Cohort profile of the longitudinal Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA) on etiology, course and consequences of depressive and anxiety disorders

INTRODUCTION: The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA, www.nesda.nl) is a longitudinal, multi-site, naturalistic, case-control cohort study set up to examine the etiology, course and consequences of depressive and anxiety disorders. This paper presents a cohort profile of NESDA. METHODS AND RESULTS: The NESDA sample recruited initially 2329 persons with a remitted or current DSM-IV based depressive (major depressive disorder, dysthymia) and/or anxiety disorder (panic disorder, social phobia, agoraphobia, generalized anxiety disorder), 367 of their siblings and 652 healthy controls, yielding a total of 3348 participants. Half-day face-to-face assessments of participants started in 2004 and since then have been repeated six times over a period of 9 years. A 13-year follow-up assessment is ongoing, at what time we also recruit offspring of participants. Retention rates are generally high, ranging from 87.1% (after 2 years) to 69.4% (after 9 years). Psychiatric diagnostic interviews have been administered at all face-to-face assessments, as was monitoring of clinical characteristics, psychosocial functioning and somatic health. Assessed etiological factors include e.g. early and current environmental risk factors, psychological vulnerability and resilience factors as well as (neuro)biology through hypothesis-driven biomarker assessments, genome-wide and large-scale '-omics' assessments, and neuroimaging assessments. LIMITATIONS: The naturalistic design allows research into course and consequences of affective disorders but is limited in treatment response interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: NESDA provides a strong research infrastructure for research into depressive and/or anxiety disorders. Its data have been used for many scientific papers describing either NESDA-based analyses or joint collaborative consortia-projects, and are in principle available to researchers outside the NESDA consortium

The impact of COVID-19-pandemic-related adversity on mental health:longitudinal study in Dutch populations with and without mental health disorders

BACKGROUND: Despite growing concerns about mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in people with pre-existing mental health disorders, research has shown that symptoms of depression and anxiety were generally quite stable, with modest changes in certain subgroups. However, individual differences in cumulative exposure to COVID-19 stressors have not been yet considered.AIMS: We aimed to quantify and investigate the impact of individual-level cumulative exposure to COVID-19-pandemic-related adversity on changes in depressive and anxiety symptoms and loneliness. In addition, we examined whether the impact differed among individuals with various levels of pre-pandemic chronicity of mental health disorders.METHOD: Between April 2020 and July 2021, 15 successive online questionnaires were distributed among three psychiatric case-control cohorts that started in the 2000s ( N = 1377). Outcomes included depressive and anxiety symptoms and loneliness. We developed a COVID-19 Adversity Index (CAI) summarising up to 15 repeated measures of COVID-19-pandemic-related exposures (e.g. exposure to COVID-19 infection, negative economic impact and quarantine). We used linear mixed linear models to estimate the effects of COVID-19-related adversity on mental health and its interaction with pre-pandemic chronicity of mental health disorders and CAI. RESULTS: Higher CAI scores were positively associated with higher increases in depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and loneliness. Associations were not statistically significantly different between groups with and without (chronic) pre-pandemic mental health disorders.CONCLUSIONS: Individual differences in cumulative exposure to COVID-19-pandemic-related adversity are important predictors of mental health, but we found no evidence for higher vulnerability among people with (chronic) pre-pandemic mental health disorders.</p

The mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with and without depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders:a longitudinal study of three Dutch case-control cohorts

Background: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in people with pre-existing mental health disorders is unclear. In three psychiatry case-control cohorts, we compared the perceived mental health impact and coping and changes in depressive symptoms, anxiety, worry, and loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic between people with and without lifetime depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders. Methods: Between April 1 and May 13, 2020, online questionnaires were distributed among the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety, Netherlands Study of Depression in Older Persons, and Netherlands Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Association cohorts, including people with (n=1181) and without (n=336) depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders. The questionnaire contained questions on perceived mental health impact, fear of COVID-19, coping, and four validated scales assessing depressive symptoms, anxiety, worry, and loneliness used in previous waves during 2006–16. Number and chronicity of disorders were based on diagnoses in previous waves. Linear regression and mixed models were done. Findings: The number and chronicity of disorders showed a positive graded dose–response relation, with greater perceived impact on mental health, fear, and poorer coping. Although people with depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders scored higher on all four symptom scales than did individuals without these mental health disorders, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, they did not report a greater increase in symptoms during the pandemic. In fact, people without depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders showed a greater increase in symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas individuals with the greatest burden on their mental health tended to show a slight symptom decrease. Interpretation: People with depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders are experiencing a detrimental impact on their mental health from the COVID-19 pandemic, which requires close monitoring in clinical practice. Yet, the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to have further increased symptom severity compared with their prepandemic levels. Funding: Dutch Research Council

