THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY SURVEY OF PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGISTS' PRACTICE PATTERNS FOR THE TREATMENT OF MOOD DISORDERS

Current Utilization of Bupropion Treatment in Children, Young Adults, and Adults in the United States

Introduction: While available for decades, the use of bupropion has increased in recent years. To provide an updated review on the use of bupropion, this article aimed to describe bupropion prescription details, potential indication, and treatment duration in children, young adults, and adults starting bupropion treatment. Methods: Individuals aged 6-64 newly initiating bupropion hydrochloride treatment were identified from commercial claims data (MarketScan, 1/1/2016-12/31/2022). New bupropion use was defined as at least 1 year without any prior bupropion dispensed prescription. Potential indications for bupropion treatment were identified from inpatient/outpatient records (ICD-10-CM diagnoses) in the 30 days prior to bupropion initiation. All analyses were stratified by age: children (6-17 years), young adults (18-29 years), and adults (30-64 years) and treatment duration up to 1 year was estimated with Kaplan-Meier estimation. Results: The study sample included 39,833 children, 177,710 young adults, and 548,557 adults newly initiating bupropion treatment. Bupropion extended-release 24-hour 150 mg was the most common (62%) formulation and dose at initiation. Depression was the most prevalent potential indication (children = 57%, young adults = 47%, adults = 36%) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was the next most common potential indication in children (25%) and young adults (12%); tobacco cessation and weight loss also identified as potential indications. Twenty-two percent of bupropion initiators were on concurrent selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment. In children, suicidal ideation (16.3%), poisoning (5.9%), and anorexia or bulimia nervosa (2.2%) were relatively common diagnoses prior to bupropion initiation. Overall, 39%-45% remained on bupropion treatment for at least 6 months, with variation by potential indication. Conclusion: The antidepressant bupropion is prescribed to children, young adults, and adults for a variety of indications in the United States, with depression and ADHD the most common indications in children. As the prescribing of bupropion becomes more widespread, additional safety and effectiveness data will be necessary to inform prescribing decisions, particularly in populations with unknown efficacy.

Clinical decision support for bipolar depression using large language models

Management of depressive episodes in bipolar disorder remains challenging for clinicians despite the availability of treatment guidelines. In other contexts, large language models have yielded promising results for supporting clinical decisionmaking. We developed 50 sets of clinical vignettes reflecting bipolar depression and presented them to experts in bipolar disorder, who were asked to identify 5 optimal next-step pharmacotherapies and 5 poor or contraindicated choices. The same vignettes were then presented to a large language model (GPT4-turbo; gpt-4-1106-preview), with or without augmentation by prompting with recent bipolar treatment guidelines, and asked to identify the optimal next-step pharmacotherapy. Overlap between model output and gold standard was estimated. The augmented model prioritized the expert-designated optimal choice for 508/1000 vignettes (50.8%, 95% CI 47.7-53.9%; Cohen's kappa = 0.31, 95% CI 0.28-0.35). For 120 vignettes (12.0%), at least one model choice was among the poor or contraindicated treatments. Results were not meaningfully different when gender or race of the vignette was permuted to examine risk for bias. By comparison, an un-augmented model identified the optimal treatment for 234 (23.0%, 95% CI 20.8-26.0%; McNemar's p < 0.001 versus augmented model) of the vignettes. A sample of community clinicians scoring the same vignettes identified the optimal choice for 23.1% (95% CI 15.7-30.5%) of vignettes, on average; McNemar's p < 0.001 versus augmented model. Large language models prompted with evidence-based guidelines represent a promising, scalable strategy for clinical decision support. In addition to prospective studies of efficacy, strategies to avoid clinician overreliance on such models, and address the possibility of bias, will be needed.

Efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching in patients with treatment-resistant depression or major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To report the first and largest systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) or major depressive disorder(MDD).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature retrieval via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane until April 2023 for RCT, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching for patients with TRD or MDD. Outcomes measured were changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), response and remission rate, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Five RCTs, including 4480 patients, were included for meta-analysis. Among them, two RCTs were rated as "high risk" in three aspects (allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel and blinding of outcome assessment) because of the non-blind method, and the quality evaluation of the remaining works of literature was "low risk". Augmentation treatment with Aripiprazole (A-ARI) was associated with a significant higher response rate compared with augmentation treatment with bupropion (A-BUP) (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.25; P = 0.0007; I2 = 23%). Besides, A-ARI had a significant higher remission rate compared with switching to bupropion (S-BUP) (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.49; P = 0.05; I2 = 59%) and A-BUP had a significant higher remission rate compared with S-BUP (RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.36; P = 0.0004; I2 = 0%). In addition, there was no significant difference in remission rate(RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.17; P = 0.42; I2 = 33%), improvement of MADRS(WMD: -2.07; 95% CI: -5.84, 1.70; P = 0.28; I2 = 70%) between A-ARI and A-BUP. No significant difference was observed in adverse events and serious adverse events among the three treatment strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

A-ARI may be a better comprehensive antidepressant treatment strategy than A-BUP or S-BUP for patients with TRD or MDD. More large-scale, multi-center, double-blind RCTs are needed to further evaluated the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching treatment strategies.

