Intravenous antidepressants: a review

Transdermal Route: A Viable Option for Systemic Delivery of Antidepressants

The high rise in the population suffering from depression depicts the need for improved and highly effective treatment options for this condition. Efforts to develop existing drugs into user-friendly dosage forms with a number of advantages in major depressive states, including but not limited to: sustained drug release, reduced drug dosing frequency, improved tolerance and adherence, suitability for use in diverse populations and different treatment scenarios, as well as less central nervous system side effects are required. One such non-invasive drug delivery route that could provide the aforementioned benefits in the treatment of depression is the transdermal route. A number of conventional and emerging transdermal delivery strategies have been investigated for some potent antidepressants and results depict the potential of this route as a viable means for systemic delivery of therapeutically relevant doses of the tested agents, with Emsam®, the commercially available patch of selegiline, being an evidence for the same. The investigated approaches include the formulation of transdermal patches, use of vesicular drug carriers, pro-drug approach, microemulsification, chemical as well as physical enhancement technologies. This review provides a comprehensive account of the rationale, developments made till date, scope and future prospects of delivering antidepressants via the transdermal1 route of administration.

Oral esketamine for treatment-resistant depression: rationale and design of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need to develop additional treatment strategies for patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The rapid but short-lived antidepressant effects of intravenous (IV) ketamine as a racemic mixture have been shown repeatedly in this population, but there is still a paucity of data on the efficacy and safety of (a) different routes of administration, and (b) ketamine's enantiomers esketamine and arketamine. Given practical advantages of oral over IV administration and pharmacodynamic arguments for better antidepressant efficacy of esketamine over arketamine, we designed a study to investigate repeated administration of oral esketamine in patients with TRD.

METHODS

This study features a triple-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial (RCT) comparing daily oral esketamine versus placebo as add-on to regular antidepressant medications for a period of 6 weeks, succeeded by a follow-up of 4 weeks. The methods support examination of the efficacy, safety, tolerability, mechanisms of action, and economic impact of oral esketamine in patients with TRD.

DISCUSSION

This is the first RCT investigating repeated oral esketamine administration in patients with TRD. If shown to be effective and tolerated, oral esketamine administration poses important advantages over IV administration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register, NTR6161. Registered 21 October 2016.

Intravenous vortioxetine to accelerate onset of effect in major depressive disorder: a 2-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

This 2-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled fixed-dose study (NCT02919501) explored the potential of accelerating onset of antidepressant efficacy and plasma exposure with single-dose intravenous vortioxetine at oral vortioxetine treatment initiation. Outpatients (ages 18-65 years) with major depressive disorder and a current depressive episode (Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score ≥30) were randomized to an initial single dose of either intravenous vortioxetine 17 mg (n = 27) or intravenous placebo (n = 28), both treatments followed by 2 weeks of oral vortioxetine (10 mg/day). From baseline to day 7, both groups exhibited fast and substantial improvements by approximately 14 Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale points, with no statistically significant treatment difference for this primary endpoint. Improvements were substantial already within 24 hours, with numerical treatment differences of 1.3 and 1.6 points at days 1 and 3, respectively, in favour of intravenous vortioxetine + oral vortioxetine. Pharmacokinetic data confirmed that intravenous vortioxetine facilitated reaching steady-state plasma concentration within 24 hours. Intravenous vortioxetine + oral vortioxetine was safe and well-tolerated, with nausea as the most common adverse event. This study supported intravenous vortioxetine as a means of rapidly reaching therapeutic vortioxetine blood levels.

Is trazodone more effective than clomipramine in major depressed outpatients? A single-blind study with intravenous and oral administration

OBJECTIVE

Some antidepressants, such as trazodone or clomipramine, can be administered intravenously in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), with potential benefits compared to the standard oral treatment, but available data about their efficacy are limited. The present study was aimed to compare the effectiveness of trazodone and clomipramine (intravenous [i.v.] followed by oral administration).

METHODS

Some 42 patients with a diagnosis of MDD according to the DSM-5 were selected and treated with i.v. trazodone or clomipramine according to clinical judgment. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale were administered at baseline, after 2 weeks, and after 6 weeks, as well as after 1 week of intravenous antidepressant administration. Raters were blinded to type of treatment.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between treatment groups in terms of effectiveness at endpoint. Borderline statistical significance was found in terms of number of responders in favor of trazodone. In addition, patients treated with trazodone reported fewer total side effects than those treated with clomipramine.