The Mood and Resilience in Offspring (MARIO) project:a longitudinal cohort study among offspring of parents with and without a mood disorder

Background:One of the most robust risk factors for developing a mood disorder is having a parent with a mood disorder. Unfortunately, mechanisms explaining the transmission of mood disorders from one generation to the next remain largely elusive. Since timely intervention is associated with a better outcome and prognosis, early detection of intergenerational transmission of mood disorders is of paramount importance. Here, we describe the design of the Mood and Resilience in Offspring (MARIO) cohort study in which we investigate: 1. differences in clinical, biological and environmental (e.g., psychosocial factors, substance use or stressful life events) risk and resilience factors in children of parents with and without mood disorders, and 2. mechanisms of intergenerational transmission of mood disorders via clinical, biological and environmental risk and resilience factors. Methods: MARIO is an observational, longitudinal cohort study that aims to include 450 offspring of parents with a mood disorder (uni- or bipolar mood disorders) and 100-150 offspring of parents without a mood disorder aged 10-25 years. Power analyses indicate that this sample size is sufficient to detect small to medium sized effects. Offspring are recruited via existing Dutch studies involving patients with a mood disorder and healthy controls, for which detailed clinical, environmental and biological data of the index-parent (i.e., the initially identified parent with or without a mood disorder) is available. Over a period of three years, four assessments will take place, in which extensive clinical, biological and environmental data and data on risk and resilience are collected through e.g., blood sampling, face-to-face interviews, online questionnaires, actigraphy and Experience Sampling Method assessment. For co-parents, information on demographics, mental disorder status and a DNA-sample are collected.Discussion: The MARIO cohort study is a large longitudinal cohort study among offspring of parents with and without mood disorders. A unique aspect is the collection of granular data on clinical, biological and environmental risk and resilience factors in offspring, in addition to available parental data on many similar factors. We aim to investigate the mechanisms underlying intergenerational transmission of mood disorders, which will ultimately lead to better outcomes for offspring at high familial risk.</p

The Mood and Resilience in Offspring (MARIO) project:a longitudinal cohort study among offspring of parents with and without a mood disorder

Background:One of the most robust risk factors for developing a mood disorder is having a parent with a mood disorder. Unfortunately, mechanisms explaining the transmission of mood disorders from one generation to the next remain largely elusive. Since timely intervention is associated with a better outcome and prognosis, early detection of intergenerational transmission of mood disorders is of paramount importance. Here, we describe the design of the Mood and Resilience in Offspring (MARIO) cohort study in which we investigate: 1. differences in clinical, biological and environmental (e.g., psychosocial factors, substance use or stressful life events) risk and resilience factors in children of parents with and without mood disorders, and 2. mechanisms of intergenerational transmission of mood disorders via clinical, biological and environmental risk and resilience factors. Methods: MARIO is an observational, longitudinal cohort study that aims to include 450 offspring of parents with a mood disorder (uni- or bipolar mood disorders) and 100-150 offspring of parents without a mood disorder aged 10-25 years. Power analyses indicate that this sample size is sufficient to detect small to medium sized effects. Offspring are recruited via existing Dutch studies involving patients with a mood disorder and healthy controls, for which detailed clinical, environmental and biological data of the index-parent (i.e., the initially identified parent with or without a mood disorder) is available. Over a period of three years, four assessments will take place, in which extensive clinical, biological and environmental data and data on risk and resilience are collected through e.g., blood sampling, face-to-face interviews, online questionnaires, actigraphy and Experience Sampling Method assessment. For co-parents, information on demographics, mental disorder status and a DNA-sample are collected.Discussion: The MARIO cohort study is a large longitudinal cohort study among offspring of parents with and without mood disorders. A unique aspect is the collection of granular data on clinical, biological and environmental risk and resilience factors in offspring, in addition to available parental data on many similar factors. We aim to investigate the mechanisms underlying intergenerational transmission of mood disorders, which will ultimately lead to better outcomes for offspring at high familial risk.</p

