Suvorexant in the Treatment of Difficulty Falling and Staying Asleep (Insomnia)

Purpose of Review

Insomnia affects more than 10% of the population and causes significant discomfort and disability. Suvorexant is an orexin receptor antagonist that specifically targets the wake-sleep cycle. This review summarizes recent and seminal evidence in the biological and physiological evidence of insomnia, the mechanism of action of suvorexant in treating insomnia, and clinical evidence regarding its use.

Recent Findings

There is no single clear diagnosis for insomnia, and thus prevalence is not entirely clear, but it is estimated to affect 10%-30% of the adult population. Comorbidities include obesity, diabetes, and various psychiatric conditions, and insomnia likely has a contributing role in these conditions. Insomnia, by definition, impacts sleep quality and also wakefulness, including academic success and work efficiency. Insomnia is likely related to genetic susceptibility and a triggering event, leading to hyper-arousal states and functional brain disturbances. This leads to hyperactivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, over-secretion of corticotropin-releasing factor, and aberrancy in neurotransmitter release. Though several pharmacological options exist for the treatment of insomnia, there is equivocal data regarding their efficacy or limits to their use due to side effects and contraindications. Suvorexant is a novel dual orexin receptor antagonist, which is shown to improve sleep by reducing arousals. Unlike classical therapeutics, suvorexant does not alter the sleep profile; it prolongs the time spent in each sleep state. Though it may cause some somnolence, it is milder than reported with other drugs.

Summary

Multiple clinical studies support the use of suvorexant in insomnia. In primary insomnia, suvorexant is effective (over placebo), as measured by polysomnography and reported by patients, in both attaining and maintaining sleep. Similar, albeit to a smaller degree, results were found in secondary insomnia. Suvorexant carries two significant advantages over existing therapies; it has a much better safety profile in approved doses, and it preserves natural sleep architecture, thus promoting more restful sleep and recovery. Unfortunately, data exists mostly for suvorexant versus placebo, and head-to-head trials with common hypnotics are needed to assess the true efficacy of suvorexant over the alternatives. And while tolerance is less likely to develop, close monitoring of post-marketing data is required to evaluate for long term adverse events and efficacy.

Clinical research challenges posed by difficult-to-treat depression

Approximately one-third of individuals in a major depressive episode will not achieve sustained remission despite multiple, well-delivered treatments. These patients experience prolonged suffering and disproportionately utilize mental and general health care resources. The recently proposed clinical heuristic of 'difficult-to-treat depression' (DTD) aims to broaden our understanding and focus attention on the identification, clinical management, treatment selection, and outcomes of such individuals. Clinical trial methodologies developed to detect short-term therapeutic effects in treatment-responsive populations may not be appropriate in DTD. This report reviews three essential challenges for clinical intervention research in DTD: (1) how to define and subtype this heterogeneous group of patients; (2) how, when, and by what methods to select, acquire, compile, and interpret clinically meaningful outcome metrics; and (3) how to choose among alternative clinical trial design options to promote causal inference and generalizability. The boundaries of DTD are uncertain, and an evidence-based taxonomy and reliable assessment tools are preconditions for clinical research and subtyping. Traditional outcome metrics in treatment-responsive depression may not apply to DTD, as they largely reflect the only short-term symptomatic change and do not incorporate durability of benefit, side effect burden, or sustained impact on quality of life or daily function. The trial methodology will also require modification as trials will likely be of longer duration to examine the sustained impact, raising complex issues regarding control group selection, blinding and its integrity, and concomitant treatments.

Levels of depressed mood and low interest for two years after response to cognitive therapy for recurrent depression

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) involves depressed mood (high negative affect, predominantly) and low interest/pleasure (low positive affect). In past research, negative affect has improved more than positive affect during acute-phase antidepressant medication or cognitive therapy (CT). We extended this literature by differentiating depressed mood and two dimensions of low interest (general and sexual), assessing persistence of symptom differences after acute-phase CT response, and testing whether continuation treatment acted differently on depressed mood versus low interest.

METHODS

We analyzed data from two randomized controlled trials. Patients with recurrent MDD first received acute-phase CT. Then, responders were randomized to 8-month continuation treatments and assessed for 16-24 additional months.

RESULTS

Depressed mood and low general interest improved more than low sexual interest during acute-phase CT. Among responders, these symptom differences persisted for at least 2 years and were not changed by continuation CT or antidepressant medication.

