A randomized, double-blind, duloxetine-referenced study comparing efficacy and tolerability of 2 fixed doses of vortioxetine in the acute treatment of adults with MDD

Vortioxetine for depression in adults: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent psychiatric condition and vortioxetine offers promising antidepressant effects due to its unique pharmacological profile. However, the dose-response relationships of vortioxetine for MDD is not well established. We aimed to conduct dose-response meta-analyses to fill this gap.

METHODS

We systematically searched multiple electronic databases for randomized controlled trials of vortioxetine for MDD, with the last search conducted on 08 February, 2024. The dose-response relationship was evaluated using a one-stage random-effects dose-response meta-analysis with restricted cubic spline model. The primary outcome was efficacy (mean change in depression scale score), with secondary outcomes including response, dropout for any reasons (acceptability), dropout for adverse events (tolerability), and any adverse events (safety).

RESULTS

The dose-response meta-analysis comprised 16 studies, with 4,294 participants allocated to the vortioxetine group and 2,299 participants allocated to the placebo group. The estimated 50% effective dose was 4.37 mg/day, and the near-maximal effective dose (95% effective dose) was 17.93 mg/day. Visual inspection of the dose-efficacy curve suggests that a plateau possibly had not been reached yet at 20 mg/day. Acceptability, tolerability and safety decreased as the dose increased. Subgroup analysis indicated that no significant differences were observed in acceptability, tolerability and safety among the dosage groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine may potentially provide additional therapeutic benefits when exceeding the current licensed dosage without significantly impacting safety. Conducting clinical trials exceeding the current approved dosage appears necessary to fully comprehend its efficacy and risk.

The Role of Vortioxetine in the Treatment of Depressive Symptoms in General Hospital Psychiatry: A Case-Series and PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Review of the Literature

Depressive symptoms are a customary finding in hospitalized patients, particularly those who are undergoing long hospitalizations, underwent major surgical procedures or suffer from high levels of multimorbidity and frailty. The patients included in this case series shared high degrees of frailty-complexity and were evaluated within the ordinary consultation and liaison psychiatry service of the University Hospital in Pisa, Italy, from September 2021 to June 2023. Patients were administered at least one follow-up evaluation after a week and before discharge. To relate this case series to the extant literature, a comprehensive systematic review of vortioxetine safety and efficacy was performed. None of the six patients included developed serious safety issues, but one patient complained of mild-to-moderate nausea for some days after the vortioxetine introduction. Five out of six patients exhibited at least a slight clinical benefit as measured by the clinical global impression scale. Of the 858 entries screened via Scopus and Medline/PubMed, a total of 134 papers were included in our review. The present case series provides preliminary evidence for vortioxetine's safety in this healthcare domain. The literature reviewed in this paper seems to endorse a promising safety profile and a very peculiar efficacy niche for vortioxetine in consultation and liaison psychiatry.

Clinical benefits of vortioxetine 20 mg/day in patients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Vortioxetine has demonstrated dose-dependent efficacy in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), with the greatest effect observed with vortioxetine 20 mg/day. This analysis further explored the clinical relevance of the more rapid and greater improvement in depressive symptoms observed with vortioxetine 20 mg/day vs 10 mg/day.

METHODS

Analysis of pooled data from six short-term (8-week), randomized, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose studies of vortioxetine 20 mg/day in patients with MDD (N = 2620). Symptomatic response (≥50% decrease in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] total score), sustained symptomatic response, and remission (MADRS total score ≤10) were assessed by vortioxetine dosage (20 or 10 mg/day).

RESULTS

After 8 weeks, 51.4% of patients receiving vortioxetine 20 mg/day had achieved symptomatic response vs 46.0% of those receiving vortioxetine 10 mg/day (P < .05). Significantly more patients achieved symptomatic response vs placebo from week 2 onwards for vortioxetine 20 mg/day and from week 6 onwards for vortioxetine 10 mg/day (both P ≤ .05). Sustained response was achieved from week 4 for 26.0% of patients receiving vortioxetine 20 mg/day vs 19.1% of those receiving vortioxetine 10 mg/day (P < .01), increasing to 36.0% and 29.8%, respectively, over the 8-week treatment period (P < .05). At week 8, 32.0% of patients receiving vortioxetine 20 mg/day were in remission vs 28.2% of those receiving vortioxetine 10 mg/day (P = .09). Rates of adverse events and treatment withdrawal were not increased during the week following vortioxetine dose up-titration to 20 mg/day.

CONCLUSION

Vortioxetine 20 mg/day provides more rapid and more sustained symptomatic response than vortioxetine 10 mg/day in patients with MDD, without compromising tolerability.

Εfficacy and safety of vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) in the treatment of adult patients with major depressive disorder: A systematic review and a meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials

Vortioxetine is a novel drug for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). It has been reported that vortioxetine exhibits positive effect on the acute stage of MDD, while it can effectively prevent the recurrence of MDD during the maintenance period. Currently, the results of systematic reviews on vortioxetine are insufficient since several efficacy measures, such as the 24-Items Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HADRS-24) total score and other safety factors have not been evaluated. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different doses of vortioxetine on the treatment of adult patients with MDD via assessing more efficacy and safety indicators. The clinical, double-blind, parallel and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effect of vortioxetine on MDD were retrieved from PubMed\Medline, EBSCO, Embase, Cochrane Library, OVID, Web of Science and clinical trial registration websites from database inception to November 2022. A total of two investigators independently screened the included references and independently evaluated their quality. The meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.0 software. The present systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42018106343). In the present study 11 RCTs were included, with a total of 4,908 adult patients with MDD. More specifically, 1,158 patients were included in the 5-mg vortioxetine group, 736 in the 10-mg group, 298 in the 15-mg group, 864 in the 20-mg group and 1,852 in the placebo group. All 11 studies were randomized, double-blinded and parallel control trials, and all publications were evaluated as high quality. The meta-analysis results showed that patients in the 5-, 10- and 20-mg vortioxetine groups exhibited significantly higher Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) response (≥50%) and remission (≤10%) rates compared with the placebo group (P<0.05). The pooled analysis also revealed a statistically significant change in the total score of HADRS-24, MADRS, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement (CGI-I) and HADRS-24 response rate in the 10- and 20-mg vortioxetine groups compared with the placebo group (P<0.05). However, no statistically significant changes in the total score of HADRS-24, MADRS, SDS, CGI-I and HADRS-24 response rate were obtained in the 5-mg group compared with the placebo group (P>0.05). Furthermore, the most common adverse events were nausea, hyperhidrosis, insomnia and vomiting, the incidence of which was increased with higher doses of vortioxetine. Overall, the results suggested that vortioxetine administration at doses of 5-20 mg was significantly effective and safe compared with placebo in the treatment of MDD. However, 5 mg vortioxetine displayed no difference in the HADRS-24, MADRS, SDS and CGI-I total scores, and HADRS-24 response rate. Furthermore, patient treatment with increasing vortioxetine doses was associated with good tolerance and high safety. Nevertheless, more multi-center, high-quality and long-term RCTs are still needed to support the aforementioned findings.