Antidepressant Strategies for Treatment of Acute Depressive Episodes Among Veterans

OBJECTIVE

The 2016 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Major Depressive Disorder offers consensus-based recommendations when response to the initial antidepressant medication is suboptimal; however, little is known about "real-world" pharmacological strategies used by providers treating depression in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System (VAHCS).

METHODS

We extracted pharmacy and administrative records of patients diagnosed with a depressive disorder and treated at the Minneapolis VAHCS between January 1, 2010 and May 11, 2021. Patients with bipolar disorder, psychosis-spectrum, or dementia diagnoses were excluded. An algorithm was developed to identify antidepressant strategies: monotherapy (MONO); optimization (OPM); switching (SWT); combination (COM); and augmentation (AUG). Additional data extracted included demographics, service utilization, other psychiatric diagnoses, and clinical risk for hospitalization and mortality.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 1298 patients, 11.3% of whom were female. The mean age of the sample was 51 years. Half of the patients received MONO, with 40% of those patients receiving inadequate doses. OPM was the most common next-step strategy. SWT and COM/AUG were used for 15.9% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. Overall, patients who received COM/AUG were younger. OPM, SWT, and COM/AUG occurred more frequently in psychiatric services settings and required a greater number of outpatient visits. The association between antidepressant strategies and risk of mortality became nonsignificant after accounting for age.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the veterans with acute depression were treated with a single antidepressant, while COM and AUG were rarely used. The age of the patient, and not necessarily greater medical risks, appeared to be a major factor in decisions about antidepressant strategies. Future studies should evaluate whether implementation of underutilized COM and AUG strategies early in the course of depression treatment are feasible.

Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022: Comparisons with Other Treatment Guidelines

The objective of this study was to compare recommendations of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022 (KMAP-BP 2022) with other recently published guidelines for treating bipolar disorder. We reviewed a total of six recently published global treatment guidelines and compared treatment recommendation of the KMAP-BP 2022 with those of other guidelines. For initial treatment of mania, there were no significant differences across treatment guidelines. All guidelines recommended mood stabilizer (MS) or atypical antipsychotic (AAP) monotherapy or a combination of an MS with an AAP as a first-line treatment strategy in a same degree for mania. However, the KMAP-BP 2022 recommended MS + AAP combination therapy for psychotic mania, mixed mania and psychotic depression as treatment of choice. Aripiprazole, quetiapine and olanzapine were the first-line AAPs for nearly all phases of bipolar disorder across guidelines. Some guideline suggested olanzapine is a second-line options during maintenance treatment, related to concern about long-term tolerability. Most guidelines advocated newer AAPs (asenapine, cariprazine, long-acting injectable risperidone, and aripiprazole once monthly) as first-line treatment options for all phases while lamotrigine was recommended for depressive and maintenance phases. Lithium and valproic acid were commonly used as MSs in all phases of bipolar disorder. KMAP-BP 2022 guidelines were similar to other guidelines, reflecting current changes in prescription patterns for bipolar disorder based on accumulated research data. Strong preference for combination therapy was characteristic of KMAP-BP 2022, predominantly in the treatment of psychotic mania, mixed mania and psychotic depression.

Mental health progress requires causal diagnostic nosology and scalable causal discovery

Nine hundred and seventy million individuals across the globe are estimated to carry the burden of a mental disorder. Limited progress has been achieved in alleviating this burden over decades of effort, compared to progress achieved for many other medical disorders. Progress on outcome improvement for all medical disorders, including mental disorders, requires research capable of discovering causality at sufficient scale and speed, and a diagnostic nosology capable of encoding the causal knowledge that is discovered. Accordingly, the field's guiding paradigm limits progress by maintaining: (a) a diagnostic nosology (DSM-5) with a profound lack of causality; (b) a misalignment between mental health etiologic research and nosology; (c) an over-reliance on clinical trials beyond their capabilities; and (d) a limited adoption of newer methods capable of discovering the complex etiology of mental disorders. We detail feasible directions forward, to achieve greater levels of progress on improving outcomes for mental disorders, by: (a) the discovery of knowledge on the complex etiology of mental disorders with application of Causal Data Science methods; and (b) the encoding of the etiological knowledge that is discovered within a causal diagnostic system for mental disorders.

A Different rTMS Protocol for a Different Type of Depression: 20.000 rTMS Pulses for the Treatment of Bipolar Depression Type II

In this open-label naturalistic study, we assess the feasibility, tolerability, and effectiveness of a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol with a reduced total pulse number for treating patients suffering from bipolar disorder type II. All patients received one rTMS treatment session of 1000 pulses for 20 consecutive working days, accumulating to 20.000 rTMS pulses applied over 4 weeks. We measured the patients’ symptoms before the start, halfway through, directly after, and one month after treatment. We quantified the depression symptoms using both the Beck depression inventory scale and the symptom checklist-90 depression subscale. Patients showed a significant reduction in depression symptoms directly after treatment and an even further reduction one month after treatment. The remission rates were at 26% halfway through treatment (after the 10th session), 61% directly after treatment (after the 20th session), and increased to 78% at the 1-month follow-up. Importantly, the protocol proved to be feasible and highly tolerable in this patient population, with no adverse effects being reported. Considering these positive results, further research should focus on replicating these findings in larger clinical samples with control groups and longer follow-up periods, while potentially adding maintenance sessions to optimize the treatment effect and stability for bipolar disorder type II patients.