LIMITATIONS

Generalization of findings to other patient populations and treatments is uncertain. Depressed mood and low interest scales were constructed from standard symptom measures and overlapped empirically.

CONCLUSIONS

Less improvement during CT, and persistent low sexual interest despite continuation treatment, highlights the need for MDD treatments more effectively targeting this positive affective symptom.

Ruminative reflection is associated with anticorrelations between the orbitofrontal cortex and the default mode network in depression: implications for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation

Patients with depression who ruminate repeatedly focus on depressive thoughts; however, there are two cognitive subtypes of rumination, reflection and brooding, each associated with different prognoses. Reflection involves problem-solving and is associated with positive outcomes, whereas brooding involves passive, negative, comparison with other people and is associated with poor outcomes. Rumination has also been related to atypical functional hyperconnectivity between the default mode network and subgenual prefrontal cortex. Repetitive pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation of the prefrontal cortex has been shown to alter functional connectivity, suggesting that the abnormal connectivity associated with rumination could potentially be altered. This study examined potential repetitive pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation prefrontal cortical targets that could modulate one or both of these rumination subtypes. Forty-three patients who took part in a trial of repetitive pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation completed the Rumination Response Scale questionnaire and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Seed to voxel functional connectivity analyses identified an anticorrelation between the left lateral orbitofrontal cortex (-44, 26, -8; k = 172) with the default mode network-subgenual region in relation to higher levels of reflection. Parallel analyses were not significant for brooding or the RRS total score. These findings extend previous studies of rumination and identify a potential mechanistic model for symptom-based neuromodulation of rumination.

Effects of adjunctive brexpiprazole on calmness and life engagement in major depressive disorder: post hoc analysis of patient-reported outcomes from clinical trial exit interviews

BACKGROUND

Though often overlooked, calming patients and increasing their life engagement are key factors in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). This study aimed to test the hypothesis that adjunctive brexpiprazole increases calmness and life engagement among patients with MDD, based on clinical trial exit interviews.

METHODS

This was a pooled analysis of exit interview data from three exploratory, open-label studies of adjunctive brexpiprazole 1-3 mg/day. The studies enrolled 105 outpatients with MDD (DSM-IV-TR criteria), a current depressive episode, and inadequate response to antidepressant treatment during the current episode. Patients were interviewed if they completed the end-of-treatment visit (Week 6 or Week 12, depending on the study). Exit interviews took the form of semi-structured telephone interviews in which patients were asked mostly qualitative questions about their symptoms prior to the start of the study, and about improvements they had noted during treatment. Interview transcripts were reviewed and codes were assigned to calmness and life engagement vocabulary, allowing aggregation of the frequency of improvement in various domains.

RESULTS

79.8% (83/104) of patients described improvements consistent with at least one calmness term, most commonly feeling less anxious (46.2%) or less irritable (44.2%). A four-domain concept of patient life engagement was developed in which 88.6% (93/105) of patients described improvements consistent with at least one domain, specifically, emotional (77.1%), physical (75.2%), social (41.9%), and/or cognitive (36.2%). Of the patients who described improvement in calmness, 96.4% (80/83) also described improvement in life engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of exit interview data suggests that patients were calmer and more engaged with life following treatment with adjunctive brexpiprazole. Thus, adjunctive brexpiprazole may provide a benefit on subjective patient outcomes in addition to the improvement in depressive symptoms shown by clinical rating scale data.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Data used in this post hoc analysis came from ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02012218, NCT02013531, NCT02013609.

Obesogenic Medications and Weight Gain Over 24 Weeks in Patients with Depression: Results from the GUIDED Study

Weight gain is a common side-effect of medications used to treat major depressive disorder (MDD). We sought to estimate the frequency of weight gain for obesogenic medications prescribed for MDD and to evaluate if bupropion mitigated risk for weight gain. We analyzed a prospective cohort of patients with weight available at baseline and 12 weeks (n = 1,032) or 24 weeks (n = 871) in a post hoc analysis of the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) study of patients with MDD who failed at least one medication trial. We compared weight gain between those on versus not on medications with high risk for weight gain, including a subgroup receiving combination treatment with bupropion. A second analysis evaluated weight gain across traditional medication classes, adjusting for potential confounding variables. Those on medications identified as high risk for weight gain were significantly more likely to experience clinically significant weight gain (≥3%) at 12 weeks (29.3% vs. 16.3%, p < .001) and 24 weeks (33.5% vs. 23.5%, p = .015). No protection from clinically significant weight gain was observed among patients treated with a high-risk medication concomitantly with bupropion (N = 31, 35% and 52% with clinically significant weight gain at 12 and 24 weeks). Antipsychotic medications and tricyclic antidepressants were most often associated with clinically significant weight gain. This study helps quantify the real-world risk of weight gain for patients with MDD on medications with high risk for weight gain, especially for patients taking antipsychotics. Concurrent treatment with bupropion does not appear to mitigate the weight gain risk.