Vortioxetine in patients with major depressive disorder and high levels of anxiety symptoms: An updated analysis of efficacy and tolerability

BACKGROUND

Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often experience comorbid anxiety symptoms. Vortioxetine has demonstrated efficacy in treating anxiety symptoms in patients with MDD; however, efficacy and tolerability have not been assessed across the entire approved dosage range.

METHODS

The efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine 5-20 mg/day were assessed in patients with MDD and high levels of anxiety symptoms (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [HAM-A] total score ≥ 20) using pooled data from four randomized, fixed-dose, placebo-controlled studies (n = 842). Data from a randomized, double-blind study of vortioxetine 10-20 mg/day versus agomelatine 25-50 mg/day in patients with an inadequate response to prior therapy (n = 299) were analyzed separately. Mean changes from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), HAM-A, and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total scores were analyzed by vortioxetine dosage.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis of fixed-dose studies demonstrated a clear dose-response relationship for vortioxetine 5-20 mg/day for improvements in MADRS, HAM-A, and SDS total scores. Vortioxetine 20 mg/day demonstrated significant effects versus placebo from week 4 onwards. In the post-hoc analysis of the active-controlled study in patients with an inadequate response to prior therapy, vortioxetine 10-20 mg/day was superior to agomelatine across all outcome measures from week 4 onwards. Up-titration of vortioxetine to 20 mg/day was not associated with an increase in adverse events.

LIMITATIONS

Short-term trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine is efficacious and well tolerated in patients with MDD and high levels of anxiety symptoms, including those with an inadequate response to prior therapy. The greatest therapeutic benefits were observed with vortioxetine 20 mg/day.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01140906, NCT01153009, NCT01163266, NCT01255787, NCT01488071.

Long-term safety and efficacy, including anhedonia, of vortioxetine for major depressive disorder: findings from two open-label studies

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of vortioxetine in the management of major depressive disorder (MDD) in two open-label one-year studies, including a post-hoc analysis of its effects on symptoms related to anhedonia.

METHODS

Both studies were 52-week, open-label, flexible-dose extension studies to evaluate the safety and efficacy of vortioxetine in adult patients with MDD following prior double-blind studies. Patients in the first study (NCT00761306) were flexibly treated with vortioxetine 5 or 10 mg/day (N = 74), and patients in the second study (NCT01323478) received vortioxetine 15 or 20 mg/day (N = 71).

RESULTS

The safety and tolerability profile of vortioxetine was similar between the two studies; treatment-emergent adverse events with the highest incidence were nausea, dizziness, headache, and nasopharyngitis. Across both studies, improvements achieved during the preceding double-blind studies period were maintained, and additional improvements were observed with open-label treatment. Patients showed a mean ± SD reduction (improvement) in Montgomery and Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from open-label baseline to Week 52 of 4.3 ± 9.2 points in the 5-10 mg study, and 10.9 ± 10.0 in the 15-20 mg study. Post-hoc MMRM analyses of MADRS anhedonia factor scores also showed continued improvements over long-term treatment; patients showed a mean ± SE reduction from an open-label baseline to Week 52 of 3.10 ± 0.57 points in the 5-10 mg study, and 5.62 ± 0.60 in the 15-20 mg study.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from both studies confirm the safety and efficacy of flexibly dosed vortioxetine over 52 weeks of treatment and demonstrate that MADRS anhedonia factor scores continue to improve with long-term maintenance treatment.

Vortioxetine 20 mg/day in patients with major depressive disorder: updated analysis of efficacy, safety, and optimal timing of dose adjustment

BACKGROUND

Analysis of efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine 20 mg/day, and optimal timing of dose adjustment, in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Pooled analysis of six randomized, fixed-dose studies of vortioxetine 5 to 20 mg/day. Mean change from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score was analyzed by vortioxetine dose using a mixed model for repeated measures. Tolerability was assessed over the 8-week treatment period and from day 8 (ie, following dose increase to 20 mg/day). Data from three randomized, flexible-dose studies were examined for frequency and timing of dose adjustment.

RESULTS

A clear dose-response relationship for vortioxetine was confirmed in terms of improvement in MADRS total score. Significant differences vs placebo were seen for vortioxetine 20 mg/day from week 2 onwards; vortioxetine 10 mg did not separate from placebo until week 4. At week 8, mean change in MADRS total score from baseline was significantly greater for vortioxetine 20 mg/day vs 10 mg/day (difference, -1.03 points; P < .05). Incidence of adverse events was not increased in patients who received vortioxetine 20 mg/day vs 10 mg/day. In flexible-dose studies, dosage was increased to 20 mg/day after 1 week in 48.0% of patients; final dosage was 20 mg/day in 64.3% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine 20 mg is significantly more effective than vortioxetine 10 mg in patients with MDD, with a similar tolerability profile. In flexible-dose studies, almost half of all patients received 20 mg/day after 1 week and two-thirds received 20 mg/day as their final dosage.

The clinical utility of newer antidepressant agents: Understanding the role in management of MDD

Whereas MDD is characterized in part by changes in mood, other symptoms can also cause significant impairment, including sexual dysfunction, cognitive impairment, and fatigue. Newer antidepressants are explored with the goal of more optimally treating these non–mood-related symptoms of MDD. The 3 oral antidepressants that have been FDA-approved most recently include vortioxetine, vilazodone, and levomilnacipran. Unique features of these antidepressants are explored through 3 patient cases.

Efficacy and safety of vortioxetine in treatment of patients with major depressive disorder and common co-morbid physical illness

BACKGROUND

The multimodal antidepressant vortioxetine is effective in reducing somatic symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), but little is known about its effects in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with common comorbid physical illnesses.

METHODS

This was a pooled analysis of 13 randomized, placebo-controlled trials which evaluated the efficacy (using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS]) and safety of vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day) in adult patients with MDD. We evaluated stable somatic comorbid conditions that were verified by a diagnosis and had sufficient database representation.

