Remission in major depression: results from a geriatric primary care population

Treatment-resistant depression: definition, prevalence, detection, management, and investigational interventions

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is common and associated with multiple serious public health implications. A consensus definition of TRD with demonstrated predictive utility in terms of clinical decision-making and health outcomes does not currently exist. Instead, a plethora of definitions have been proposed, which vary significantly in their conceptual framework. The absence of a consensus definition hampers precise estimates of the prevalence of TRD, and also belies efforts to identify risk factors, prevention opportunities, and effective interventions. In addition, it results in heterogeneity in clinical practice decision-making, adversely affecting quality of care. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have adopted the most used definition of TRD (i.e., inadequate response to a minimum of two antidepressants despite adequacy of the treatment trial and adherence to treatment). It is currently estimated that at least 30% of persons with depression meet this definition. A significant percentage of persons with TRD are actually pseudo-resistant (e.g., due to inadequacy of treatment trials or non-adherence to treatment). Although multiple sociodemographic, clinical, treatment and contextual factors are known to negatively moderate response in persons with depression, very few factors are regarded as predictive of non-response across multiple modalities of treatment. Intravenous ketamine and intranasal esketamine (co-administered with an antidepressant) are established as efficacious in the management of TRD. Some second-generation antipsychotics (e.g., aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, quetiapine XR) are proven effective as adjunctive treatments to antidepressants in partial responders, but only the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination has been studied in FDA-defined TRD. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is established as effective and FDA-approved for individuals with TRD, with accelerated theta-burst TMS also recently showing efficacy. Electroconvulsive therapy is regarded as an effective acute and maintenance intervention in TRD, with preliminary evidence suggesting non-inferiority to acute intravenous ketamine. Evidence for extending antidepressant trial, medication switching and combining antidepressants is mixed. Manual-based psychotherapies are not established as efficacious on their own in TRD, but offer significant symptomatic relief when added to conventional antidepressants. Digital therapeutics are under study and represent a potential future clinical vista in this population.

Comparison of Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Esketamine Nasal Spray Plus Oral Antidepressant in Younger Versus Older Patients With Treatment-Resistant Depression: Post-Hoc Analysis of SUSTAIN-2, a Long-Term Open-Label Phase 3 Safety and Efficacy Study

BACKGROUND

Older, compared with younger, patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) typically have lower response and remission rates with poorer tolerability to antidepressant treatment. This post-hoc analysis compared outcomes following treatment with esketamine nasal spray (ESK) between younger (18-64 years) and older (≥65 years) patients with TRD.

METHODS

SUSTAIN-2, an up to 1-year open-label safety and efficacy study of ESK plus an oral antidepressant, included patients with TRD either directly enrolled (≥18-year) or transferred from a phase 3 double-blind study, TRANSFORM-3 (≥65-year). Patients were treated in two phases: 4-week induction and 48-week optimization/maintenance.

RESULTS

Younger (n = 624) and older (n = 178) patients had similar baseline characteristics except for hypertension history (21.5% versus 48.3%, respectively). Patients (younger versus older) had similar mean baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores and mean (SD) reductions in MADRS total scores for induction (-18.0 [7.19] versus -18.1 [9.37]; p = 0.492 [t = 0.69, df = 701]) and optimization/maintenance (week 12) (-19.9 [7.03] versus -22.2 [9.50]; p = 0.265 [t = -1.12, df = 3470]) phases. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported in younger versus older patients, respectively, were: induction, 86.1% versus 74.8%; optimization/maintenance, 86.8% versus 81.0%; serious TEAEs: induction, 2.2% versus 1.9%; optimization/maintenance, 6.7% versus 4.8%; TEAEs of increased blood pressure: induction, 6.9% versus 6.5%; optimization/maintenance, 7.1% versus 9.5%; and falls: induction, 0.3% versus 0.6%; optimization/maintenance, 0.2% versus 0.8%. Cognitive tests did not show clinically meaningful differences between the age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited by the open-label design of SUSTAIN-2, this post-hoc analysis showed generally comparable improvement in depression between ESK-treated younger and older adult patients with TRD, with consistent safety outcomes.

What is the short-term remission rate for people with untreated depression? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Depression is one of the prevalent mental illnesses and leading cause of global disease burden. However, most people with depression do not access treatment. Remission without treatment may occur in some cases of depression. This study aimed to estimate the short-term remission (natural recovery) from untreated depression.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO and conducted following PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched, supplemented with an additional hand search to identify studies reporting natural recovery from untreated depression. Study selection and screening were carried out by three independent reviewers. Methodological quality assessment of the included studies was conducted. Remission was defined as no longer meeting the diagnostic criteria or scoring below the cut off points of the validated tools as reported by the included studies. The data were synthesized using narrative summary and random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Sixteen waitlist-controlled trial studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The duration of follow-up ranged from 4 to 12 weeks with a median duration of 8 weeks. The overall pooled remission from untreated depression was 12.5%, 95% confidence interval (7.8, 18.0%). Due to lack of published data, we were unable to determine if the severity of depression symptoms was associated with remission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term remission from depression without treatment is uncommon. Across studies, 8 - 18% of people remitted without treatment within 12 weeks. Waitlist control groups may not represent all persons with depression.