The effect of esketamine in patients with treatment-resistant depression with and without comorbid anxiety symptoms or disorder

BACKGROUND

Comorbid anxiety is generally associated with poorer response to antidepressant treatment. This post hoc analysis explored the efficacy of esketamine plus an antidepressant in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) with or without comorbid anxiety.

METHODS

TRANSFORM-2, a double-blind, flexible-dose, 4-week study (NCT02418585), randomized adults with TRD to placebo or esketamine nasal spray, each with a newly-initiated oral antidepressant. Comorbid anxiety was defined as clinically noteworthy anxiety symptoms (7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7] score ≥10) at screening and baseline or comorbid anxiety disorder diagnosis at screening. Treatment effect based on change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, and response and remission were examined by presence/absence of comorbid anxiety using analysis of covariance and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Approximately 72% (162/223) of patients had baseline comorbid anxiety. Esketamine-treated patients with and without anxiety demonstrated significant reductions in MADRS (mean [SD] change from baseline at day 28: -21.0 [12.51] and -22.7 [11.98], respectively). Higher rates of response and remission, and a significantly greater decrease in MADRS score at day 28 were observed compared to antidepressant/placebo, regardless of comorbid anxiety (with anxiety: difference in LS means [95% CI] -4.2 [-8.1, -0.3]; without anxiety: -7.5 [-13.7, -1.3]). There was no significant interaction of treatment and comorbid anxiety (p = .371). Notably, in the antidepressant/placebo group improvement was similar in those with and without comorbid anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Post hoc data support efficacy of esketamine plus an oral antidepressant in patients with TRD, regardless of comorbid anxiety.

Durability of treatment response to zolpidem using a partial reinforcement regimen: does this strategy require priming?

BACKGROUND

Previous research has shown that after one month of full dose nightly treatment with zolpidem (priming), subjects with chronic insomnia (CI) switched to intermittent dosing with medication and placebos were able to maintain their treatment responses. This approach to maintenance therapy is referred to as partial reinforcement. The present study sought to assess whether priming is required for partial reinforcement or whether intermittent dosing with placebos (50% placebos and 50% active medication) can, by itself, be used for both acute and extended treatment.

METHOD

55 CI subjects underwent a baseline evaluation (Phase-1) and then were randomized to one of two conditions in Phase-2 of the study: one month of (1) nightly medication use with standard-dose zolpidem (QHS [n = 39]) or (2) intermittent dosing with standard-dose zolpidem and placebos (IDwP [n = 16]). In Phase-3 (three months), the QHS group was re-randomized to either continued QHS full dose treatment (FD/FD) or to IDwP dose treatment (FD/VD). Treatment response rates and Total Wake Time (TWT = [SL + WASO + EMA]) were assessed during each phase of the study.

RESULTS

In Phase-2, 77% (QHS) and 50% (IDwP) subjects exhibited treatment responses (p = 0.09) where the average change in TWT was similar. In Phase-3, 73% (FD/FD), 57% (FD/VD), and 88% (VD/VD) of subjects exhibited continued treatment responses (p = 0.22) where the average improvement in TWT continued with FD/FD and remained stable for FD/VD and VD/VD (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that intermittent dosing with placebos can maintain effects but do not allow for the additional clinical gains afforded by continuous treatment.