RESULTS

Of the 5982 patients included in the database, 963 (16.1%) patients had a diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, 152 (2.5%) had diabetes mellitus and 26 (0.4%) had chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD). At Week 8, adjusted mean[95%CI] treatment differences (vortioxetine vs. placebo) on MADRS total scores were -2.7[-4.2, -1.3] (p = 0.0002) points for the cardiovascular disease, -4.0[-7.7, -0.4] (p = 0.03) for the diabetes, and -6.2[-21.3, 8.9] (p = 0.36) for the COPD groups. The rate and pattern of adverse events were similar across the sub-groups with comorbidities and was consistent with that expected for vortioxetine treatment.

LIMITATIONS

The primary studies were not designed to investigate the relationship between vortioxetine and comorbidities, nor were the post hoc analyses powered to detect group differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MDD and comorbid cardiovascular disease or diabetes respond to vortioxetine in a similar way to the broader MDD population. Vortioxetine was generally safe and well tolerated and without unexpected adverse events in these subpopulations, most of whom are taking multiple concomitant medications.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Vortioxetine for the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in Adults

Objective

We aimed to compare the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of vortioxetine in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) in adults.

Method

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), and www.ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials that examined vortioxetine vs. placebo or other antidepressants for the treatment of MDD from database inception to August 30, 2021, using keywords Vortioxetine, Brintellix, Trintellix, LuAA21004, major depressive disorder, mood disorder, affective disorder, and MDD. We identified 789 publications after removing duplicates. After screening, 20 eligible randomized controlled trials were identified, of which 19 were included in the final meta-analysis. We included adults (aged 18 years and older) with a primary diagnosis of MDD. Two review authors independently selected the studies and extracted data. We extracted data on study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability. Analyses were performed using random-effects models, and outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs).

Results

In total, 20 studies (8,547 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Vortioxetine outperformed the placebo in efficacy outcomes, including response (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.23-1.48; P < 0.001), remission (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.17-1.52; P < 0.001), and cognitive function (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.16-0.52; P = 0.0003). Compared with the serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), vortioxetine had better tolerability (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86-0.94; P < 0.001) but no significant difference in response (RR 0.91, 95%CI 0.82-1.00; P = 0.06) or remission (RR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.81-1.20, P = 0.88). Vortioxetine had no difference in response (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.88-1.32; P = 0.46), remission (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41-2.44; P = 1.00) comparing with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

Conclusions

Vortioxetine is more advantageous over placebo in treating MDD among adults, but no significant difference compared to SNRIs and SSRIs in general.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021278355, identifier: CRD42021278355.

Effectiveness of vortioxetine in patients with major depressive disorder comorbid with generalized anxiety disorder: Results of the RECONNECT study

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are frequently comorbid.

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of vortioxetine in patients with MDD and comorbid GAD.

METHODS

Open-label, 8-week study (NCT04220996) in 100 adult outpatients with severe MDD and severe comorbid GAD receiving vortioxetine as first treatment for the current depressive episode or switching to vortioxetine due to inadequate response to another drug for depression. Vortioxetine starting dosage was 10 mg/day, with forced up-titration to 20 mg/day after 1 week. Response was defined as ⩾50% decrease in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and/or Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score from baseline; remission defined as MADRS and/or HAM-A total score ⩽10.

RESULTS

Clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements from baseline in symptoms of depression and anxiety, and overall functioning and health-related quality of life, were observed after 8 weeks' vortioxetine treatment (all changes p < 0.0001 vs baseline). At week 8, rates of MADRS response and remission were 61% and 35%, respectively. Corresponding rates of HAM-A response and remission were 55% and 42%. Response on both the MADRS and HAM-A scales was achieved by 52% of patients; 31% achieved remission on both scales. Vortioxetine dose up-titration was well tolerated; no unexpected adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Vortioxetine demonstrates effectiveness in significantly reducing symptoms of both depression and anxiety in patients with severe MDD comorbid with severe GAD. Findings support increasing vortioxetine dosage to 20 mg/day early in the course of therapy, and show that this may be achieved without compromising tolerability.

Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy: Updated comparisons and meta-analyses of newer versus older trials

BACKGROUND

Valid assessment of drug efficacy and safety requires an evidence base free of reporting bias. Using trial reports in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval packages as a gold standard, we previously found that the published literature inflated the apparent efficacy of antidepressant drugs. The objective of the current study was to determine whether this has improved with recently approved drugs.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Using medical and statistical reviews in FDA drug approval packages, we identified 30 Phase II/III double-blind placebo-controlled acute monotherapy trials, involving 13,747 patients, of desvenlafaxine, vilazodone, levomilnacipran, and vortioxetine; we then identified corresponding published reports. We compared the data from this newer cohort of antidepressants (approved February 2008 to September 2013) with the previously published dataset on 74 trials of 12 older antidepressants (approved December 1987 to August 2002). Using logistic regression, we examined the effects of trial outcome and trial cohort (newer versus older) on transparent reporting (whether published and FDA conclusions agreed). Among newer antidepressants, transparent publication occurred more with positive (15/15 = 100%) than negative (7/15 = 47%) trials (OR 35.1, CI95% 1.8 to 693). Controlling for trial outcome, transparent publication occurred more with newer than older trials (OR 6.6, CI95% 1.6 to 26.4). Within negative trials, transparent reporting increased from 11% to 47%. We also conducted and contrasted FDA- and journal-based meta-analyses. For newer antidepressants, FDA-based effect size (ESFDA) was 0.24 (CI95% 0.18 to 0.30), while journal-based effect size (ESJournals) was 0.29 (CI95% 0.23 to 0.36). Thus, effect size inflation, presumably due to reporting bias, was 0.05, less than for older antidepressants (0.10). Limitations of this study include a small number of trials and drugs-belonging to a single class-and a focus on efficacy (versus safety).

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting bias persists but appears to have diminished for newer, compared to older, antidepressants. Continued efforts are needed to further improve transparency in the scientific literature.

Effects of Escitalopram on Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Oxidative Stress Induced by Tunicamycin

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) was reported to be associated with endoplasmic reticulum stress (ERS) combined with oxidative stress (OS) (ERS/OS). Here, we aimed to investigate the effects of escitalopram (ESC) on blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability and ERS/OS-related pathways in brain microvascular endothelial cells (bEnd.3 cells) induced by tunicamycin (TM).

Methods: bEnd.3 cells were divided into four groups: control, TM, ESC, and ESC + TM groups. CCK-8 and flow cytometry were used to detect cell survival and apoptosis, respectively. The expression levels of proteins involved in cell permeability and ERS/OS-related pathways were assessed by western blot and immunofluorescence. Malondialdehyde (MDA) concentration and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity were determined by commercial kits.