Mental health and perceived impact during the first Covid-19 pandemic year:A longitudinal study in Dutch case-control cohorts of persons with and without depressive, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorders

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the longer-term impact of the Covid-19 pandemic beyond the first months of 2020, particularly for people with pre-existing mental health disorders. Studies including pre-pandemic data from large psychiatric cohorts are scarce. METHODS: Between April 2020 and February 2021, twelve successive online questionnaires were distributed among participants of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety, Netherlands Study of Depression in Older Persons, and Netherlands Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Association Study (N = 1714, response rate 62%). Outcomes were depressive symptoms, anxiety, worry, loneliness, perceived mental health impact of the pandemic, fear of Covid-19, positive coping, and happiness. Using linear mixed models we compared trajectories between subgroups with different pre-pandemic chronicity of disorders and healthy controls. RESULTS: Depressive, anxiety and worry symptoms were stable since April–May 2020 whereas happiness slightly decreased. Furthermore, positive coping steadily decreased and loneliness increased - exceeding pre-Covid and April–May 2020 levels. Perceived mental health impact and fear of Covid-19 fluctuated in accordance with national Covid-19 mortality rate changes. Absolute levels of all outcomes were poorer with higher chronicity of disorders, yet trajectories did not differ among subgroups. LIMITATIONS: The most vulnerable psychiatric groups may have been underrepresented and results may not be generalizable to lower income countries. CONCLUSIONS: After a year, levels of depressive and worry symptoms remained higher than before the pandemic in healthy control groups, yet not in psychiatric groups. Nevertheless, persistent high symptoms in psychiatric groups and increasing loneliness in all groups are specific points of concern for mental health care professionals

Cannabidiol enhancement of exposure therapy in treatment refractory patients with social anxiety disorder and panic disorder with agoraphobia:A randomised controlled trial

Preclinical research suggests that enhancing CB1 receptor agonism may improve fear extinction. In order to translate this knowledge into a clinical application we examined whether cannabidiol (CBD), a hydrolysis inhibitor of the endogenous CB1 receptor agonist anandamide (AEA), would enhance the effects of exposure therapy in treatment refractory patients with anxiety disorders. Patients with panic disorder with agoraphobia or social anxiety disorder were recruited for a double-blind parallel randomised controlled trial at three mental health care centres in the Netherlands. Eight therapist-assisted exposure in vivo sessions (weekly, outpatient) were augmented with 300 mg oral CBD (n = 39) or placebo (n = 41). The Fear Questionnaire (FQ) was assessed at baseline, mid-and post-treatment, and at 3 and 6 months follow-up. Primary analyses were on an intent-to-treat basis. No differences were found in treatment outcome over time between CBD and placebo on FQ scores, neither across (beta = 0.32, 95% CI [-0.60; 1.25]) nor within diagnosis groups (beta = -0.11, 95% CI [-1.62; 1.40]). In contrast to our hypotheses, CBD augmentation did not enhance early treatment response, within-session fear extinction or extinction learning. Incidence of adverse effects was equal in the CBD (n = 4, 10.3%) and placebo condition (n = 6, 15.4%). In this first clinical trial examining CBD as an adjunctive therapy in anxiety disorders, CBD did not improve treatment outcome. Future clinical trials may investigate different dosage regimens. (c) 2022 Published by Elsevier B.V

The relation between depressive and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in obsessive-compulsive disorder: Results from a large, naturalistic follow-up study