Addressing anhedonia to increase depression treatment engagement

Anhedonia, or reward system dysfunction, is associated with poorer treatment outcomes among depressed individuals. The role of anhedonia in treatment engagement, however, has not yet been explored. We review research on components of reward functioning impaired in depression, including effort valuation, reward anticipation, initial responsiveness, reward learning, reward probability, and reward delay, highlighting potential barriers to treatment engagement associated with these components. We then propose interventions to improve treatment initiation and continuation by addressing deficits in each component of reward functioning, focusing on modifications of existing evidence-based interventions to meet the needs of individuals with heightened anhedonia. We describe potential settings for these interventions and times at which they can be delivered during the process of referring individuals to mental health treatment, conducting intakes or assessments, and providing treatment. Additionally, we note the advantages of using screening processes already in place in primary care, workplace, school, and online settings to identify individuals with heightened anhedonia who may benefit from these interventions. We conclude with suggestions for future research on the impact of anhedonia on treatment engagement and the efficacy of interventions to address it. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Many depressed individuals who might benefit from treatment do not initiate it or discontinue early. One barrier to treatment engagement may be anhedonia, a core symptom of depression characterized by loss of interest or pleasure in usual activities. We describe brief interventions to improve treatment engagement in individuals with anhedonia that can be implemented during the referral process or early in treatment. We argue that interventions aiming to improve treatment engagement in depressed individuals that target anhedonia may be particularly effective.

A clinical approach to treatment resistance in depressed patients: What to do when the usual treatments don't work well enough?

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder is a common, recurrent, disabling and costly disorder that is often severe and/or chronic, and for which non-remission on guideline concordant first-line antidepressant treatment is the norm. A sizeable percentage of patients diagnosed with MDD do not achieve full remission after receiving antidepressant treatment. How to understand or approach these 'refractory', 'TRD' or 'difficult to treat' patients need to be revisited. Treatment resistant depression (TRD) has been described elsewhere as failure to respond to adequate treatment by two different antidepressants. This definition is problematic as it suggests that TRD is a subtype of major depressive disorder (MDD), inferring a boundary between TRD and depression that is not treatment resistant. However, there is scant evidence to suggest that a discrete TRD entity exists as a distinct subtype of MDD, which itself is not a discrete or homogeneous entity. Similarly, the boundary between TRD and other forms of depression is predicated at least in part on regulatory and research requirements rather than biological evidence or clinical utility.

AIM

This paper aims to investigate the notion of treatment failure in order to understand (i) what is TRD in the context of a broader formulation based on the understanding of depression, (ii) what factors make an individual patient difficult to treat, and (iii) what is the appropriate and individualised treatment strategy, predicated on an individual with refractory forms of depression?

METHOD

Expert contributors to this paper were sought internationally by contacting representatives of key professional societies in the treatment of MDD - World Federation of Societies for Biological Psychiatry, Australasian Society for Bipolar and Depressive Disorders, International Society for Affective Disorders, Collegium Internationale Neuro-Psychopharmacologium and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments. The manuscript was prepared through iterative editing.

OUTCOMES

The concept of TRD as a discrete subtype of MDD, defined by failure to respond to pharmacotherapy, is not supported by evidence. Between 15 and 30% of depressive episodes fail to respond to adequate trials of 2 antidepressants, and 68% of individuals do not achieve remission from depression after a first-line course of antidepressant treatment. Failure to respond to antidepressant treatment, somatic therapies or psychotherapies may often reflect other factors including; biological resistance, diagnostic error, limitations of current therapies, psychosocial variables, a past history of exposure to childhood maltreatment or abuse, job satisfaction, personality disorders, co-morbid mental and physical disorders, substance use or non-adherence to treatment. Only a subset of patients not responding to antidepressant treatment can be explained through pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamics mechanisms. We propose that non remitting MDD should be personalised, and propose a strategy of 'deconstructing depression'. By this approach, the clinician considers which factors contribute to making this individual both depressed and 'resistant' to previous therapeutic approaches. Clinical formulation is required to understand the nature of the depression. Many predictors of response are not biological, and reflect a confluence of biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors, which may influence the illness in a particular individual. After deconstructing depression at a personalised level, a personalised treatment plan can be constructed. The treatment plan needs to address the factors that have contributed to the individual's hard to treat depression. In addition, an individual with a history of illness may have a lot of accumulated life issues due to consequences of their illness, and these should be addressed in a recovery plan.

LIMITATIONS

A 'deconstructing depression' qualitative rubric does not easily provide clear inclusion and exclusion criteria for researchers wanting to investigate TRD.

CONCLUSIONS

MDD is a polymorphic disorder and many individuals who fail to respond to standard pharmacotherapy and are considered hard to treat. These patients are best served by personalised approaches that deconstruct the factors that have contributed to the patient's depression and implementing a treatment plan that adequately addresses these factors. The existence of TRD as a discrete and distinct subtype of MDD, defined by two treatment failures, is not supported by evidence.

