Antidepressant efficacy of agomelatine: meta-analysis of published and unpublished studies

Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines

A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants was undertaken in order to incorporate new evidence and to update the recommendations where appropriate. A consensus meeting involving experts in depressive disorders and their management was held in September 2012. Key areas in treating depression were reviewed and the strength of evidence and clinical implications were considered. The guidelines were then revised after extensive feedback from participants and interested parties. A literature review is provided which identifies the quality of evidence upon which the recommendations are made. These guidelines cover the nature and detection of depressive disorders, acute treatment with antidepressant drugs, choice of drug versus alternative treatment, practical issues in prescribing and management, next-step treatment, relapse prevention, treatment of relapse and stopping treatment. Significant changes since the last guidelines were published in 2008 include the availability of new antidepressant treatment options, improved evidence supporting certain augmentation strategies (drug and non-drug), management of potential long-term side effects, updated guidance for prescribing in elderly and adolescent populations and updated guidance for optimal prescribing. Suggestions for future research priorities are also made.

Vortioxetine: a meta-analysis of 12 short-term, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials for the treatment of major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Vortioxetine was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September 2013 for treating major depressive disorder (MDD). Thus far, a number of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of vortioxetine have been conducted in patients with MDD. We performed a meta-analysis to increase the statistical power of these studies and enhance our current understanding of the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of MDD.

METHODS

We performed an extensive search of databases and the clinical trial registry. The mean change in total scores on the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and the Montgomery- Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from the baseline were the primary outcome measures. The secondary efficacy measures were the response and remission rates, as defined by a 50% or greater reduction in HAM-D/MADRS total scores and as a score of 10 or less in the MADRS and 7 or less in the HAM-D total scores at the end of treatment.

RESULTS

We included 7 published and 5 unpublished short-term (6-12 wk) RCTs in our meta-analysis. Vortioxetine was significantly more effective than placebo, with an effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD]) of -0.217 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.313 to -0.122) and with odds ratios (ORs) for response and remission of 1.652 (95% CI 1.321 to 2.067) and 1.399 (95% CI 1.104 to 1.773), respectively. Those treated with vortioxetine did not differ significantly from those treated with selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors/agomelatine with regard to the SMD of the primary outcome measure (0.081, -0.062 to 0.223) or for response (OR 0.815, 95% CI 0.585 to 1.135) and remission (OR 0.843, 95% CI 0.575 to 1.238) rates. Discontinuation owing to lack of efficacy (OR 0.541, 95% CI 0.308 to 0.950) was significantly less common among those treated with vortioxetine than among those who received placebo, whereas discontinuation owing to adverse events (AEs; OR 1.530, 95% CI 1.144 to 2.047) was significantly more common among those treated with vortioxetine than among those receiving placebo. There was no significant difference in discontinuation rates between vortioxetine and comparators owing to inefficacy (OR 0.983, 95% CI 0.585 to 1.650), whereas discontinuation owing to AEs was significantly less common in the vortioxetine than in the comparator group (OR 0.728, 95% CI 0.554 to 0.957).

LIMITATIONS

Studies examining the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of MDD are limited.

CONCLUSION

Although our results suggest that vortioxetine may be an effective treatment option for MDD, they should be interpreted and translated into clinical practice with caution, as the meta-analysis was based on a limited number of heterogeneous RCTs.

Learning from the past and looking to the future: Emerging perspectives for improving the treatment of psychiatric disorders

Modern neuropsychopharmacology commenced in the 1950s with the serendipitous discovery of first-generation antipsychotics and antidepressants which were therapeutically effective yet had marked adverse effects. Today, a broader palette of safer and better-tolerated agents is available for helping people that suffer from schizophrenia, depression and other psychiatric disorders, while complementary approaches like psychotherapy also have important roles to play in their treatment, both alone and in association with medication. Nonetheless, despite considerable efforts, current management is still only partially effective, and highly-prevalent psychiatric disorders of the brain continue to represent a huge personal and socio-economic burden. The lack of success in discovering more effective pharmacotherapy has contributed, together with many other factors, to a relative disengagement by pharmaceutical firms from neuropsychiatry. Nonetheless, interest remains high, and partnerships are proliferating with academic centres which are increasingly integrating drug discovery and translational research into their traditional activities. This is, then, a time of transition and an opportune moment to thoroughly survey the field. Accordingly, the present paper, first, chronicles the discovery and development of psychotropic agents, focusing in particular on their mechanisms of action and therapeutic utility, and how problems faced were eventually overcome. Second, it discusses the lessons learned from past successes and failures, and how they are being applied to promote future progress. Third, it comprehensively surveys emerging strategies that are (1), improving our understanding of the diagnosis and classification of psychiatric disorders; (2), deepening knowledge of their underlying risk factors and pathophysiological substrates; (3), refining cellular and animal models for discovery and validation of novel therapeutic agents; (4), improving the design and outcome of clinical trials; (5), moving towards reliable biomarkers of patient subpopulations and medication efficacy and (6), promoting collaborative approaches to innovation by uniting key partners from the regulators, industry and academia to patients. Notwithstanding the challenges ahead, the many changes and ideas articulated herein provide new hope and something of a framework for progress towards the improved prevention and relief of psychiatric and other CNS disorders, an urgent mission for our Century.

