berlin, Germany (GRID:grid.7468.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2248 7639)
9 University Hospital of Würzburg, Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatics, and Psychotherapy, Center for Mental Health, Würzburg, Germany (GRID:grid.411760.5) (ISNI:0000 0001 1378 7891); Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of Psychology, Berlin, Germany (GRID:grid.7468.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 2248 7639); partner site Berlin/Potsdam, German Center for Mental Health (DZPG), Berlin, Germany (GRID:grid.7468.d)