Design of the National Adaptive Trial for PTSD-related Insomnia (NAP Study), VA Cooperative Study Program (CSP) #2016

There are currently no validated pharmacotherapies for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related insomnia. The purpose of the National Adaptive Trial for PTSD-Related Insomnia (NAP Study) is to efficiently compare to placebo the effects of three insomnia medications with different mechanisms of action that are already prescribed widely to veterans diagnosed with PTSD within U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers. This study plans to enroll 1224 patients from 34 VA Medical Centers into a 12- week prospective, randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial comparing trazodone, eszopiclone, and gabapentin. The primary outcome measure is insomnia, assessed with the Insomnia Severity Index. A novel aspect of this study is its adaptive design. At the recruitment midpoint, an interim analysis will be conducted to inform a decision to close recruitment to any "futile" arms (i.e. arms where further recruitment is very unlikely to yield a significant result) while maintaining the overall study recruitment target. This step could result in the enrichment of the remaining study arms, enhancing statistical power for the remaining comparisons to placebo. This study will also explore clinical, actigraphic, and biochemical predictors of treatment response that may guide future biomarker development. Lastly, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this study will allow the consenting process and follow-up visits to be conducted via video or phone contact if in-person meetings are not possible. Overall, this study aims to identify at least one effective pharmacotherapy for PTSD-related insomnia, and, perhaps, to generate definitive negative data to reduce the use of ineffective insomnia medications. NATIONAL CLINICAL TRIAL (NCT) IDENTIFIED NUMBER: NCT03668041.

Efficacy and Safety of Seltorexant as Adjunctive Therapy in Major Depressive Disorder: A Phase 2b, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Adaptive Dose-Finding Study

BACKGROUND

Seltorexant, a selective antagonist of human orexin-2 receptors, demonstrated antidepressant effects in a previous exploratory study in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

To replicate and extend this observation, a double-blind, adaptive dose-finding study was performed in patients with MDD who had an inadequate response to 1-3 selective serotonin/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors in the current episode. Patients were randomized (2:1:1) to placebo or seltorexant (20 mg or 40 mg) once-daily, administered adjunctively to the antidepressant the patient had been receiving at screening. After an interim analysis (6 weeks post-randomization of 160th patient), newly recruited patients randomly received (3:3:1) placebo or seltorexant 10 mg or 20 mg; the 40-mg dose was no longer assigned. Patients were stratified by baseline Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) scores (ISI ≥ 15 vs < 15). The primary endpoint was change from baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 6.

RESULTS

Mixed-Model for Repeated Measures analysis showed a greater improvement in MADRS total score in the seltorexant 20-mg group vs placebo at weeks 3 and 6; least-square means difference (90% CI): -4.5 (-6.96; -2.07), P = .003; and -3.1 (-6.13; -0.16), P = .083, respectively. The improvement in MADRS score at week 6 for seltorexant 20 mg was greater in patients with baseline ISI ≥ 15 vs those with ISI < 15; least-square means difference (90% CI) vs placebo: -4.9 (-8.98; -0.80) and -0.7 (-5.16; 3.76), respectively. The most common (≥5%) adverse events with seltorexant were somnolence, headache, and nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically meaningful reduction of depressive symptoms was observed for seltorexant 20 mg. In the subset of patients with sleep disturbance (ISI ≥ 15), a larger treatment difference between seltorexant 20 mg and placebo was observed, warranting further investigation. No new safety signal was identified.

REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03227224.

PREVIOUS PRESENTATION

Poster presented at 58th Annual Meeting of American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP), December 8-11, 2019, Orlando, FL.

Treatment of Insomnia with Zaleplon in HIV+ Significantly Improves Sleep and Depression

More than 50% of individuals who are HIV positive report insomnia, which can reduce HIV treatment adherence, impair quality of life, and contribute to metabolic dysfunction. Major depressive disorder is also highly comorbid in this population, leading to further impairment. There is evidence that treating insomnia may improve not only sleep, but depression and metabolic function, as well. The present study aimed to examine the effects of pharmacotherapeutic treatment of insomnia on sleep, depression, and metabolic functioning in individuals with HIV. 20 individuals with asymptomatic seropositive HIV and comorbid insomnia and depression were administered zaleplon for 6 weeks. Insomnia severity was assessed using the Insomnia Severity Index and Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and depression severity was assessed using the Quick Inventory of Depression, both prior to treatment and 6 weeks post treatment. Metabolomic changes were assessed using a comprehensive platform measuring ~2000 lipid features and polar metabolites. Linear mixed effects models demonstrated that 6 weeks of treatment with zaleplon significantly improved symptoms of both insomnia and depression. Metabolomic analyses also demonstrated that changes in insomnia severity were associated with significant changes in key branched chain amino acid metabolites. Our results show that improvement in insomnia is associated with reduced depressive symptoms and beneficial metabolomic changes. Additionally, changes in key branched chain amino acid metabolites following treatment may serve as useful biomarkers of treatment response.