An Evaluation of the Clinical and Economic Burden Among Older Adult Medicare-Covered Beneficiaries With Treatment-Resistant Depression

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical and economic burden of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) among older adult patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) to non-TRD MDD and non-MDD patients.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study using 5% Medicare data (January 1, 2012-December 31, 2015) for MDD patients aged ≥65 years who were defined as TRD if they received ≥2 antidepressant treatments in the current episode. MDD patients not meeting TRD criteria were deemed non-TRD MDD; those without an MDD diagnosis were categorized as non-MDD. All were required to have continuous health plan enrollment for ≥6 months pre- and ≥12 months postindex date (index: first antidepressant claim/random [non-MDD]). Three cohorts were matched, and generalized linear and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare medication use, healthcare resource utilization, costs, and risks of initial hospitalization and readmission ≤30 days postdischarge from initial hospitalization.

RESULTS

After matching, 178 patients from each cohort were analyzed. During 12 months of follow-up, TRD patients had higher use of different antidepressants and antipsychotics, higher inpatient and emergency room visits, longer inpatient stays, and higher total healthcare costs ($24,543 versus $16,059, $8,058) than non-TRD MDD and non-MDD cohorts, respectively (all p <0.05). Risk of initial hospitalization was higher in the TRD (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.08-6.23) and non-TRD MDD cohorts (HR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.02-3.25) than the non-MDD cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden of MDD among older adult Medicare beneficiaries is substantial, and even greater among those with TRD compared to non-TRD MDD, demonstrating the need for more effective treatments than those currently available.

Predictors of treatment outcome in depression in later life: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Predictor analyses of late-life depression can be used to identify variables associated with outcomes of treatments, and hence ways of tailoring specific treatments to patients. The aim of this review was to systematically identify, review and meta-analyse predictors of outcomes of any type of treatment for late-life depression.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and PsycINFO were searched for studies published up to December 2016. Primary and secondary studies reported treatment predictors from randomised controlled trials of any treatment for patients with major depressive disorder aged over 60 were included. Treatment outcomes included response, remission and change in depression score.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Of 65 identified statistically significant predictors, only 7 were reported in at least 3 studies. Of these, 5 were included in meta-analyses, and only 3 were statistically significant. Most studies were rated as being of moderate to strong quality and satisfied key quality criteria for predictor analyses.

LIMITATIONS

The searches were limited to randomised controlled trials and most of the included studies were secondary analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline depression severity, co-morbid anxiety, executive dysfunction, current episode duration, early improvement, physical illnesses and age were reported as statistically significant predictors of treatment outcomes. Only the first three were significant in meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses showed differences in predictor effect between biological and psychosocial treatment. However, high heterogeneity and small study numbers suggest a cautious interpretation of results. These predictors were associated with various mechanisms including brain pathophysiology, perceived social support and proposed distinct types of depressive disorder. Further investigation of the clinical utility of these predictors is suggested.

Directions for Effectiveness Research to Improve Health Services for Late-Life Depression in the United States

Considerable progress has been made in the treatment of late-life depression over the past 20 years, yet considerable gaps in care remain. Gaps in care are particularly pronounced for older men, certain racial and ethnic minority groups, and those with comorbid medical or mental disorders. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature and conducted interviews with experts in late-life depression to identify promising directions for effectiveness research to address these gaps in care. We searched the PubMed, PsychInfo, and CINHAL databases between January 1, 1998, through August 31, 2013, using terms related to late-life depression and any of the following: epidemiology, services organization, economics of care, underserved groups including health disparities, impact on caregivers, and interventions. The results of this selective review supplemented by more current recommendations from national experts highlight three priority research areas to improve health services for late-life depression: focusing on the unique needs of the patient through patient-centered care and culturally sensitive care, involving caregivers outside the traditional clinical care team, and involving alternate settings of care. We build on these results to offer five recommendations for future effectiveness research that hold considerable potential to advance intervention and health services development for late-life depression.

Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems

BACKGROUND

Common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, are estimated to affect up to 15% of the UK population at any one time, and health care systems worldwide need to implement interventions to reduce the impact and burden of these conditions. Collaborative care is a complex intervention based on chronic disease management models that may be effective in the management of these common mental health problems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of collaborative care for patients with depression or anxiety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to February 2012: The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) trials registers (CCDANCTR-References and CCDANCTR-Studies) which include relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE (1950 to present), EMBASE (1974 to present), PsycINFO (1967 to present) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, all years); the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP); ClinicalTrials.gov; and CINAHL (to November 2010 only). We screened the reference lists of reports of all included studies and published systematic reviews for reports of additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of collaborative care for participants of all ages with depression or anxiety.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent researchers extracted data using a standardised data extraction sheet. Two independent researchers made 'Risk of bias' assessments using criteria from The Cochrane Collaboration. We combined continuous measures of outcome using standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We combined dichotomous measures using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seventy-nine RCTs (including 90 relevant comparisons) involving 24,308 participants in the review. Studies varied in terms of risk of bias.The results of primary analyses demonstrated significantly greater improvement in depression outcomes for adults with depression treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.27; RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.43), medium-term (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.15; RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.48), and long-term (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.24; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.41). However, these significant benefits were not demonstrated into the very long-term (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27).The results also demonstrated significantly greater improvement in anxiety outcomes for adults with anxiety treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.17; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.87), medium-term (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.19; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.69), and long-term (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.06; RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.42). No comparisons examined the effects of the intervention on anxiety outcomes in the very long-term.There was evidence of benefit in secondary outcomes including medication use, mental health quality of life, and patient satisfaction, although there was less evidence of benefit in physical quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care is associated with significant improvement in depression and anxiety outcomes compared with usual care, and represents a useful addition to clinical pathways for adult patients with depression and anxiety.