Results: We revealed that TM-induced bEnd.3 cells exhibited remarkably decreased viability and increased apoptosis rate, while ESC treatment reversed these changes. Additionally, TM treatment resulted in markedly increased PERK, GRP78, ATF6, XBP1, and CHOP protein expression levels. On the contrary, the expression of PERK, GRP78, XBP1, and CHOP was obviously reduced in TM-induced bEnd.3 cells after ESC treatment. Moreover, TM significantly reduced the expression of p-eNOS and P-gp and increased the expression of CaMKII and MMP9 compared with the control group. However, ESC reversed these changes in TM-induced bEnd.3 cells. Furthermore, the expression of SOD was significantly decreased, while MDA was significantly increased by TM treatment. In contrast, the expression of SOD was dramatically increased, while MDA was remarkably decreased by ESC treatment.

Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that ESC can inhibit ERS/OS and BBB permeability of TM-induced bEnd.3 cells. ESC may alleviate cognitive impairment and prevent comorbidities in MDD patients through ERS/OS.

Systematic review of gender bias in vortioxetine clinical trials

This paper evaluates gender bias in the published clinical trials of Vortioxetine. We conducted a systematic review of controlled clinical trials of Vortioxetine for the treatment of depression. The literature search was performed using MEDLINE and following the corresponding international recommendations. We identified 42 articles, of which 23 were included. The proportion of women ranged from 47%-75% and the percentage of women included in the 10,404 total patients sample was 65%. The separate analysis of the main variable between the subpopulations of men and women was only carried out in 3/23 publications included. In contrast, 6/23 trials analyzed secondary variables separated by sex. No trials discussed the results separately by sex. The proportion of women included was slightly higher than that in clinical trials of other antidepressants. However, the analysis of the main result or secondary variables by sex, as well as discussing the results separately by sex, are scarce. This gives rise to gender bias in these works.

Is Obesity A Determinant Of Success With Pharmacological Treatment For Depression? A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis And Meta-Regression

BACKGROUND

The bidirectional association between Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and obesity suggests that body mass index (BMI) at the baseline could influence remission rates (RR) with pharmacological treatment. We evaluated the influence of baseline BMI on the chances of remission among patients with MDD administered antidepressants.

METHODS

Based on the guidelines of the PRISMA statement, we conducted a systematic review on PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases with subsequent meta-analysis and meta-regression. We included only randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of antidepressants of different classes (monotherapy and combined therapies) that evidenced baseline BMI assessment. We created a model to describe the linear relationship between baseline BMI and RR.

RESULTS

Our systematic review yielded 70 studies with a total of 9,779 patients in the active group and 7,136 patients in the placebo group. In placebo controlled studies, BMI influenced the RR of patients randomized to active treatment. The RR for antidepressants in monotherapy was higher in normal weight to overweight patients rather than obese patients (33% vs 12%, respectively). Also in monotherapy, the RR is higher when the study is conducted on patients with a lower baseline BMI (p=0.029). For combined therapies, the pooled RR was higher in obese patients rather than in normal weight to overweight patients (75% vs 17%, respectively).

LIMITATIONS

BMI provides no information about body composition and obesity can be related to several potential confounders that potentially influence RR.

CONCLUSION

The RR with antidepressant therapy seems to be associated with baseline BMI in patients with MDD, although this simple variable was insufficiently explored so far.

Conditional power of antidepressant network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Conditional power of network meta-analysis (NMA) can support the planning of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing medical interventions. Conditional power is the probability that updating existing inconclusive evidence in NMA with additional trial(s) will result in conclusive evidence, given assumptions regarding trial design, anticipated effect sizes, or event probabilities.

METHODS

The present work aimed to estimate conditional power for potential future trials on antidepressant treatments. Existing evidence was based on a published network of 502 RCTs conducted between 1979-2018 assessing acute antidepressant treatment in major depressive disorder (MDD). Primary outcomes were efficacy in terms of the symptom change on the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) and tolerability in terms of the dropout rate due to adverse events. The network compares 21 antidepressants consisting of 231 relative treatment comparisons, 164 (efficacy) and 127 (tolerability) of which are currently assumed to have inconclusive evidence.

RESULTS

Required sample sizes to achieve new conclusive evidence with at least 80% conditional power were estimated to range between N = 894 - 4190 (efficacy) and N = 521 - 1246 (tolerability). Otherwise, sample sizes ranging between N = 49 - 485 (efficacy) and N = 40 - 320 (tolerability) may require stopping for futility based on a boundary at 20% conditional power. Optimizing trial designs by considering multiple trials that contribute both direct and indirect evidence, anticipating alternative effect sizes or alternative event probabilities, may increase conditional power but required sample sizes remain high. Antidepressants having the greatest conditional power associated with smallest required sample sizes were identified as those on which current evidence is low, i.e., clomipramine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, nefazodone, and vilazodone, with respect to both outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The present results suggest that conditional power to achieve new conclusive evidence in ongoing or future trials on antidepressant treatments is low. Limiting the use of the presented conditional power analysis are primarily due to the estimated large sample sizes which would be required in future trials as well as due to the well-known small effect sizes in antidepressant treatments. These findings may inform researchers and decision-makers regarding the clinical relevance and justification of research in ongoing or future antidepressant RCTs in MDD.

Vortioxetine in the Treatment of Mood Disorders Associated with Burning Mouth Syndrome: Results of an Open-Label, Flexible-Dose Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a new multimodal antidepressant, vortioxetine (VO), in the management of burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

DESIGN

Longitudinal single-assessment open-label pilot study.

SETTING

University hospital. Subjects. Thirty BMS patients were enrolled.

METHODS

BMS patients were treated with topical clonazepam and a flexible dose of VO (10 mg, 15 mg, or 20 mg). The visual analog scale (VAS), the Total Pain Rating Index (T-PRI), the Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression (HAM-D) and Anxiety (HAM-A), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were performed at baseline (time 0) and after two (time 1), four (time 2), six (time 3), and 12 months (time 4) of treatment. Descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon nonparametric test for two paired samples were used.