Evaluation of MADRS severity thresholds in patients with bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

The Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is commonly used to assess depression symptom changes in clinical trials; however, the score itself can be difficult to interpret without clinical context. Categories of depression severity corresponding to MADRS total score have not been established for bipolar depression, which was the objective of this study.

METHODS

Data were pooled from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of cariprazine in patients with bipolar I depression; placebo and cariprazine arms were pooled. An anchor-based approach was used to map MADRS total score to the clinician-rated, 7-category Clinical Global Impression of Severity scale (CGI-S). Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to assess associations between MADRS total and CGI-S scores. Optimal MADRS severity thresholds for each CGI-S category was determined via Youden index using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.

RESULTS

Using data from 1523 patients with bipolar depression, mean MADRS total scores were positively correlated with mean CGI-S scores at week 6 (r = 0.87; P<.0001). Using ROC curves, MADRS severity thresholds corresponding to each CGI-S category were estimated with high sensitivity and specificity: 0-6 for "normal, not at all ill", 7-12 for "borderline mentally ill", 13-18 for "mildly ill", 19-23 for "moderately ill", 24-36 for "markedly ill", 37-39 for "severely ill", and ≥40 for "extremely ill".

CONCLUSIONS

Utilizing data from 3 clinical trials of patients with bipolar depression, MADRS severity thresholds were identified. These empirical findings may help clinicians contextualize MADRS results from bipolar clinical research and apply to their practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT01396447, NCT02670538, NCT02670551.

Targeting location relates to treatment response in active but not sham rTMS stimulation

Background:

Precise targeting of brain functional networks is believed critical for treatment efficacy of rTMS (repetitive pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation) in treatment resistant major depression.

Objective:

To use imaging data from a “failed” clinical trial of rTMS in Veterans to test whether treatment response was associated with rTMS coil location in active but not sham stimulation, and compare fMRI functional connectivity between those stimulation locations.

Methods:

An imaging substudy of 49 Veterans (mean age, 56 years; range, 27e78 years; 39 male) from a randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial of rTMS treatment, grouping participants by clinical response, followed by group comparisons of treatment locations identified by individualized fiducial markers on structural MRI and resting state fMRI derived networks.

Results:

The average stimulation location for responders versus nonresponders differed in the active but not in the sham condition (P = .02). The average responder location derived from the active condition showed significant negative functional connectivity with the subgenual cingulate (P < .001) while the nonresponder location did not (P = .17), a finding replicated in independent cohorts of 84 depressed and 35 neurotypical participants. The responder and nonresponder stimulation locations evoked different seed based networks (FDR corrected clusters, all P < .03), revealing additional brain regions related to rTMS treatment outcome.

Conclusion:

These results provide evidence from a randomized controlled trial that clinical response to rTMS is related to accuracy in targeting the region within DLPFC that is negatively correlated with subgenual cingulate. These results support the validity of a neuro-functionally informed rTMS therapy target in Veterans.

The natural history of insomnia: Does sleep extension differentiate between those that do and do not develop chronic insomnia?