Do clinicians follow heuristics in prescribing antidepressants?

BACKGROUND

While clinicians commonly learn heuristics to guide antidepressant treatment selection, surveys suggest real-world prescribing practices vary widely. We aimed to determine the extent to which antidepressant prescriptions were consistent with commonly-advocated heuristics for treatment selection.

METHODS

This retrospective longitudinal cohort study examined electronic health records from psychiatry and non-psychiatry practice networks affiliated with two large academic medical centers between March 2008 and December 2017. Patients included 45,955 individuals with a major depressive disorder or depressive disorder not otherwise specified diagnosis who were prescribed at least one of 11 common antidepressant medications. Specific clinical features that may impact prescribing choices were extracted from coded data, and analyzed for association with index prescription in logistic regression models adjusted for sociodemographic variables and provider type.

RESULTS

Multiple clinical features yielded 10% or greater change in odds of prescribing, including overweight and underweight status and sexual dysfunction. These heuristics were generally applied similarly across hospital systems and psychiatrist and non-psychiatrist providers.

LIMITATIONS

These analyses rely on coded clinical data, which is likely to substantially underestimate prevalence of particular clinical features. Additionally, numerous other features that may impact prescribing choices are not able to be modeled.

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm the hypothesis that clinicians apply heuristics on the basis of clinical features to guide antidepressant prescribing, although the magnitude of these effects is modest, suggesting other patient- or clinician-level factors have larger effects.

FUNDING

This work was funded by NSF GRFP (grant no. DGE1745303), Harvard SEAS, the Center for Research on Computation and Society at Harvard, the Harvard Data Science Initiative, and a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (grant no. 1R01MH106577).

Vortioxetine in major depressive disorder: from mechanisms of action to clinical studies. An updated review

INTRODUCTION

Vortioxetine is a multimodal-acting antidepressant that provides improvements on cognitive function aside from antidepressants and anxiolytic effects. Vortioxetine has been found to be one of the most effective and best tolerated options for major depressive disorder (MDD) in head-to-head trials.

AREAS COVERED

The present review intends to gather the most relevant and pragmatic data of vortioxetine in MDD, specially focusing on new studies that emerged between 2015 and 2020.

EXPERT OPINION

Vortioxetine is the first antidepressant that has shown improvements both in depression and cognitive symptoms, due to the unique multimodal mechanism of action that combine the 5-HT reuptake inhibition with modulations of other key pre- and post-synaptic 5-HT receptors (agonism of 5-HT_1A receptor, partial agonism of 5-HT_1B receptor, and antagonism of 5-HT₃, 5-HT_1D and 5-HT₇ receptors). This new mechanism of action can explain the dose-dependent effect and can be responsible for its effects on cognitive functioning and improved tolerability profile. Potential analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties observed in preclinical studies as well as interesting efficacy and tolerability results of clinical studies with specific target groups render it a promising therapeutic option for patients with MDD and concomitant conditions (as menopause symptoms, pain, inflammation, apathy, sleep and/or metabolic abnormalities).

A retrospective analysis of bipolar depression treated with transcranial magnetic stimulation

INTRODUCTION

Treatment options are limited for patients with bipolar depression. Antidepressants added to mood stabilizers even carry risks of precipitating mixed/manic episodes. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) may provide a safe and effective option for these patients.

METHODS

Database analysis of the TMS Service at Sheppard Pratt Health System identified patients with bipolar disorder type I (BD1) or II (BD2) in a pure depressive phase at initiation of TMS. Records were reviewed for response and remission rates based on MADRS scores, time to effect, and adverse events, notably treatment-emergent affective switching. All had failed at least two prior treatments for depression, were currently on at least one mood stabilizer and off antidepressants. Stimulation parameters targeted left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: 120% motor threshold, 10 pulses per second (pps) × 4s, intertrain interval (ITI) 26s, 75 trains (37.5 min/session) for 3,000 pps total, 5 sessions/week for 30 total treatments, or until remission criteria were met.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients with BD were identified, representing 15% of the total TMS population. 77% of those who completed a course of TMS met response criteria, and 41% of subjects who completed at least 25 treatments met remission criteria. Subjects with BD1 were more likely to respond, remit, or suffer an adverse event than those with BD2. No patient met clinical criteria for a manic/mixed episode, but four (10%) discontinued due to concerns of activation.

CONCLUSIONS

TMS is effective in the bipolar depressed population where episode focused intervention can be specifically offered. Risk of psychomotor agitation must be closely monitored.

Pharmacological management of bipolar disorder: Japanese expert consensus

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to develop a consensus guideline by certified experts of the Japanese Society of Clinical Neuropsychopharmacology on the psychopharmacological treatment for bipolar disorders I and II (BP-I and BP-II), in order to fill the gap in the literature and provide more concrete guidance for challenging and controversial real-world situations.

METHODS

Experts were asked to assess treatment options regarding 19 clinical situations of bipolar disorder with a nine-point Likert scale (one = "disagree" and nine = "agree"). According to the responses from 119 experts, the options were categorized into the first-, second-, and third-line treatments.