A systematic review of agomelatine-induced liver injury

Agomelatine is an antidepressant with a unique mechanism of action. Since its marketing in 2009, concerns have been raised regarding its potential to induce liver injury. The authors therefore address the need to comprehensively evaluate the potential risk posed by agomelatine of inducing liver injury by reviewing data from published and unpublished clinical trials in both the pre- and postmarketing settings, as well as data from non-interventional studies, pharmacovigilance database reviews and one case report. Recommendations for clinicians are also provided.

In this review, agomelatine was found to be associated with higher rates of liver injury than both placebo and the four active comparator antidepressants used in the clinical trials for agomelatine, with rates as high as 4.6% for agomelatine compared to 2.1% for placebo, 1.4% for escitalopram, 0.6% for paroxetine, 0.4% for fluoxetine, and 0% for sertraline. The review also provides evidence for the existence of a positive relationship between agomelatine dose and liver injury. Furthermore, rates of liver injury were found to be lower in non-interventional studies. Findings from pharmacovigilance database reviews and one case report also highlight the risk of agomelatine-induced liver injury.

As agomelatine does pose a risk of liver injury, clinicians must carefully monitor liver function throughout treatment. However, agomelatine’s unique mechanism of action and favourable safety profile render it a valuable treatment option.

A quantitative analysis of agomelatine-induced liver injury is lacking in the literature and would be welcomed.

Combination of agomelatine and bupropion for treatment-resistant depression: results from a chart review study including a matched control group

INTRODUCTION

Although a growing selection of antidepressants is available, a significant number of patients do not reach clinical remission, despite multiple trials. Data concerning the efficacy and safety of combination therapies with newer antidepressants are limited.

METHODS

Fifteen inpatients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), defined as Beck Depression Inventory-2 (BDI-2) scores >14 despite treatment with adequate doses of ≥ 1 antidepressant classes for ≥ 6 weeks, were treated with agomelatine plus bupropion for ≥6 weeks, and compared to 15 patients on antidepressant monotherapy with TRD matched on age, sex, and TRD stage based on retrospective chart review. The primary outcome was change in BDI-2 scores. Secondary outcomes included treatment response (BDI-2 score decrease by ≥ 50%), remission (BDI-2 score <13), routinely measured cardiometabolic parameters and adverse effects.

RESULTS

After a mean of 6 ± 1 weeks, BDI-2 scores decreased by 20.3 ± 5.6 points in the combination group compared to 12.5 ± 15.1 points in the monotherapy group (P = 0.073; Cohen's d = 0.7). Altogether, 73.3% in the combination group responded compared to 53.3% on monotherapy (P = 0.27). About 60.0% on combination therapy reached remission compared to 40% on monotherapy (P = 0.28), a difference equivalent to a number-needed-to-treat = 4. Treatment response was independent of the degree of TRD (P = 0.27). Bupropion-agomelatine cotreatment was well tolerated and laboratory adverse effect parameters were not altered.

CONCLUSION

Despite the small sample and uncontrolled study design, the good remission rate in TRD patients receiving agomelatine plus bupropion, particularly in comparison to the monotherapy group, indicates that this combination treatment should be explored further as a potentially promising strategy for patients with TRD.

Vortioxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder

ABSTRACT 

Vortioxetine is a novel psychotropic drug, with evidence of efficacy in acute treatment of major depressive episodes and in prevention of relapse in major depressive disorder. It has been described as having a ‘multimodal’ serotonergic mechanism of action, involving reuptake inhibition and a range of effects on presynaptic and postsynaptic receptors. It also has important effects on other neurotransmitters thought to be important in the neurobiology of depression and response to antidepressant treatment. It is efficacious in reducing anxiety symptom severity in depressed patients. The tolerability profile of vortioxetine appears predictable from its pharmacological properties. It may have beneficial effects in improving ‘cognition’ in depression, and a lower incidence of treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction, but these potential benefits require further investigation.

Understanding the Antidepressant Debate in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder

There is a long-standing polemic concerning the usefulness of antidepressants in the treatment of major depressive disorder. In this paper, we propose to highlight some aspects of this controversy by exploring the mutual influence of psychopharmacology and trial methodologies. Indeed, antidepressant efficacy, if not proved, was accepted before antidepressant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were run. While RCTs became a gold standard to meet the requirements of the regulatory bodies, methodological tools were required to measure outcomes and to test whether antidepressants provide statistically significant benefits as compared with a placebo. All these methodological options have nonetheless introduced fuzziness in our interpretation of study results, in terms of clinical meaningfulness and in terms of transposability to a real life settings. Additionally, selective publication raises concerns about the published literature, and results in many paradoxes. Instead of providing easy answers, the application of the RCT paradigm in MDD raises numerous questions. This is probably in the nature of all scientific studies, but it can be in contradiction with clinicians' expectations, who want to be sure that the treatment will (or will not) work for their individual patients.