According to the "3P model" of insomnia, the variable that mediates the transition from acute insomnia (AI) to chronic insomnia is "sleep extension" (the behavioural tendency to expand sleep opportunity to compensate for sleep loss). In the present analysis, we sought to evaluate how time in bed (TIB) varies relative to the new onset of AI and chronic insomnia. A total of 1,248 subjects were recruited as good sleepers (GS). Subjects were monitored over 1 year with sleep diaries. State transitions were defined, a priori, for AI, recovered from AI (AI-REC), and for chronic insomnia (AI-CI). Two additional groupings were added based on profiles that were unanticipated: subjects that exhibited persistent poor sleep following AI (AI-PPS [those that neither recovered or developed chronic insomnia]) and subjects that recovered from chronic insomnia (CI-REC). All the groups (GS, AI-REC, AI-CI, AI-PPS and CI-REC) were evaluated for TIB differences with longitudinal mixed effects models. Post hoc analyses for the percentage of the groups that were typed as TIB "restrictors, maintainers, and expanders" were conducted using longitudinal mixed effects models and contingency analyses. Significant differences for pre-post AI TIB were not detected for the insomnia groups. Trends were apparent for the AI-CI group, which suggested that minor increases in TIB occurred weeks before the declared onset of AI. Additionally, it was found that a significantly larger percentage of AI-CI subjects engaged in sleep extension (as compared to GS). The present data suggest that transition from AI to chronic insomnia does not appear to be initiated by sleep extension and the transition may occur before the elapse of 3 months of ≥3 nights of sleep continuity disturbance. Given these findings, it may be that the mismatch between sleep ability and sleep opportunity is perpetuated over time given the failure to "naturally" engage in sleep restriction (as opposed to sleep extension).

Stability and Change in Relations Between Personality Traits and the Interpersonal Problems Circumplex During Cognitive Therapy for Recurrent Depression

Both personality impairment and maladaptive-range traits are necessary for diagnosis in the alternative model of personality disorder. We clarified personality impairment-trait connections using measures of the interpersonal problems circumplex and personality traits among adult outpatients (N = 351) with major depressive disorder receiving cognitive therapy (CT). The trait scales' circumplex projections were summarized by elevation (correlations with general interpersonal problems), amplitude (specific relations to the circumplex dimensions of dominance and affiliation), and angle (predominant orientation in the two-dimensional circumplex). Most trait scales showed hypothesized circumplex relations, including substantive elevation (e.g., negative temperament, mistrust), amplitude (e.g., aggression, detachment), and expected angles (e.g., positive temperament and manipulativeness oriented toward overly nurturant/intrusive or domineering/vindictive problems, respectively), that were stable across time during CT. These results revealed meaningful and consistent impairment-trait connections, even during CT when mean depressive affect decreased substantially.

Development of a Patient-Centered Software System to Facilitate Effective Management of Bipolar Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Self-management of bipolar disorder (BD) is an important component of treatment.

METHODS

We developed a patient-centered computational software system based on concepts from nonlinear systems (chaos) theory with mobile access to assist in managing BD known as KIOS. KIOS tracks interacting symptoms to determine theprecise state of a BD patient. Once the patient's state is identified and the trajectory of the patient established, specific advice is generated to help manage the course of the disease. KIOS also provides analytics that can be used by clinicians and researchers to track outcomes and the course of illness. A 12-week field test was completed.

RESULTS

In 20 BD subjects, use of KIOS was associated with improvements in primary symptom categories of BD. Usability and generated advice were rated as a median of 6 out of a maximum of 7.

CONCLUSIONS

The KIOS focus on change illuminates problems in the same way that humans experience them, implying that the future state will be consequent to changes made to impact the current state. Randomized clinical trial is indicated.

Prevalence of predicted gene-drug interactions for antidepressants in the treatment of major depressive disorder in the Precision Medicine in Mental Health Care Study

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing is a potentially important, but understudied approach to precision medicine that could improve prescribing practices for antidepressants (ADs) in patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Thus, it is important to understand the scope of its potential impact and to identify patients who may benefit most from PGx-guided care.

METHODS

Participants were treatment-seeking US veterans (N=1149) with MDD enrolled in the Precision Medicine in Mental Health Care study, a pragmatic multi-site, randomized, controlled trial that examines the utility of PGx testing in the context of pharmacotherapy for MDD. We report the prevalence of ADs with predicted moderate and clinically significant gene-drug interaction potential based on next-intended treatment. We also examined demographic and treatment history characteristics as predictors of the gene-drug interaction potential of participants' next-intended treatment.

RESULTS

Prevalence of the next-intended AD with moderate or clinically significant gene-drug interaction was 45.1% and19.3%. Previous treatment with an AD in the past two years was associated with a 1.59 increased likelihood of having a next-intended AD treatment with predicted clinically significant gene-drug interaction (95% CI: 1.08-2.35).

LIMITATIONS

The gene-drug interaction potential of ADs is specific to the PGx test panel used in this study and may not generalize to other PGx test panels.