RESULTS

The BMS patients showed a statistically significant improvement in VAS and T-PRI scores from baseline (median [interquartile range {IQR}] = 10.0 [10-10] and 22.0 [20-24], respectively) to time 4 (median [IQR] = 0.0 [0-0] and 8.0 [7-9], P < 0.001, respectively). Similarly, the HAM-A and HAM-D and PSQI scores showed an improvement from time 0 (median [IQR] = 20 [15.8-22], 19 [16-20.3], and 4.0 [4-7.3], respectively) to time 4 (median [IQR] = 6.0 [6-7], 6.0 [6-7], and 3.0 [3-4], respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

VO is efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of BMS in firstline therapy on account of its better receptor pharmacological profile and in second-line treatment for patients who have only partially responded or have reported adverse effects to previous treatments.

Efficacy of Vortioxetine on Anhedonia: Results from a Pooled Analysis of Short-Term Studies in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

PURPOSE

Anhedonia is a core symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD), which has important functional consequences for the patient. This post hoc analysis investigated the relationship between anhedonia and functioning in patients with MDD treated with vortioxetine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a pooled analysis of all 11 short-term, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of vortioxetine (fixed dose, 5-20 mg/day) in patients with MDD which included Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) assessments. A short-term, randomized, active-controlled trial of flexible-dose treatment with vortioxetine (10-20 mg/day) versus agomelatine (25-50 mg/day) was also analyzed. Mean changes from baseline to study endpoint in MADRS total, MADRS anhedonia subscale, SDS total, and SDS social-functioning scores were analyzed by a mixed model for repeated measures. The relationship between treatment effects on anhedonia and functioning was investigated using path analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 4988 patients with MDD were included in the placebo-controlled studies and 495 in the active-comparator study. Significant dose-dependent improvements in overall depressive symptoms, anhedonia, and measures of functioning were seen in vortioxetine-treated patients compared with those who received placebo or agomelatine. Results of the path analysis for the placebo-controlled studies suggested that the effect on functioning was mostly driven by the effect of treatment on MADRS anhedonia factors.

CONCLUSION

Vortioxetine showed significant short-term efficacy against anhedonia in this large population of patients with MDD. In the placebo-controlled studies, improvements in functioning associated with vortioxetine appeared to be mostly driven by the effect of treatment on MADRS anhedonia factors.

Vortioxetine as a new frontier in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain: a review and update

Chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) is a disabling medical condition that impairs the health-related quality-of-life of affected patients. A high prevalence of anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance and cognitive impairment has frequently been reported in association with CNP, making the management of this disease complex and often multidisciplinary. Dual-acting agents such as selective serotonin and noradrenalin reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are considered particularly useful in the modulation of pain and in treatment of the mood disorders frequently associated with CNP. Recent evidence suggests that the top-down inhibitory control of pain involves the engagement and enhancement of descending endogenous opioidergic, cannabinoid and serotonergic systems, with the effect of serotonin being particularly related to the receptor subtypes that are preferentially activated; indeed serotonin induces analgesia via activation of 5-HT7 receptors and hyperalgesia via activation of 5-HT3 receptors. Vortioxetine (VO) is a novel multimodal serotonergic antidepressant with a unique mechanism of action. It has been demonstrated recently in experimental and clinical studies to have efficacy on pain hypersensitivity and on mood disorders. This drug inhibits the serotonin transporter with a high affinity, antagonises the 5-HT3, 5-HT1D and 5HT7 serotonin receptors, and activates the 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B receptors. In clinical studies, VO has proved effective at a dose of 10-20 mg/daily in short- and long-term treatment of patients with chronic orofacial pain, demonstrating a higher rate of clinical response and remission, a better acceptability, safety rate and tolerability, and a lower latency of action compared with other antidepressants. In the light of these recent findings, VO may be considered as a new pharmacological treatment also in relation to various types of CNP, particularly in elderly patients with concomitant mood disorders and cognitive impairment. The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date overview of the pharmacology and clinical applications of VO and to highlight its potential therapeutic properties and advantages in the management of CNP.

Clinical Switching Strategies of Various Antidepressants to Vortioxetine in the PREDDICT Trial

BACKGROUND

Partial response to antidepressant medication as well as relapse and treatment resistance are common in major depressive disorder (MDD). Therefore, for most patients with MDD, there will be a need to consider changing antidepressant medication at some stage during the course of the illness. The PREDDICT study investigates the efficacy of augmenting vortioxetine with celecoxib.

METHODS

We describe the method used in the PREDDICT study to change participants, who were already taking antidepressant medication at the time of the screening visit, to vortioxetine. We used a cross-titration to change study participants to vortioxetine.

RESULTS

Of a total of 122 study participants who were randomized to receive vortioxetine plus celecoxib or vortioxetine plus placebo at the study baseline visit, 82 were taking antidepressant medication (other than vortioxetine) prior to randomization. These medications were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, mirtazapine, or agomelatine. Eighty of these 82 participants completed the changeover to vortioxetine as well as the study baseline visit. We found side effects were generally mild during this changeover period. In addition, there was a reduction in mean total Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score of 2.5 (SD 6.0) from study baseline to week 2 and a further reduction in mean total Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale of 2.5 (SD 5.9) from week 2 to week 4.

CONCLUSION

Changing other antidepressants to vortioxetine can be done safely and was generally well-tolerated. However, there are some antidepressant classes, in particular monoamine oxidase inhibitors that require a washout period, which were not represented in this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR); ID number 12617000527369p; http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12617000527369p.aspx.

Pharmacological treatment of acute-phase anorexia nervosa: Evidence from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Anorexia nervosa (AN) is the psychiatric disorder with the highest mortality rate, with a standard mortality ratio of 5.86. Despite the large use of psychotropic drugs in the clinical setting, Food and Drug Administration has not approved any psychoactive treatment for AN.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating psychopharmacological treatment in acute-phase AN.

METHODS

The present paper follows the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. An extensive literature search was performed. All RCTs enrolling patients with acute-phase AN, comparing at least one psychotropic drug with another drug, placebo, treatment-as-usual or no treatment were included. The main outcome was the effect of psychoactive drugs on body mass index (BMI); data on psychopathological outcomes were also collected when available.

RESULTS

A total of 19 RCTs met all specified criteria. Of these, 11 were excluded from quantitative analyses. Of the eight studies included in the meta-analyses, five reported data on BMI, showing no significant difference between olanzapine and placebo for weight recovery. No significant result was found for AN psychopathology, depressive and anxious symptoms for any of the molecules studied.

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs published in this field display methodological biases, low sample sizes and short follow-up periods. Further research efforts are needed in this field as no evidence has been demonstrated for the use of any psychotropic drug in acute-phase AN neither for weight recovery, nor for comorbid psychiatric symptoms.