CONCLUSION

Both i.v. trazodone and clomipramine are rapid and effective options for improving depressive symptoms, although trazodone appears to be tolerated better. Further studies with larger samples and double-blind conditions are warranted to confirm our results.

Effects of Citalopram on Cue-Induced Alcohol Craving and Thalamic D2/3 Dopamine Receptor Availability

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are often used in alcohol use disorders. Clinical trials with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for alcohol use disorders, however, have yielded mixed results. The goal of this project was to assess whether a single i.v. dose of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor reduces craving for alcohol and/or simultaneously increases striatal dopamine concentration in individuals with alcohol dependence.

METHODS

Alcohol-dependent (DSM-IV-TR criteria) volunteers and matched controls (n = 10/group) underwent a double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subjects study. Participants received i.v. citalopram (40 mg) or saline (counter-balanced) followed by a cue-induced craving assessment and [18F]-fallypride positron emission tomography scanning.

RESULTS

In the alcohol-dependent individuals, the citalopram (compared with saline) resulted in decreased cue-induced craving for alcohol. For the whole study group, cue-induced alcohol craving was inversely correlated with thalamic (but not striatal) dopamine D2/3 receptor availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute serotonin reuptake inhibition reduces cue-induced alcohol craving. Furthermore, thalamic dopamine abnormalities and the striatal hyperdopaminergic hypothesis of alcohol use disorder are supported.

Ketamine as a novel treatment for major depressive disorder and bipolar depression: a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Given the significant disability, morbidity and mortality associated with depression, the promising recent trials of ketamine highlight a novel intervention. A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of ketamine in comparison with placebo for the reduction of depressive symptoms in patients who meet criteria for a major depressive episode.

METHOD

Two electronic databases were searched in September 2013 for English-language studies that were randomized placebo-controlled trials of ketamine treatment for patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar depression and utilized a standardized rating scale. Studies including participants receiving electroconvulsive therapy and adolescent/child participants were excluded. Five studies were included in the quantitative meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The quantitative meta-analysis showed that ketamine significantly reduced depressive symptoms. The overall effect size at day 1 was large and statistically significant with an overall standardized mean difference of 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.69-1.34) (P<.001), with the effects sustained at 7 days postinfusion. The heterogeneity of the studies was low and not statistically significant, and the funnel plot showed no publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The large and statistically significant effect of ketamine on depressive symptoms supports a promising, new and effective pharmacotherapy with rapid onset, high efficacy and good tolerability.

EMSAM (deprenyl patch): how a promising antidepressant was underutilized

The EMSAM patch is a unique monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) being the only antidepressant utilizing a transdermal delivery system. This was welcomed by clinicians who hoped that EMSAM would be better tolerated than oral MAOIs and non-MAOI antidepressants, as well as being effective for treatment in a wide spectrum of depressed patients including atypical depression, bipolar depression, and refractory depression. Unfortunately, the clinical use of EMSAM has been underutilized and its potential usefulness overlooked. This article suggests that fear of possible side effects, particularly the "cheese reaction" and serotonin syndrome, are some of the main contributors to underutilization by clinicians. These risks have been significantly exaggerated with the 6 mg/day dose not even requiring a special diet. Other contributing factors leading to underutilization are reviewed such as: the lack of studies addressing many important clinical questions; inadequate data analyses; not evaluating the effect of EMSAM on comorbid psychiatric conditions, particularly anxiety disorders; lack of antidepressant comparators versus EMSAM; no dose-response relationship examined; various depressive subtypes and conditions are unexplored, eg, bipolar depression and refractory depression; poor insurance coverage for an expensive medication; as well as minimal marketing efforts and postmarketing studies. On the other hand, many potential advantages of EMSAM are not highlighted enough in the literature and by pharmaceutical companies which might have increased clinical interest and utilization of the antidepressant. For example, the advantages of EMSAM include: avoidance of swallowing issues, as can be seen with oral antidepressants; minimal side effects, probably due to a favorable pharmacokinetic profile; minimal evidence of suicidal behavior, probably relating to the transdermal route of administration; low rates of inducing hypomanic/manic episodes; as well as significant efficacy in "anxious depression" and atypical depression. Recent efforts in conducting some post hoc analyses and presentations on EMSAM may yet stimulate further clinical interest and use of this antidepressant.

Ketamine for depression: where do we go from here?