CONCLUSIONS

PGx testing could benefit one in five patients prescribed ADs with clinically significant gene-drug interaction potential. Patients with prior AD treatment are more likely to have an AD with significant gene-drug interaction potential as their next-intended treatment and therefore may benefit most from PGx testing.

Adding cognitive therapy to antidepressant medications decreases suicidal ideation

BACKGROUND

Psychotherapy for depression and antidepressant medications have both been associated with decreases in suicidal ideation. Studies have not examined whether adding psychotherapy to antidepressant medications further reduces suicidal ideation relative to medications alone in adults.

METHODS

Participants (N = 452) were randomized to 7 months of treatment with antidepressant medications or combined treatment with both medications and cognitive therapy for depression. We examined change in the suicide items from the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) across treatment using Bayesian generalized linear mixed models for non-continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

Suicidal ideation decreased across treatment. When measured with the BDI, participants receiving both cognitive therapy and antidepressant medications showed 17% greater reductions in suicidal ideation relative to those receiving medications alone; this effect remained significant when controlling for depression severity. While the same pattern was observed when suicidal ideation was measured with the HDRS, the effect was smaller (7%) and not statistically significant. When BDI and HDRS scores were combined, participants receiving both therapy and medications showed 9% greater reductions in suicidal ideation relative to those receiving medications alone; this effect was marginally significant when controlling for depression severity.

LIMITATIONS

This is a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial designed to treat depression, in which suicidal ideation was assessed using single-item measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding cognitive therapy to antidepressant medications may reduce suicidal ideation to a greater extent than medications alone. Pending replication, combination treatment may be preferred for individuals with suicidal ideation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00057577.

Continuation phase treatment outcomes for switching, combining, or augmenting strategies for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder: A VAST-D report

BACKGROUND

This secondary analysis of the VA Augmentation and Switching Treatments for Depression study compared the continuation phase treatment outcomes of three commonly used second-step treatment strategies following at least one prior failed medication treatment attempt.

METHODS

In total, 1522 outpatients with MDD were randomized to switching to bupropion-SR (S-BUP), combining with bupropion-SR (C-BUP), or augmenting with aripiprazole (A-ARI). Following 12 weeks of acute phase treatment, 725 entered the 24-week continuation treatment phase. Depressive symptom severity, relapse, "emergent" remission, anxiety, suicidal ideation, quality of life, health status, and side effects were compared.

RESULTS

We did not find clinically significant differential treatment effects with the exception that A-ARI was associated with less anxiety than S-BUP or C-BUP. Participants who entered continuation treatment as remitters had milder depressive symptom severity and lower relapse rates than those not in remission; they also experienced more improvement on most other outcomes. A-ARI was associated with less anxiety, insomnia, and dry mouth but more somnolence, extrapyramidal effects, akathisia, abnormal laboratory values, and appetite and weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuation treatment is a dynamic period. Regardless of the treatment, participants who entered continuation treatment at Week 12 in full remission continued to have better outcomes over the subsequent 24 weeks than those who were not in remission at the start of the continuation phase.

Clinical validation of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing and single-gene guidelines in predicting psychotropic medication blood levels and clinical outcomes in patients with depression

We evaluated the clinical validity of a combinatorial pharmacogenomic test and single-gene Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines against patient outcomes and medication blood levels to assess their ability to inform prescribing in major depressive disorder (MDD). This is a secondary analysis of the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) randomized-controlled trial, which included patients with a diagnosis of MDD, and ≥1 prior medication failure. The ability to predict increased/decreased medication metabolism was validated against blood levels at screening (adjusted for age, sex, smoking status). The ability of predicted gene-drug interactions (pharmacogenomic test) or therapeutic recommendations (single-gene guidelines) to predict patient outcomes was validated against week 8 outcomes (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; symptom improvement, response, remission). Analyses were performed for patients taking any eligible medication (outcomes N=1,022, blood levels N=1,034) and the subset taking medications with single-gene guidelines (outcomes N=584, blood levels N=372). The combinatorial pharmacogenomic test was the only significant predictor of patient outcomes. Both the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test and single-gene guidelines were significant predictors of blood levels for all medications when evaluated separately; however, only the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test remained significant when both were included in the multivariate model. There were no substantial differences when all medications were evaluated or for the subset with single-gene guidelines. Overall, this evaluation of clinical validity demonstrates that the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test was a superior predictor of patient outcomes and medication blood levels when compared with guidelines based on individual genes.