Agomelatine beyond borders: current evidences of its efficacy in disorders other than major depression

Agomelatine, a melatonergic antidepressant with a rapid onset of action, is one of the most recent drugs in the antidepressant category. Agomelatine's antidepressant actions are attributed to its sleep-promoting and chronobiotic actions mediated by MT1 and MT2 receptors present in the suprachiasmatic nucleus, as well as to its effects on the blockade of 5-HT2c receptors. Blockade of 5-HT2c receptors causes release of both noradrenaline and dopamine at the fronto-cortical dopaminergic and noradrenergic pathways. The combined actions of agomelatine on MT1/MT2 and 5-HT2c receptors facilitate the resynchronization of altered circadian rhythms and abnormal sleep patterns. Agomelatine appeared to be effective in treating major depression. Moreover, evidence exists that points out a possible efficacy of such drug in the treatment of bipolar depression, anxiety disorders, alcohol dependence, migraines etc. Thus, the aim of this narrative review was to elucidate current evidences on the role of agomelatine in disorders other than major depression.

Agomelatine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: an assessment of benefits and risks

Agomelatine (AGM) was approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in February 2009. It is an analogue of melatonin and features a unique pharmacodynamic profile with agonism on both types of melatonergic receptors (MT1/MT2) and antagonism at serotonergic 5-HT2C receptors. There is, however, an ongoing debate regarding the efficacy and safety of this novel antidepressant agent, originally evoked by claims of a significant publication bias underlying the assessment of AGM being an effective antidepressant. Indeed, two recent comprehensive metaanalyses of published and unpublished clinical trials found evidence for a relevant publication bias. However, due to its statistically significant advantage over placebo based on the results of these metaanalyses AGM must be referred to as an effective antidepressant agent in the acute phase of MDD. However, the effect sizes of AGM in the treatment of MDD were evaluated as being small in comparison to other antidepressant agents. In addition, there is insufficient evidence for the efficacy of AGM in relapse prevention of MDD. Apart from efficacy issues, AGM appears to have the potential to exhibit severe hepatotoxicity (the EMA has identified AGM-associated “hepatotoxic reactions” as a new safety concern in September 2013) that is currently poorly understood. Considering these aspects, it seems inappropriate to evaluate AGM as an antidepressant agent of first choice. Nevertheless, its unique mechanism of action with particular sleep modulating effects may represent a specific treatment strategy for patients with particular characteristics; further studies with thorough characterization of patients are needed to test this hypothesis.

Therapeutic effects of melatonin receptor agonists on sleep and comorbid disorders

Several melatonin receptors agonists (ramelteon, prolonged-release melatonin, agomelatine and tasimelteon) have recently become available for the treatment of insomnia, depression and circadian rhythms sleep-wake disorders. The efficacy and safety profiles of these compounds in the treatment of the indicated disorders are reviewed. Accumulating evidence indicates that sleep-wake disorders and co-existing medical conditions are mutually exacerbating. This understanding has now been incorporated into the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5). Therefore, when evaluating the risk/benefit ratio of sleep drugs, it is pertinent to also evaluate their effects on wake and comorbid condition. Beneficial effects of melatonin receptor agonists on comorbid neurological, psychiatric, cardiovascular and metabolic symptomatology beyond sleep regulation are also described. The review underlines the beneficial value of enhancing physiological sleep in comorbid conditions.

A randomised, double-blind study in adults with major depressive disorder with an inadequate response to a single course of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor treatment switched to vortioxetine or agomelatine

OBJECTIVE

This randomised, double-blind, 12-week study compared efficacy and tolerability of flexible-dose treatment with vortioxetine(10-20 mg/day) versus agomelatine (25-50 mg/day) in major depressive disorder patients with inadequate response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI)/serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) monotherapy.

METHODS

Patients were switched directly from SSRI/SNRI to vortioxetine or agomelatine. Primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 8 in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score analysed by mixed model for repeated measurements, using a noninferiority test followed by a superiority test. Secondary endpoints included response and remission rates, anxiety symptoms(Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale), Clinical Global Impression, overall functioning (Sheehan Disability Scale), health-related quality of life(EuroQol 5 Dimensions), productivity (work limitation questionnaire) and family functioning (Depression and Family Functioning Scale).

RESULTS

Primary endpoint noninferiority was established and vortioxetine (n = 252) was superior to agomelatine (n = 241) by 2.2 MADRS points (p<0.01). Vortioxetine was also significantly superior in response and remission rates at weeks 8 and 12; MADRS, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impression, Sheehan Disability Scale and EuroQol 5 Dimensions scores at week 4 onwards; work limitation questionnaire at week 8 and Depression and Family Functioning Scale at weeks 8 and 12. Fewer patients withdrew because of adverse events with vortioxetine (5.9% vs 9.5%). Adverse events (incidence ≥5%) were nausea, headache, dizziness and somnolence.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine was noninferior and significantly superior to agomelatine in major depressive disorder patients with previous inadequate response to a single course of SSRI/SNRI monotherapy. Vortioxetine was safe and well tolerated.