Since publication of the first randomized controlled trial describing rapid antidepressant effects of ketamine, several reports have confirmed the potential utility of this dissociative anesthetic medication for treatment of major depressive episodes, including those associated with bipolar disorder and resistant to other medications and electroconvulsive therapy. These reports have generated several questions with respect to who might respond to ketamine, how, and for how long. To start answering these questions. We used PubMed.gov and ClinicalTrials.gov to perform a systematic review of all available published data on the antidepressant effects of ketamine and of all recently completed, ongoing, and planned studies. To date, 163 patients, primarily with treatment-resistant depression, have participated in case studies, open-label investigations, or controlled trials. All controlled trials have used a within-subject, crossover design with an inactive placebo as the control. Ketamine administration has usually involved an anaesthesiologist infusing a single, subanesthetic, intravenous dose, and required hospitalization for at least 24 hours postinfusion. Response rates in the open-label investigations and controlled trials have ranged from 25% to 85% at 24 hours postinfusion and from 14% to 70% at 72 hours postinfusion. Although adverse effects have generally been mild, some patients have experienced brief changes in blood pressure, heart rate, or respiratory rate. Risk-benefit analyses support further research of ketamine for individuals with severe mood disorders. However, given the paucity of randomized controlled trials, lack of an active placebo, limited data on long-term outcomes, and potential risks, ketamine administration is not recommended outside of the hospital setting.

Intravenous anti-obsessive agents: a review

Oral antidepressants are currently the first-line pharmacotherapy for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but response rates can often be low and with delayed onset of therapeutic action. Some reports have suggested that intravenous (i.v.) anti-obsessive agents may have faster onset of action and greater efficacy. A Medline search was conducted for all reports pertaining to the use of i.v. antidepressants for OCD. Search terms included: 'intravenous', 'clomipramine', 'selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor', 'tricyclic', 'citalopram', 'sertraline', 'paroxetine', 'fluvoxamine', 'SSRIs' and 'intravenous antidepressants'. Relevant articles mainly investigated clomipramine (CMI) with one open trial examining citalopram. Intravenous agents appear to be well-tolerated, particularly in those who have failed oral agents, and may act more rapidly to produce initial clinical response, although this advantage is often lost over time. Preliminary evidence suggests subgroups of patients with severe treatment-refractory OCD may benefit from i.v. anti-obsessive agents, CMI and citalopram. Larger, controlled trials are needed for more definitive conclusions.

The Timing of Antidepressant Effects: A Comparison of Diverse Pharmacological and Somatic Treatments

Currently available antidepressants used to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) unfortunately often take weeks to months to achieve their full effects, commonly resulting in considerable morbidity and increased risk for suicidal behavior. Our lack of understanding of the precise cellular underpinnings of this illness and of the mechanism of action of existing effective pharmacological treatments is a large part of the reason that therapies with a more rapid onset of antidepressant action (ROAA) have not been developed. Other issues that need to be addressed include heterogeneous clinical concepts and statistical models to measure rapid antidepressant effects. This review describes the timing of onset of antidepressant effects for various therapies used to treat MDD. While several agents produce earlier improvement of depressive symptoms (defined as occurring within one week), the response rate associated with such agents can be quite variable. These agents include both currently available antidepressants as well as other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. Considerably fewer treatments are associated with ROAA, defined as occurring within several hours or one day. Treatment strategies for MDD whose sustained antidepressant effects manifest within hours or even a few days would have an enormous impact on public health.

Intravenous augmentative citalopram versus clomipramine in partial/nonresponder depressed patients: a short-term, low dose, randomized, placebo-controlled study