Suicidal ideation and behavior in adults with major depressive disorder treated with vortioxetine: post hoc pooled analyses of randomized, placebo-controlled, short-term and open-label, long-term extension trials

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the risk of suicidal ideation and behavior associated with vortioxetine treatment in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Suicide-related events were evaluated post hoc using 2 study pools: one short-term pool of 10 randomized, placebo-controlled studies (6-8 weeks) and another long-term pool that included 3 open-label extension studies (52 weeks). Evaluation of suicide-related events was performed using Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) scores and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) data.

RESULTS

At baseline, the percentage of patients reporting any C-SSRS ideation or behavior events in short-term studies was similar between placebo (14.7%), vortioxetine (19.8%, 13.0%, 11.2%, and 13.7% for 5-, 10-, 15-, and 20-mg groups, respectively), and duloxetine active reference (13.2%) and did not change throughout the 6- to 8-week treatment period for placebo (17.0%), vortioxetine (19.3%, 13.5%, 12.6%, and 15% for 5-, 10-, 15-, and 20-mg groups, respectively), or duloxetine (11.3%). The incidence of suicide-related events for TEAEs in the short-term pool was 0.4% for placebo, 0.2% or 1.0% for vortioxetine 5 mg or 10 mg, and 0.7% each for vortioxetine 15 mg and 20 mg, as well as duloxetine. After 52-week treatment with vortioxetine, suicidal ideation based on C-SSRS was 9.8%, C-SSRS suicidal behavior was 0.2%, and the incidence of suicide-related events based on TEAEs was <1%. There were no completed suicides in any study.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine is not associated with increased risk of suicidal ideation or behavior in MDD patients.

Structured review of the use of the Arizona sexual experiences scale in clinical settings

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% of women and 30% of men describe sexual dysfunction, although recognition in medical settings is suboptimal, due to problems in reporting and eliciting concerns relating to sexual function and satisfaction. Screening questionnaires may help to support this aspect of clinical practice. The Arizona sexual experiences scale (ASEX) includes items that quantify sex drive, arousal, vaginal lubrication or penile erection, ability to reach orgasm, and satisfaction from orgasm.

METHOD

We investigated the validity and other psychometric properties of the ASEX, and the findings from the populations in which it has been employed, by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar using the terms, Arizona sexual experiences scale, Arizona Sexual Experience Questionnaire, and ASEX. We eliminated duplications, letters, and papers not available in English, and grouped the remaining papers into the categories of psychometric, epidemiological, and outcome-based studies.

RESULTS

After elimination of letters and duplicates, papers not in English, and preclinical and irrelevant studies, 104 papers were analyzed. The ASEX has excellent internal consistency, scale reliability and strong test-retest reliability. Analyses of variance reveal significant differences in total ASEX scores between patients and controls and between females and males. ASEX appears to be useful in a range of clinical situations including patients with primary sexual dysfunction, specific psychiatric disorders, specific physical illnesses, and treatment emergent sexual dysfunction.

DISCUSSION

The ASEX appears to be a reliable instrument for identifying and quantifying sexual dysfunction across a range of populations in various clinical settings. Little is known about its utility in patients with anxiety disorders or relationships between ASEX scores and biological parameters.

Meta-analysis of placebo group dropout in adult antidepressant trials

BACKGROUND

Minimizing dropouts across antidepressant, placebo-controlled trials remains a major opportunity to improve the efficiency of trials. This meta-analysis investigated placebo dropout rate and its predictors in second generation antidepressant (SGA) for anxiety, depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).

METHODS

A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to examine placebo group dropout rate in SGA trials for depression, anxiety and OCD using Freeman - Tukey transformation. Stratified subgroup analysis by diagnostic indication was performed to examine the dropout rate across disorders. Meta-regression was performed to identify correlates between placebo dropout rate and trial and subject characteristics.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis included 148 trials with 18,016 participants receiving placebo. Across antidepressant trials the overall placebo dropout rate was 25% (dropout rate ± standard error (SE) = 0.25 ± 0.01, 95% CI: 0.23-0.27, z = 23.95, p < .001) and was similar across disorders (χ2 = 1.09, df = 2, p = .58). The placebo group dropout rate was 26% in depressive disorders, 25% in anxiety disorders and 22% in OCD. Across all diagnostic indications, earlier publication year, placebo lead-in, studies conducted in a single country (instead of internationally), longer trial duration, fewer study sites, more study visits and less baseline illness severity were associated with higher placebo dropout rate. Significant predictors of placebo dropout did not replicate across disorders.

CONCLUSION

No significant difference was found in placebo dropout rate between internalizing disorders with overall dropout rate for placebo groups in antidepressant trials being around 25%. Placebo dropouts in trials can be minimized by reducing subject burden in trials, enrolling more severely affected subjects and foregoing placebo lead-in periods.

Efficacy of vortioxetine in patients with major depressive disorder reporting childhood or recent trauma

BACKGROUND

This analysis investigates the efficacy of vortioxetine in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) who report childhood or recent trauma.

METHODS

Patient-level data were analyzed from 4 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled short-term studies investigating the efficacy of vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day) versus placebo in patients (18-75 years old) with DSM-IV-TR-defined MDD. Changes from baseline to week 8 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) were examined at the individual study level and as in meta-analysis. A long-term relapse prevention study of 5 and 10 mg of vortioxetine was also analyzed. Traumatic events history was recorded at baseline.

RESULTS

Sixty-one percent of subjects (1113/1811) reported trauma history in the short-term studies. A significant effect vs. placebo was observed for vortioxetine on MADRS (10 mg, -2.2, P = .025; 20 mg, -4.4, P < .001), HAM-A (20 mg, -1.60, P = .012), CGI-I (5 mg, -0.3, P = .028; 10 mg, -0.3, P = .013; 20 mg, -0.50, P = .009), and SDS (20 mg, -2.3, P = .007) in patients with any trauma (childhood and/or recent). In the relapse prevention study, 51% (198/392) of subjects reported a history of trauma. Subjects with any trauma (childhood and/or recent) randomized to placebo were significantly more likely to relapse than subjects treated with vortioxetine (hazard ratio 2.8, P = .0019).

LIMITATIONS

An exploratory analysis.

DISCUSSION

Vortioxetine showed significant short- and long-term efficacy on depressive and anxiety symptoms and overall functioning in this large subpopulation of MDD patients with a history of trauma. A significantly lower risk of relapse was also observed with vortioxetine.

Applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria in placebo-controlled studies to a clinical sample: A comparison of medications

BACKGROUND

We previously compared the inclusion/exclusion criteria in the studies of vortioxetine to other antidepressants and found that they were significantly more restrictive in the vortioxetine studies. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the differences in psychiatric inclusion/exclusion criteria used in the studies of some antidepressants resulted in differences in generalizability to clinical samples.