RESULTS

For the treatment of BP-I, lithium monotherapy was categorized as a first-line treatment for manic episodes (mean ± standard deviation score, 7.0 ± 2.2), depressive episodes (7.1 ± 2.0), and the maintenance phase (7.8 ± 1.8). Combination therapy of lithium and an atypical antipsychotic was endorsed for manic episodes (7.7 ± 1.7), depressive episodes with (7.1 ± 2.0) and without mixed features (6.9 ± 2.2), and the maintenance phase (6.9 ± 2.1). Similarly, in BP-II, lithium monotherapy was categorized as a first-line treatment for hypomanic episodes (7.3 ± 2.2), depressive episodes (7.0 ± 2.2), and the maintenance phase (7.3 ± 2.3), while combination therapy of lithium and an atypical antipsychotic was recommended for hypomanic episodes (6.9 ± 2.4).No antipsychotic monotherapy or antidepressant treatment was categorized as a first-line treatment for any type of episode.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations reflect the current evidence and represent the experts' consensus on using lithium for the treatment of bipolar disorder. Clinicians should consider the effectiveness and adverse effects of antipsychotic and antidepressant medications for the treatment of bipolar disorder.

Switching antidepressants in the treatment of major depression: When, how and what to switch to?

BACKGROUND

Switching antidepressant medications is recommended when an initial antidepressant is not effective, when it is unable to be tolerated or when there are significant drug interactions. The aim of this paper is to review the evidence regarding when to switch antidepressants and the optimal approach to switching.

METHODS

Clinical and academic experts in mood disorders from Australia and New Zealand (Treatment Algorithm Group, TAG) met to discuss the key considerations regarding switching antidepressants in the treatment of depression and formulate recommendations about switching strategies.

RESULTS

While switching is recommended, there is limited data to guide on how best to approach switching antidepressants (e.g. whether to switch within class or out of class), and how to define the best time to consider switching. Broadly, switching within class after non-response is recommended for mild-moderate depression and out-of-class for patients with a more severe depression or melancholia.

LIMITATIONS

There is a limited evidence-base to draw on to make definitive recommendations on switching approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching antidepressants is an appropriate strategy to use if there is a minimal response to an initial antidepressant. Further research is required to determine the optimal switching approach.

Success and efficiency of phase 2/3 adjunctive trials for MDD funded by industry: a systematic review

To review the success rate and efficiency of industry-sponsored phase 2/3 clinical trials for adjunctive therapies for antidepressant partial- and non-responders with major depressive disorder (MDD), a systematic search of Pubmed/Medline was conducted, in addition to abstracts of major psychiatric meeting held since 2010, of randomized, placebo-controlled adjunct oral pharmacotherapy trials in this patient population. Forty-six (n = 33,900; 70 drug compactor arms) trials were pooled, yielding only three approved drugs. Twenty-two (31.4%) drug-placebo comparisons were successful. Numerically, success rates for treatment arms from studies with one versus more than one drug-placebo comparison were higher (39.3% versus 26.2%). The antidepressant lead-in employing single-blind placebo and the sequential-parallel comparison design (SPCD) were successful in 50% and 40% of cases, respectively. The direct randomization (no lead-in) design yielded positive results in one third of cases. The success rate of open-label antidepressant lead-ins without placebo or using double-blind placebo was very poor (<15%). There was also a pronounced discrepancy in terms of efficiency across study designs. Accounting for sample size requirements, a phase 3 program using SPCD would have a higher cumulative chance of yielding two positive trials (50%) than a phase 3 program using a single-blind placebo lead-in (40%). Future programs should carefully weigh the need for a lead-in, which is time-consuming, expensive and, in some cases (i.e., open-label antidepressant without placebo or with double-blind placebo) nearly futile. Instead, more effort should involve the use of studies where patients are directly randomized, such as the SPCD, with more investment shifted towards the accurate and independent vetting of subject eligibility.

Identification and characterization of proteins that are differentially expressed in adipose tissue of olanzapine-induced insulin resistance rat by iTRAQ quantitative proteomics

Olanzapine is commonly used to treat schizophrenia. However, long-term administration of olanzapine causes metabolic side effects, such as insulin resistance (IR), which seriously affects patients' quality of life. Both diagnostic and prognostic markers are urgently needed to increase patient compliance. We applied isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ) labeling combined with 2D LC/MS/MS technology to identify the differentially expressed proteins in olanzapine-induced IR rats. A total of 3194 proteins were identified from rat adipose tissues, and 270 differentially expressed proteins were screened out with a ratio threshold >1.5-fold or <0.67-fold. Based on a bioinformatics analysis and literature search, we selected six candidates (MYH1, MYL2, Cp, FABP4, apoA-IV, and Ywhaz) from a set of 270 proteins and verified these proteins by western blot; the expression of these proteins coincided with the LC-MS/MS results. Finally, the biological roles of FABP4 and apoA-IV, which are two novel IR-related proteins identified in the present study, were verified in 3T3-L1 cells. These data suggest that these two proteins acted on olanzapine-induced IR via the IRS-1/AKT signaling pathway. Our results provide a dataset of potential targets to explore the mechanism in olanzapine-induced IR and reveal the new roles of FABP4 and apoA-IV in olanzapine-induced IR. SIGNIFICANCE: The proteomic analysis of this study revealed the target associated with olanzapine-induced IR and provided relevant insights into the molecular functions, biological processes, and signaling pathways in these targets. Protein MYH1, MYL2, Cp, FABP4, apoA-IV, and Ywhaz may be potential biomarkers, and protein FABP4 and apoA-IV were considered as promising targets in olanzapineinduced IR. Therefore, if the performance of the proposed biomarkers is further confirmed, these proteins can provide powerful targets for exploring the mechanism of olanzapine-induced IR.