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of short-term low-dose intravenous augmentative citalopram (10 mg/d) versus clomipramine (25 mg/d) versus placebo in a sample of patients with MDE and partial or no response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Fifty-four patients with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, MDE and partial or no response to SSRIs per os (21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D21] score reduction, <50% or < or =25%, respectively, compared with pretreatment scores) were selected and randomized to citalopram (n = 18), clomipramine (n = 18), or placebo (n = 18) intravenous augmentation. The augmentation regimen lasted 5 days during which patients were maintained on their previous treatment with oral SSRIs. Analyses of variance with repeated measures on HAM-D(21), collected daily in blind-raters design, were performed to detect any change of depressive symptoms between the 3 groups. In addition, the number of responders and remitters was computed in the 3 groups of treatment. At end point, a significant treatment effect (F= 4.57; P = 0.015) and time-by-treatment effect (F = 11.22; P < 0.0001) were found on HAM-D21 total scores in favor of citalopram and clomipramine versus placebo, with a superiority of citalopram over clomipramine on overall symptoms (P = 0.05) as well as on anxiety-somatization symptoms (P = 0.027). The number of responders was significantly superior in the active treatment groups versus the placebo group ([chi](2)(2) = 16.36; P < 0.0001). The same result was found, considering the number of remitters ([chi](2)(2) = 13.50; P < 0.0001). Present findings suggest that both clomipramine and citalopram intravenous augmentation at low doses and for a short period are well tolerated and superior to placebo in major depressives with partial or no response to oral SSRIs with a possible superiority of citalopram over clomipramine with regard to anxiety-somatization symptoms. The lack of double-blind conditions and the limited sample size may limit the confidence in the reported results, and larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm the present findings.

Clinical experience of the use of a pharmacological treatment algorithm for major depressive disorder in patients with advanced cancer

The objective of this study was to describe the applicability and the dropout of the pharmacological treatment algorithm for major depressive disorder in patients with advanced cancer. Psychiatrists treated major depressive disorder in advanced cancer patients on the basis of the algorithm. For discussing the problems related to the algorithm, we reviewed the reasons for the non-application of the algorithm and the reasons for dropout of patients within a week of initiation of treatment. The algorithm was applied in 54 of 59 cases (applicability rate, 92%). The reasons for the non-application of the algorithm were as follows: the need to add a benzodiazepine to an antidepressant in 4 cases and the need to choose alprazolam despite the depression being moderate in severity, in order to obtain a rapid onset action and reduce anxiety in a patient with short prognosis. Nineteen of the 55 patients dropped out within a week of initiation of treatment based on the algorithm. Delirium was the most frequent reason for dropout. The applicability rate was high, but several problems were identified, including those related to the combination of antidepressants and benzodiazepines, pharmacological treatment of depression in patients with short prognosis, and delirium due to antidepressants.

Metareview on short-term effectiveness and safety of antidepressants for depression: an evidence-based approach to inform clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

To examine the available scientific literature for answers to clinically relevant questions regarding the effectiveness and tolerability of antidepressant drugs (ADs) for the acute phase treatment of depression and to assess the degree to which the literature supports the findings.

METHODS

We used several sources to identify primary reviews: MEDLINE (1955 to April 2006), EMBASE (1980 to April 2006), PsycINFO (1980 to April 2006), and the Cochrane Library 2006 Issue 1. Additional searches were also carried out on the following databases of the National Health Service Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment, and Turning Research into Practice. We also searched the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidance website. We carried out a metareview of selected high-quality systematic reviews of short-term pharmacologic interventions with ADs for major depression. To assess efficacy, we followed the hierarchy of evidence proposed by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (Oxford), including only reviews of randomized controlled trials. To assess tolerability, we also considered observational data when randomized evidence was not available.

RESULTS

There was randomized evidence that ADs are efficacious in primary care settings and that there may be small, but clinically important, differences in efficacy between ADs. There was no good evidence that an AD combined with an antipsychotic is superior to AD monotherapy in cases of psychotic depression or that intravenous administration leads to more rapid response. There was evidence that monoamine oxidase inhibitors are superior to tricyclic antidepressants, but not to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in treating atypical depression. There is some evidence of harm related to the use of SSRIs in pregnancy but not to their use when breastfeeding. There is evidence that SSRIs may increase suicidal thoughts, but not actual suicide, in early-phase therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a substantial body of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of ADs in the treatment of depressive disorder. Nonetheless, there remains considerable residual uncertainty. The evidence is inadequate for generally applicable recommendations; in most cases, the balance between risks and benefits will need to be considered for individual patients. Clinicians should also be guided by the recommendations and warnings issued by drug regulatory authorities.