METHODS

We applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in 161 antidepressant efficacy trials to 1,271 patients presenting to an outpatient practice who received a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The patients underwent a thorough diagnostic evaluation. We compared the percentage of patients that would be excluded in studies of different medications.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients that would have been excluded was significantly higher in the vortioxetine studies than other medications. For the 15 medications that were included in at least 5 trials, we computed the mean percentage of patients that would be excluded. The values ranged from 76.0% (for fluoxetine) to 99.1% (for quetiapine).

LIMITATIONS

While our calculations were based on the exclusion criteria stated in the published articles, we have no way of knowing how these criteria were actually applied.

CONCLUSION

Studies of different medications vary in how representative the samples are of patients in clinical practice. The variability in the inclusion/exclusion criteria used to select samples for antidepressant efficacy trials, and the evidence that studies of different medications vary in their generalizability, makes it more difficult to interpret network analyses comparing the relative efficacy of medications.

The efficacy and safety of 10 mg/day vortioxetine compared to placebo for adult major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a growing interest in vortioxetine in major depressive disorder (MDD).

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of 10 mg/day (mg/d) vortioxetine compared to placebo for MDD in adult.

METHODS

Eight randomly controlled trials (RCTs) about the treatment of 10 mg/d vortioxetine in adult patients with MDD were identified and 2354 patients were included in meta-analysis.

RESULTS

According to the results, 10 mg/d vortioxetine showed significant differences in response rates (OR=1.88, 95% CI=1.40-2.53, P<0.0001), remission rates (OR=1.54, 95% CI=1.27-1.86, P<0.00001), change from baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score (SMD=-3.50, 95%CI=-4.83 to -2.17, P<0.00001), clinical global Impression-Global Improvement (CGI-I) total score (SMD=-3.40, 95% CI=-4.69 to -2.11, P<0.00001), and change from baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total score (SMD=-2.09, 95% CI=-2.64 to -1.55, P<0.00001). But 10 mg/d vortioxetine was easier induced nausea (OR=4.18, 95% CI=3.21-5.44, P<0.00001) and constipation (OR=1.88, 95% CI=1.14 to 3.09, P=0.01).

CONCLUSION

10 mg/d vortioxetine was more effective, but easily induced nausea and constipation when compared to placebo for MDD in adult.

Vortioxetine for Cognitive Enhancement in Major Depression: From Animal Models to Clinical Research

Objectives: Vortioxetine has already shown its efficacy in the acute and long-term treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) and its potential interest in the prevention of relapse. The aim of this study was to review the current status of knowledge regarding its cognitive effects. Methods: We conducted a review of key data obtained from preclinical behavioral models and clinical trials in MDD focusing on vortioxetine-induced cognitive changes. Results: In animals, acute and chronic administration of vortioxetine improves performance on objective measures that cover a broad range of cognitive domains. In human, vortioxetine appears to be a useful treatment option in MDD patients with cognitive dysfunction. Conclusion: Vortioxetine constitutes a promising treatment for treatment of cognitive impairment in MDD, but its place in the therapeutic armamentarium still needs to be determined.

Results of a real-world study on vortioxetine in patients with major depressive disorder in South East Asia (REVIDA)

OBJECTIVE

The REVIDA study aimed to assess the evolution of major depression symptoms in South East Asian (SEA) patients treated with vortioxetine for major depression in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This non-interventional study was conducted from August 2016 to April 2017. A total of 138 patients (aged 18-65 years) with an active episode of major depression were recruited from Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Vortioxetine was initiated on the first visit and patients were followed for 3 months. Depression severity was assessed using the PHQ-9 questionnaire (patient assessed) and CGI-S scale (physician assessed); cognitive function was assessed with the PDQ-D questionnaire; work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) was assessed with the WPAI questionnaire.

RESULTS

At baseline, 89.9% of patients were moderately to severely depressed (PHQ-9 score ≥10). During the 3 month treatment period, mean ± SD PHQ-9 score decreased from 18.7 ± 5.7 to 5.0 ± 5.3, mean ± SD CGI-S score decreased from 4.4 ± 0.7 to 2.2 ± 1.1 and mean ± SD PDQ-D score decreased from 42.1 ± 18.8 to 13.4 ± 13.0. By Month 3, response and remission rates reached 80.8% and 59.0%, respectively. Work productivity loss decreased from 73.6% to 30.5%, while activity impairment decreased from 71.5% to 24.6%. Positive correlations were observed between PHQ-9, PDQ-D, and WPAI work productivity loss and activity impairment. By Month 3, 82.0% of patients were either not depressed or only mildly depressed (PHQ-9 score ≤9).

CONCLUSION

In real-world clinical settings, vortioxetine was effective in reducing depression severity and improving cognitive function and work productivity in SEA patients with major depression.

BDNF-Related Imbalance of Copine 6 and Synaptic Plasticity Markers Couples With Depression-Like Behavior and Immune Activation in CUMS Rats

Chronic stress is a contributing risk factor in the pathogenesis of depression. Although the mechanisms are multifaceted, the relationship can be ascribed partly to stress-related alterations in immune activation and brain plasticity. Considering the increasing evidence regarding the role of Copine 6 in the regulation of synaptic plasticity, the aim of the present study is to investigate Copine 6 expression in the hippocampus and the prefrontal cortex (PFC) in a stress-induced depression rat model. The behavior of the rats was evaluated via the open field test, saccharin preference test, elevated plus maze test, tail suspension test, Morris water maze, and forced swimming test. The plasma concentrations of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were measured, and the protein expressions of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), Copine 6, and synaptic plasticity markers in the hippocampus and the PFC were also detected. The results showed that chronic unpredictable mild stress (CUMS) induces depression-like behavior in rats, accompanied by increased plasma concentrations of CRP and IL-6. Moreover, the protein expressions of BDNF, Copine 6, and synapsin I were decreased in both the hippocampus and the PFC of CUMS rats, and the protein expression of synaptotagmin I was decreased in the hippocampus. Furthermore, Pearson's test revealed a potential relationship between the depression-like behavior, the plasma CRP concentration, and the protein expressions of BDNF, Copine 6, synapsin I, or synaptotagmin I in the hippocampus or the PFC. Together with our previous results, the current findings suggest that apart from immune activation, the BDNF-related imbalance of Copine 6 expression in the brain might play a crucial role in stress-associated depression-like behaviors and synaptic plasticity changes.