Psychiatric Diagnoses and Medications for Hurricane Harvey Sheltered Evacuees

To report on the diagnosis of and pharmacological services provided to 229 evacuees of Hurricane Harvey housed within a large convention center. Retrospective chart review of services rendered. Evacuees were primarily adults who presented with varied diagnoses, most commonly mood, anxiety and/or psychotic disorders. There was significant need for medications and psychosocial support to address preexisting conditions, as well as emerging problems (e.g., insomnia). Individuals presenting for pharmacological services following natural disasters may require medications to continue ongoing care, and/or treatment for insomnia. Therapists can provide direct intervention as well as identify those in need of further evaluation/intervention. Providers should be prepared with a fully stocked pharmacy, accessible but confidential location, and a pre-established method of record keeping.

Korean Medication Algorithm for Bipolar Disorder 2018: Comparisons with Other Treatment Guidelines

The objective of this study was to compare recommendations of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2018 (KMAP-BP 2018) with other recently published guidelines for treating bipolar disorder. We reviewed a total of five recently published global treatment guidelines and compared treatment recommendation of the KMAP-BP 2018 with those of other guidelines. For initial treatment of mania, there were no significant differences across treatment guidelines. All guidelines recommended mood stabilizer (MS) or atypical antipsychotic (AAP) monotherapy or a combination of an MS with an AAP as a first-line treatment strategy for mania. However, the KMAP-BP 2018 did not prefer monotherapy with MS or AAP for psychotic mania. Quetiapine, olanzapine and aripiprazole were the first-line AAPs for nearly all phases of bipolar disorder across guidelines. Most guidelines advocated newer AAPs as first-line treatment options for all phases while lamotrigine was recommended for depressive and maintenance phases. Lithium and valproic acid were commonly used as MSs in all phases of bipolar disorder. As research evidence accumulated over time, recommendations of newer AAPs (such as asenapine, cariprazine, paliperidone, lurasidine, long-acting injectable risperidone and aripiprazole once monthly) became prominent. KMAP-BP 2018 guidelines were similar to other guidelines, reflecting current changes in prescription patterns for bipolar disorder based on accumulated research data. Strong preference for combination therapy was characteristic of KMAP-BP 2018, predominantly in the treatment of psychotic mania and severe depression. Further studies were needed to address several issues identified in our review.

Chronic olanzapine administration causes metabolic syndrome through inflammatory cytokines in rodent models of insulin resistance

Olanzapine is a second-generation anti-psychotic drug used to prevent neuroinflammation in patients with schizophrenia. However, the long-term administration of olanzapine leads to insulin resistance (IR); the mechanisms of this effect remains poorly understood. Using cellular and rodent models of IR induced by olanzapine, we found that chronic olanzapine treatment induces differential inflammatory cytokine reactions in peripheral adipose and the central nervous system. Long-term treatment of olanzapine caused metabolic symptoms, including IR, by markedly elevating the plasma levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-1ß, IL-6, IL-8 and TNFα; these findings are consistent with observations from schizophrenia patients chronically treated with olanzapine. Our observations of differential inflammatory cytokine responses in white adipose tissues from the prefrontal cortex in the brain indicated cell type-specific effects of the drug. These cytokines induced IR by activating NF-kB through the suppression of IkBα. Functional blockade of the components p50/p65 of NF-kB rescued olanzapine-induced IR in NIH-3T3 L1-derived adipocytes. Our findings demonstrate that olanzapine induces inflammatory cytokine reactions in peripheral tissues without adversely affecting the central nervous system and suggest that chronic olanzapine treatment of schizophrenia patients may cause inflammation-mediated IR with minimal or no adverse effects in the brain.

The use of brexpiprazole amongst individuals with insufficient outcomes with aripiprazole or bupropion: A case series

PURPOSE

We sought to characterize the clinical experience of outpatients treated with brexpiprazole after achieving suboptimal outcomes with aripiprazole or bupropion as determined by the treating psychiatric provider.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Case series; inefficacy, intolerability, or other unsatisfactory outcome to previous trial with aripiprazole or bupropion.

FINDINGS

The majority of individuals in our sample exhibited tolerability of brexpiprazole. In addition, reduction in mean PHQ-9 scores was observed with brexpiprazole treatment.

IMPLICATIONS

The results of our preliminary analysis suggest that a subpopulation of adults who have insufficient outcomes on aripiprazole or bupropion due to intolerability, inefficacy or other unsatisfactory outcome may benefit by switching to brexpiprazole treatment. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed, as well as sophisticated network analysis to further understand efficacy and tolerability differences between atypical antipsychotics.