Safety and efficacy of oral escitalopram as continuation treatment of intravenous citalopram in patients with major depressive disorder

The objective of this open-label, multicentre study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treatment with escitalopram (10 or 20 mg/day) for 6 weeks following a switch from intravenous citalopram treatment (20 or 40 mg/day) in patients presenting with a major depressive episode. A total of 173 patients were included, 147 (85%) of whom completed the study. The mean Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at inclusion (last citalopram dose) was 31.6 +/- 9.9. The MADRS score decreased to 23.4 +/- 10.5 after 3 days of oral treatment with escitalopram and was 12.7 +/- 9.3 at the end of the study. The scores on the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) and Patient Global Evaluation scales also improved: at the end of the study, the response rates were 67% on the MADRS (defined as >or=50% decrease from MADRS baseline score) and 68% on the CGI-I (defined as CGI-I <or=2). More than half of the patients were in remission (MADRS score <or=12). Overall, the switch from intravenous citalopram to escitalopram was well tolerated. In all, 57 patients (33%) reported at least 1 adverse event, and 7 patients (4%) were withdrawn due to an adverse event. The most frequently reported adverse events were probably linked to residual depressive symptoms (anxiety: 9%; insomnia: 5%). In conclusion, escitalopram was well tolerated as a continuation treatment after switching from intravenous citalopram and reduced depressive symptoms in patients with a moderate to severe major depressive episode.

Intravenous mirtazapine is safe and effective in the treatment of depressed inpatients

Mirtazapine is a third-generation antidepressant with a dual mode of action. The oral administration has been shown to be effective and safe in the treatment of depressed patients. In this multicenter naturalistic study, we assessed the safety, tolerability, and therapeutic efficacy of intravenously administered mirtazapine in 80 moderately to severely depressed inpatients during a treatment period of 14 days. We found a significant decrease of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score compared to baseline. Side effects were mild and transient. Our data indicate that intravenous mirtazapine is an effective, safe and well-tolerated treatment for depressed inpatients.

Tolérance et efficacité de l’escitalopram per os, en relais de la forme intraveineuse du citalopram chez des patients présentant un épisode dépressif majeur

Intravenous (iv) administration of an antidepressant is a common practice in some European countries, particularly in France, Spain, and Italy in the initial treatment phase of hospitalised, severe depressed patients. After a beneficial response is observed, patients are switched to an oral formulation. The approved treatment period of the iv form of citalopram is limited to 8-10 days. The high bioavailability of citalopram permits the use of identical iv and oral doses. Citalopram is a racemate, consisting of a 1:1 mixture of the S- and R-enantiomers. The therapeutically active component is the S-enantiomer (escitalopram). Pharmacokinetic single dose administration studies in healthy subjects have demonstrated that daily oral administration of 20 mg of escitalopram or 40 mg citalopram results in similar plasma concentrations of the S-enantiomer of citalopram. This open-label multicentre French prospective study investigated the tolerability and efficacy of oral escitalopram 10 and 20 mg/day, administered for a 6-week period as continuation treatment of citalopram (20 mg or 40 mg daily) intravenous (iv), in patients with Major Depressive Disorder. A total of 171 patients were enrolled, of whom 147 (85%) completed the study. The mean MADRS score at inclusion (last citalopram dose) was 31.6 +/- 9.9. The total MADRS score decreased after 3 days of oral treatment with escitalopram. Escitalopram demonstrated a continuous effect in treating depressive symptoms throughout the study. The decrease in MADRS mean total score from baseline was statistically significant to each visit (day 3, 15; p < 0.0001). At final visit (J42), the decrease was - 18.9 +/- 11.7 (p < 0.0001) and the MADRS mean total score was 12.7 +/- 9.3. There were no differences seen in the patient response comparing gender, age, and the single or recurrent episodes. The changes of Clinical Global Impression scores (CGI-S, CGI-I, PGE-Patient Global Evaluation) were also indicative of an improvement of the patients' depression. The CGI-I and PGE scores were significantly correlated indicating good agreement between investigator and patient in rating the degree of improvement. At the end of the study, 67% of patients were classified as responders (decrease of MADRS score from baseline > or = 50%), and the majority of them were considered remitters (final MADRS score < or = 12). Overall, the switch from intravenous citalopram to oral escitalopram was well tolerated in the study population. In all, 57 patients (33%) reported at least one adverse event (AE) during the study (21 patients in the 10 mg group and 36 patients in the 20 mg group); of these, 7 patients (4%) withdrew from the study. The most frequently reported AEs were suggestive of residual symptoms of depression (anxiety, 9%; insomnia, 5% of patients). In conclusion, in this study oral escitalopram (10 mg or 20 mg) was well tolerated as continuation treatment after switching from intravenous citalopram (20 mg or 40 mg). From the efficacy and safety data of this study, it can be concluded that the switch from citalopram iv to oral escitalopram (10 and 20 mg/day) is effective in decreasing depressive symptoms, and could be safely proposed in patients with major depressive disorder.