Background: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has a lifetime prevalence of 2-3% and is a leading cause of global disability. Brain circuit abnormalities in individuals with OCD have been identified, but important knowledge gaps remain. The goal of the new global initiative described in this paper is to identify robust and reproducible brain signatures of measurable behaviors and clinical symptoms that are common in individuals with OCD. A global approach was chosen to accelerate discovery, to increase rigor and transparency, and to ensure generalizability of results. Methods: We will study 250 medication-free adults with OCD, 100 unaffected adult siblings of individuals with OCD, and 250 healthy control subjects at five expert research sites across five countries (Brazil, India, Netherlands, South Africa, and the U.S.). All participants will receive clinical evaluation, neurocognitive assessment, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The imaging will examine multiple brain circuits hypothesized to underlie OCD behaviors, focusing on morphometry (T1-weighted MRI), structural connectivity (Diffusion Tensor Imaging), and functional connectivity (resting-state fMRI). In addition to analyzing each imaging modality separately, we will also use multi-modal fusion with machine learning statistical methods in an attempt to derive imaging signatures that distinguish individuals with OCD from unaffected siblings and healthy controls (Aim #1). Then we will examine how these imaging signatures link to behavioral performance on neurocognitive tasks that probe these same circuits as well as to clinical profiles (Aim #2). Finally, we will explore how specific environmental features (childhood trauma, socioeconomic status, and religiosity) moderate these brain-behavior associations.

IMPORTANCE The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to treatment delays for many patients with cancer. While published guidelines provide suggestions on which cases are appropriate for treatment delay, there are no good quantitative estimates on the association of delays with tumor control or risk of new metastases. OBJECTIVES To develop a simplified mathematical model of tumor growth, control, and new metastases for cancers with varying doubling times and metastatic potential and to estimate tumor control probability (TCP) and metastases risk as a function of treatment delay interval. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This decision analytical model describes a quantitative model for 3 tumors (ie, head and neck, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancers). Using accepted ranges of tumor doubling times and metastatic development from the clinical literature from 2001 to 2020, estimates of tumor growth, TCP, and new metastases were analyzed for various treatment delay intervals. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Risk estimates for potential decreases in local TCP and increases in new metastases with each interval of treatment delay. RESULTS For fast-growing head and neck tumors with a 2-month treatment delay, there was an estimated 4.8% (95% CI, 3.4%-6.4%) increase in local tumor control risk and a 0.49% (0.47%-0.51%) increase in new distal metastases risk. A 6-month delay was associated with an estimated 21.3% (13.4-30.4) increase in local tumor control risk and a 6.0% (5.2-6.8) increase in distal metastases risk. For intermediate-growing colorectal tumors, there was a 2.1% (0.7%-3.5%) increase in local tumor control risk and a 2.7% (2.6%-2.8%) increase in distal metastases risk at 2 months and a 7.6% (2.2%-14.2%) increase in local tumor control risk and a 24.7% (21.9%-27.8%) increase in distal metastases risk at 6 months. For slower-growing lung tumors, there was a 1.2% (0.0%-2.8%) increase in local tumor control risk and a 0.19% (0.18%-0.20%) increase in distal metastases risk at 2 months, and a 4.3% (0.0%-10.6%) increase in local tumor control risk and a 1.9% (1.6%-2.2%) increase in distal metastases risk at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study proposed a model to quantify the association of treatment delays with local tumor control and risk of new metastases. The detrimental associations were greatest for tumors with faster rates of proliferation and metastasis. The associations were smaller, but still substantial, for slower-growing tumors.

No abstract

Studies with rodents and healthy humans suggest that replacing the expected threat with a novel outcome improves extinction and reduces the return of conditioned fear more effectively than threat omission alone. Because of the potential clinical implications of this finding for exposure-based anxiety treatments, this study tested whether the same was true in individuals with pathological anxiety (i.e., met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for an anxiety disorder and/or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). In this preliminary test of novelty-facilitated extinction, 51 unmedicated individuals with pathological anxiety were randomized to standard extinction (n = 27) or novelty-facilitated extinction (n = 24). Participants returned 24 h later to test extinction recall and fear reinstatement. Skin conductance responses (SCR) were the dependent measure of conditioned fear. Participants in both groups learned the fear association but variably extinguished it. Novelty did not facilitate extinction in this preliminary trial. Findings underscore the importance of translating paradigms from healthy humans to clinical samples, to ensure that new treatment ideas based on advances in basic neuroscience are relevant to patients.