Consensus Recommendations for the Clinical Application of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) in the Treatment of Depression

OBJECTIVE

To provide expert recommendations for the safe and effective application of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD).

PARTICIPANTS

Participants included a group of 17 expert clinicians and researchers with expertise in the clinical application of rTMS, representing both the National Network of Depression Centers (NNDC) rTMS Task Group and the American Psychiatric Association Council on Research (APA CoR) Task Force on Novel Biomarkers and Treatments.

EVIDENCE

The consensus statement is based on a review of extensive literature from 2 databases (OvidSP MEDLINE and PsycINFO) searched from 1990 through 2016. The search terms included variants of major depressive disorder and transcranial magnetic stimulation. The results were limited to articles written in English that focused on adult populations. Of the approximately 1,500 retrieved studies, a total of 118 publications were included in the consensus statement and were supplemented with expert opinion to achieve consensus recommendations on key issues surrounding the administration of rTMS for MDD in clinical practice settings.

CONSENSUS PROCESS

In cases in which the research evidence was equivocal or unclear, a consensus decision on how rTMS should be administered was reached by the authors of this article and is denoted in the article as "expert opinion."

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple randomized controlled trials and published literature have supported the safety and efficacy of rTMS antidepressant therapy. These consensus recommendations, developed by the NNDC rTMS Task Group and APA CoR Task Force on Novel Biomarkers and Treatments, provide comprehensive information for the safe and effective clinical application of rTMS in the treatment of MDD.

Surveying Psychiatrists' Psychopharmacology Practices Across Common Clinical Scenarios

The practice of psychopharmacology has become increasingly complex with the expansion of medication options across psychiatric conditions. The level of variability among psychiatrists in their application of medication treatments has received little attention to date. We surveyed 111 psychiatrists attending one of two annual psychiatry meetings in 2017, asking whether they agreed or disagreed with statements about psychopharmacological approaches to 14 common clinical scenarios. High consistency was found for six scenarios, which generally reflected published treatment guidelines, and in recommending that their patients avoid using marijuana. However, low consistency was found for seven scenarios, particularly for statements addressing the use of benzodiazepines and antipsychotic medications. These statements of low consistency generally reflected contradictions or ambiguity across treatment guidelines. In comparison with male psychiatrists, female psychiatrists' responses revealed greater caution around use of medications with addictive potential. Responses to statements were not associated with psychiatrists' perceived adequacy of psychopharmacology training received during residency. Although psychiatrists have high consistency in some aspects of psychopharmacological practice, significant variability exists in important areas of medication use. The consistency of psychotropic medication prescribing may be improved through conducting practical clinical trials that address the existing evidence gaps and by developing educational materials targeting areas of prescriber disagreement.

Comparative evaluation of vortioxetine as a switch therapy in patients with major depressive disorder

Switching antidepressant therapy is a recommended strategy for depressed patients who neither respond to nor tolerate an initial pharmacotherapy course. This paper reviews the efficacy and tolerability of switching to vortioxetine. All three published studies of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) switched from SSRI/SNRI therapy to vortioxetine due to lack of efficacy or tolerability were selected. Vortioxetine was evaluated versus agomelatine directly (REVIVE) and versus sertraline, venlafaxine, bupropion, and citalopram in an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) from switch studies retrieved in a literature review. Vortioxetine׳s impact on SSRI-induced treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction (TESD) was assessed directly versus escitalopram (NCT01364649) in stable patients with MDD. Vortioxetine׳s tolerability in the switch population was compared to the overall MDD population. Vortioxetine showed significant benefits over agomelatine on efficacy, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes, with fewer withdrawals due to adverse events (AEs) (REVIVE). Vortioxetine had numerically higher remission rates versus all therapies included (ITC). Withdrawal rates due to AEs were significantly lower for vortioxetine versus sertraline, venlafaxine, and bupropion, and numerically lower versus citalopram. Switching to vortioxetine was statistically superior to escitalopram in improving TESD (NCT01364649). Tolerability was similar in the switch and overall MDD populations. These findings suggest that vortioxetine is an effective switch therapy for patients with MDD whose response to SSRI/SNRI therapy is inadequate. Vortioxetine was well tolerated and, for patients with a history of TESD, showed significant advantages versus escitalopram. Vortioxetine appears to be a valid option for patients with MDD who have not been effectively treated with first-line pharmacotherapies.

Effect of Antidepressant Switching vs Augmentation on Remission Among Patients With Major Depressive Disorder Unresponsive to Antidepressant Treatment: The VAST-D Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Less than one-third of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) achieve remission with their first antidepressant.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative effectiveness and safety of 3 common alternate treatments for MDD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From December 2012 to May 2015, 1522 patients at 35 US Veterans Health Administration medical centers who were diagnosed with nonpsychotic MDD, unresponsive to at least 1 antidepressant course meeting minimal standards for treatment dose and duration, participated in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 1 of 3 treatments and evaluated for up to 36 weeks.