Objective Despite the frequent occurrence of depressive symptoms in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), little is known about the reciprocal influence between depressive and obsessive-compulsive symptoms during the course of the disease. The aim of the present study is to investigate the longitudinal relationship between obsessive-compulsive and depressive symptoms in OCD patients. Method We used the baseline and 1-year follow-up data of the Netherlands Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Association (NOCDA) study. In 276 patients with a lifetime diagnosis of obsessive-compulsive disorder, depressive and obsessive-compulsive symptoms were assessed at baseline and at one-year follow-up with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Symptom (Y-BOCS) scale. Relations were investigated using a cross-lagged panel design. Results The association between the severity of depressive symptoms at baseline and obsessive-compulsive symptoms at follow-up was significant (β=0.244, p<0.001), while the association between the severity of obsessive-compulsive symptoms at baseline and depressive symptoms at follow-up was not (β=0.097, p=0.060). Replication of the analyses in subgroups with and without current comorbid major depressive disorder (MDD) and subgroups with different sequence of onset (primary versus secondary MDD) revealed the same results. Limitations There may be other factors, which affect both depressive and obsessive-compulsive symptoms that were not assessed in the present study. Conclusion The present study demonstrates a relation between depressive symptoms and the course of obsessive-compulsive symptoms in OCD patients, irrespective of a current diagnosis of MDD and the sequence of onset of OCD and MDD

The Mood and Resilience in Offspring (MARIO) project: a longitudinal cohort study among offspring of parents with and without a mood disorder

Background: One of the most robust risk factors for developing a mood disorder is having a parent with a mood disorder. Unfortunately, mechanisms explaining the transmission of mood disorders from one generation to the next remain largely elusive. Since timely intervention is associated with a better outcome and prognosis, early detection of intergenerational transmission of mood disorders is of paramount importance. Here, we describe the design of the Mood and Resilience in Offspring (MARIO) cohort study in which we investigate: 1. differences in clinical, biological and environmental (e.g., psychosocial factors, substance use or stressful life events) risk and resilience factors in children of parents with and without mood disorders, and 2. mechanisms of intergenerational transmission of mood disorders via clinical, biological and environmental risk and resilience factors. Methods: MARIO is an observational, longitudinal cohort study that aims to include 450 offspring of parents with a mood disorder (uni- or bipolar mood disorders) and 100-150 offspring of parents without a mood disorder aged 10-25 years. Power analyses indicate that this sample size is sufficient to detect small to medium sized effects. Offspring are recruited via existing Dutch studies involving patients with a mood disorder and healthy controls, for which detailed clinical, environmental and biological data of the index-parent (i.e., the initially identified parent with or without a mood disorder) is available. Over a period of three years, four assessments will take place, in which extensive clinical, biological and environmental data and data on risk and resilience are collected through e.g., blood sampling, face-to-face interviews, online questionnaires, actigraphy and Experience Sampling Method assessment. For co-parents, information on demographics, mental disorder status and a DNA-sample are collected. Discussion: The MARIO cohort study is a large longitudinal cohort study among offspring of parents with and without mood disorders. A unique aspect is the collection of granular data on clinical, biological and environmental risk and resilience factors in offspring, in addition to available parental data on many similar factors. We aim to investigate the mechanisms underlying intergenerational transmission of mood disorders, which will ultimately lead to better outcomes for offspring at high familial risk

Incidence and outcome of acquired demyelinating syndromes in Dutch children: update of a nationwide and prospective study

Introduction: Acquired demyelinating syndromes (ADS) are immune-mediated demyelinating disorders of the central nervous system in children. A nationwide, multicentre and prospective cohort study was initiated in the Netherlands in 2006, with a reported ADS incidence of 0.66/100,000 per year and MS incidence of 0.15/100,000 per year in the period between 2007 and 2010. In this study, we provide an update on the incidence and the long-term follow-up of ADS in the Netherlands. Methods: Children < 18 years with a first attack of demyelination were included consecutively from January 2006 to December 2016. Diagnoses were based on the International Paediatric MS study group consensus criteria. Outcome data were collected by neurological and neuropsychological assessments, and telephone call assessments. Results: Between 2011 and 2016, 55/165 of the ADS patients were diagnosed with MS (33%). This resulted in an increased ADS and MS incidence of 0.80/100,000 per year and 0.26/100,000 per year, respectively. Since 2006 a total of 243 ADS patients have been included. During follow-up (median 55 months, IQR 28–84), 137 patients were diagnosed with monophasic disease (56%), 89 with MS (37%) and 17 with multiphasic disease other than MS (7%). At least one form of residual deficit including cognitive impairment was observed in 69% of all ADS patients, even in monophasic ADS. An Expanded Disability Status Scale score of ≥ 5.5 was reached in 3/89 MS patients (3%). Conclusion: The reported incidence of ADS in Dutch children has increased since 2010. Residual deficits are common in this group, even in monophasic patients. Therefore, long-term follow-up in ADS patients is warranted