INTERVENTIONS

Switch to a different antidepressant, bupropion (switch group, n = 511); augment current treatment with bupropion (augment-bupropion group, n = 506); or augment with an atypical antipsychotic, aripiprazole (augment-aripiprazole group, n = 505) for 12 weeks (acute treatment phase) and up to 36 weeks for longer-term follow-up (continuation phase).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was remission during the acute treatment phase (16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated [QIDS-C16] score ≤5 at 2 consecutive visits). Secondary outcomes included response (≥50% reduction in QIDS-C16 score or improvement on the Clinical Global Impression Improvement scale), relapse, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Among 1522 randomized patients (mean age, 54.4 years; men, 1296 [85.2%]), 1137 (74.7%) completed the acute treatment phase. Remission rates at 12 weeks were 22.3% (n = 114) for the switch group, 26.9% (n = 136)for the augment-bupropion group, and 28.9% (n = 146) for the augment-aripiprazole group. The augment-aripiprazole group exceeded the switch group in remission (relative risk [RR], 1.30 [95% CI, 1.05-1.60]; P = .02), but other remission comparisons were not significant. Response was greater for the augment-aripiprazole group (74.3%) than for either the switch group (62.4%; RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.09-1.29]) or the augment-bupropion group (65.6%; RR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.04-1.23]). No significant treatment differences were observed for relapse. Anxiety was more frequent in the 2 bupropion groups (24.3% in the switch group [n = 124] vs 16.6% in the augment-aripiprazole group [n = 84]; and 22.5% in augment-bupropion group [n = 114]). Adverse effects more frequent in the augment-aripiprazole group included somnolence, akathisia, and weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among a predominantly male population with major depressive disorder unresponsive to antidepressant treatment, augmentation with aripiprazole resulted in a statistically significant but only modestly increased likelihood of remission during 12 weeks of treatment compared with switching to bupropion monotherapy. Given the small effect size and adverse effects associated with aripiprazole, further analysis including cost-effectiveness is needed to understand the net utility of this approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01421342.

Adjunctive Brexpiprazole as a Novel Effective Strategy for Treating Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Brexpiprazole was approved for adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in 2015. Because only a small number of randomized controlled trials have investigated the use of brexpiprazole in MDD, we performed a meta-analysis.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

We systematically searched literatures in PubMed, Cochrane Library database, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov up to January 2016. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in total Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score from baseline. Secondary efficacy measures were the mean change in total Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (17 items) score from baseline and the response (≥50% reduction in MADRS total score) and remission (MADRS total score ≤ 10 with ≥50% reduction) rates.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

Four studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Brexpiprazole showed superior efficacy over placebo with effect sizes (mean differences) of -1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.45 to -1.07) for MADRS and -1.21 (95% CI, -1.71 to -0.72) for the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The risk ratios for response and remission were 1.57 (95% CI, 1.29-1.91) and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.22-1.96), respectively. The incidences of discontinuation due to adverse events, akathisia, and weight increase were higher in the brexpiprazole group than in the placebo group, with risk ratios of 3.44 (95% CI, 1.52-7.80), 3.39 (95% CI, 2.08-5.51), and 4.36 (95% CI, 2.45-7.77), respectively, and the incidence of akathisia was related to the brexpiprazole dose.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Although our results suggest that brexpiprazole could be an effective adjunctive agent for MDD, they should be cautiously translated into clinical practice because the meta-analysis was based on only a handful of randomized controlled trials.

Attitudes toward antipsychotic treatment among patients with bipolar disorders and their clinicians: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Antipsychotics are recommended as first-line therapy for acute mania and maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder; however, published literature suggests their real-world use remains limited. Understanding attitudes toward these medications may help identify barriers and inform personalized therapy. This literature review evaluated patient and clinician attitudes toward the use of antipsychotics for treating bipolar disorder.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews identified English language articles published between January 1, 2000, and June 15, 2016, that reported attitudinal data from patients, health care professionals, or caregivers; treatment decision-making; or patient characteristics that predicted antipsychotic use for bipolar disorder. Results were analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

Of the 209 references identified, 11 met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated. These articles provided attitudinal information from 1,418 patients with bipolar disorder and 1,282 treating clinicians. Patients' attitudes toward antipsychotics were generally positive. Longer duration of clinical stability was associated with positive attitudes. Implementation of psychoeducational and adherence enhancement strategies could improve patient attitudes. Limited data suggest clinicians' perceptions of antipsychotic efficacy and tolerability may have the greatest impact on their prescribing patterns. Because the current real-world evidence base is inadequate, clinician attitudes may reflect a relative lack of experience using antipsychotics in patients with bipolar disorder.

CONCLUSION

Although data are very limited, perceived tolerability and efficacy concerns shape both patient and clinician attitudes toward use of antipsychotic drugs in bipolar disorder. Additional studies are warranted.

Abandoning personalization to get to precision in the pharmacotherapy of depression

Effectiveness studies and analyses of naturalistic cohorts demonstrate that many patients with major depressive disorder do not experience symptomatic remission with antidepressant treatments. In an effort to better match patients with effective treatments, numerous investigations of predictors or moderators of treatment response have been reported over the past five decades, including clinical features as well as biological measures. However, none of these have entered routine clinical practice; instead, clinicians typically personalize treatment on the basis of patient preferences as well as their own. Here, we review the reasons why it has been challenging to identify and deploy treatment-specific predictors of response, and suggest strategies that may be required to achieve true precision in the pharmacotherapy of depression. We emphasize the need for changes in how depression care is delivered, measured, and used to inform future practice.

Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation with quetiapine in treating bipolar II depression: a randomized, double-blinded, control study

The clinical and cognitive responses to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in bipolar II depressed patients remain unclear. In this study, thirty-eight bipolar II depressed patients were randomly assigned into three groups: (i) left high-frequency (n = 12), (ii) right low-frequency (n = 13), (iii) sham stimulation (n = 13), and underwent four-week rTMS with quetiapine concomitantly. Clinical efficacy was evaluated at baseline and weekly intervals using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Cognitive functioning was assessed before and after the study with the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), Stroop Word-Color Interference Test (Stroop), and Trail Making Test (TMT). Thirty-five patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, the mean scores of both the HDRS-17 and the MADRS significantly decreased over the 4-week trial, which did not differ among the three groups. Exploratory analyses revealed no differences in factor scores of HDRS-17s, or in response or remission rates. Scores of WCST, Stroop, or TMT did not differ across the three groups. These findings indicated active rTMS combined with quetiapine was not superior to quetiapine monotherapy in improving depressive symptoms or cognitive performance in patients with bipolar II depression.

RISK OF NEW ONSET TYPE II DM IN MDD PATIENTS RECEIVING SECOND-GENERATION ANTIPSYCHOTICS TREATMENT: A NATIONWIDE COHORT STUDY

BACKGROUND

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) augmentation treatment has showed better efficacy in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). However, the association between SGA and diabetes mellitus (DM) in MDD patients deserves further investigation. The study aimed to examine the risk of new onset type II DM in MDD patients receiving SGA treatment.

METHODS

From the Psychiatric Inpatient Medical Claim Dataset, MDD patients treated with SGA continuously for more than 8 weeks were analyzed in a 1:1 propensity score matched pair sample to 1,049 patients that had never been treated with SGA. Patients were followed up to 5 years based on ICD-9 CM codes indicating incident type II DM. Cumulative incidences of type II DM were calculated and the Cox proportional hazards model with competing risk was applied to determine the risk factors for type II DM onset.

RESULTS

Cumulative incidences of new-onset type II DM between the two groups were similar. Use of SGA showed no significant increase in risk for new-onset type II DM (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.898; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.605-1.334; P-value = 0.596). Increased risk for type II DM was shown to be associated with aging (per year) (HR = 1.039; 95% CI, 1.026-1.053; P-value < 0.001) and history of hyperlipidemia (HR = 2.323; 95% CI, 1.469-3.675; P-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicated that there is no significant difference in the risk of developing type II DM between MDD patients with and without SGA exposure. More studies focused on the benefit-risk assessment of SGA treatment in patients with MDD are warranted.

Atypical Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Acute Bipolar Depression with Mixed Features: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Evidence supporting the use of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in the treatment of acute depression with mixed features (MFs) associated with bipolar disorder (BD) is scarce and equivocal. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and preliminary meta-analysis investigating SGAs in the treatment of acute BD depression with MFs. Two authors independently searched major electronic databases from 1990 until September 2015 for randomized (placebo-) controlled trials (RCTs) or open-label clinical trials investigating the efficacy of SGAs in the treatment of acute bipolar depression with MFs. A random-effect meta-analysis calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) between SGA and placebo for the mean baseline to endpoint change in depression as well as manic symptoms score was computed based on 95% confidence intervals (CI). Six RCTs and one open-label placebo-controlled studies (including post-hoc reports) representing 1023 patients were included. Participants received either ziprasidone, olanzapine, lurasidone, quetiapine or asenapine for an average of 6.5 weeks across the included studies. Meta-analysis with Duval and Tweedie adjustment for publication bias demonstrated that SGA resulted in significant improvements of (hypo-)manic symptoms of bipolar mixed depression as assessed by the means of the total scores of the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) (SMD −0.74, 95% CI −1.20 to −0.28, n SGA = 907, control = 652). Meta-analysis demonstrated that participants in receipt of SGA (n = 979) experienced a large improvement in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores (SMD −1.08, 95% CI −1.35 to −0.81, p < 0.001) vs. placebo (n = 678). Publication and measurement biases and relative paucity of studies. Overall, SGAs appear to offer favorable improvements in MADRS and YMRS scores vs. placebo. Nevertheless, given the preliminary nature of the present report, additional original studies are required to allow more reliable and clinically definitive conclusions.

Personalizing supportive care in oncology patients using pharmacogenetic-driven treatment pathways

Cancer patients frequently suffer from disease- and treatment-related pain, nausea and depression, which severely reduces patients' quality of life. It is critical that clinicians are aware of drug-gene interactions and recognize the utility of applying pharmacogenetic information to personalize and improve supportive care. Pharmacogenetic-based algorithms may enhance clinical outcomes by allowing the clinician to select the 'least genetically vulnerable' drug. This review summarizes clinically relevant drug-gene interactions and presents pharmacogenetic-driven treatment pathways for depression, nausea/vomiting and pain. Ideally, this review provides a resource for clinicians to consult when selecting pharmacotherapy for a patient who presents with limited pharmacogenetic test results, with the hope of better controlling burdensome symptoms and improving the quality of life for cancer patients.