Digit Symbol Substitution Test: The Case for Sensitivity Over Specificity in Neuropsychological Testing

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Development of the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) was initiated over a century ago as an experimental tool to understand human associative learning. Its clinical utility, owing to its brevity and high discriminant validity, was first recognized in the 1940s, and now the DSST is among the most commonly used tests in clinical neuropsychology.

METHODS

Specific studies and articles were reviewed to illustrate what the test measures, to evaluate its sensitivity to change, and to discuss its use in clinical practice.

RESULTS

The DSST is a valid and sensitive measure of cognitive dysfunction impacted by many domains. Performance on the DSST correlates with real-world functional outcomes (eg, the ability to accomplish everyday tasks) and recovery from functional disability in a range of psychiatric conditions including schizophrenia and major depressive disorder. Importantly, the DSST has been demonstrated to be sensitive to changes in cognitive functioning in patients with major depressive disorder and offers promise as a clinical decision-making tool for monitoring treatment effects in this and other disorders affecting cognition.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

The DSST is sensitive to the presence of cognitive dysfunction as well as to change in cognitive function across a wide range of clinical populations but has low specificity to determine exactly which cognitive domain has been affected. However, the DSST offers a practical and effective method to monitor cognitive functions over time in clinical practice.

Variation in analytic transparency in recent efficacy studies of antidepressant medication

The validity of clinical trial results is influenced by researchers' decisions regarding the management of missing data. Inadequate management of missing data has been identified as a significant source of bias that can result in an overestimation of drug efficacy. Transparency related to the management of missing data is essential to assess the strength of evidence reported in publications. In a subset of 17 randomised clinical trials for two new antidepressant medications, we present a case study in which we examined investigators' decisions regarding how to handle missing data and if their chosen method took into account, possible violations of analytic requirements that could affect results. The majority of trials (76%) concluded that there was a benefit of antidepressant treatment and in 94% the methodology for handling missing data was identifiable. Of these, 50% imputed data using the last observation carried forward and half used a mixed-effects model repeated measure approach. Most reports did not provide a rationale for the method used, and no trials described analyses regarding differences between completers and dropouts. Sensitivity analysis was inconsistently reported and correction for multiple comparisons was not uniformly applied. Lack of transparency for analytic choices related to handling of missing data testing was common in this subset of RCTs. Because management of missing data can directly influence the quality of study results, it is critical that journal editors develop and enforce standards for methodological transparency.

Meta-analysis: Second generation antidepressants and headache

BACKGROUND

To assess the risk of headache associated with commonly prescribed antidepressant medications and to examine the impact of medication class, pharmacodynamics and dosage on risk of headache.

METHODS

We searched PubMed to identify all randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy of second generation antidepressant medications in the treatment of adults with depression, anxiety or obsessive-compulsive disorders. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis to examine the pooled risk ratio of headache reported as a side-effect in adults treated with second generation antidepressants compared to placebo. We used stratified subgroup analysis and meta-regression to examine the effects of medication type, class, dosage, indication, and receptor affinity profile on the measured risk of headache.

RESULTS

SSRIs were associated with a significantly increased risk of headache (RR = 1.06, 95%CI = 1.00-1.13, z = 2.0, p = 0.045) when compared to placebo. There was no significant difference (test for subgroup differences χ² = 2.2, df = 1, p = 0.14) in the risk of headache between SSRIs and SNRIs (RR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.88-1.06, p = 0.63). There was no significant difference in the relative risk of headache with second generation antidepressants based on diagnostic indication, pharmacological properties and dosage of medications. The only antidepressants that were found to be significantly associated with increased risk of headache compared to placebo were bupropion (RR = 1.22, 95%CI = 1.06-1.41, z = 2.73, p = 0.006) and escitalopram (RR = 1.18, 95%CI = 1.01-1.37, z = 2.11, p = 0.04).

LIMITATIONS

The small number of studies that examined side effects within fixed-dose trials may have limited the power to examine the association between medication dosing and risk of headache. Additionally, reporting bias could potentially occur non-randomly across agents and therefore effect meta-analysis results.

CONCLUSIONS

Headaches reported after the initiation of second generation antidepressant medications are more likely to be coincidental than a treatment-emergent side effect of these medications.

Meta-analysis: Risk of dry mouth with second generation antidepressants

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this meta-analysis was to quantify the risk of dry mouth associated with commonly prescribed antidepressant agents and examine the potential implications of medication class, dose, and pharmacodynamics and dose on risk of treatment-induced dry mouth.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

A PubMed search was conducted to identify double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy and tolerability of second generation antidepressant medications for adults with depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, and OCD.

DATA EXTRACTION

A random-effects meta-analysis was used to quantify the pooled risk ratio of treatment-emergent dry mouth with second generation antidepressants compared to placebo. Stratified subgroup analysis and meta-regression was utilized to further examine the effects antidepressant agent, class, dosage, indication, and receptor affinity profile on the measured risk of dry mouth.

RESULTS

99 trials involving 20,868 adults. SNRIs (Relative Risk (RR)=2.24, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.95-2.58, z=11.2, p<0.001) were associated with a significantly greater risk of dry mouth (test for subgroup differences χ²=7.6, df=1; p=0.006) compared to placebo than SSRIs (RR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.39-1.95, z=5.8, p<0.001). There was a significant difference found in the risk of dry mouth between diagnostic indications within the SNRI class (test for subgroup differences χ²=9.63, df=1; p=0.002). Anxiety diagnoses (RR=2.78, 95% CI: 2.29-3.38, z=10.32, p<0.001) were associated with a greater risk of dry mouth compared to depression (RR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.48-2.18, z=5.85, p<0.001). Decreased affinity for Alpha-1 (PE=0.18, 95% CI: 0.07-0.28, z=3.26, p=0.001) and Alpha-2 (PE=0.49, 95% CI: 0.22-0.75, z=3.64, p<0.001) receptors and SERT (PE=0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.14, z=2.10, p<0.05) was significantly associated with increased risk of dry mouth.

CONCLUSIONS

The current meta-analysis suggests that SSRIs, SNRIs, and atypical antidepressants are all associated with varying degrees of increased risk of dry mouth. SNRIs were associated with a significantly greater risk of dry mouth compared to SSRIs.

Addressing the Side Effects of Contemporary Antidepressant Drugs: A Comprehensive Review

Randomized trials have shown that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) have better safety profiles than classical tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). However, an increasing number of studies, including meta-analyses, naturalistic studies, and longer-term studies suggested that SSRIs and SNRIs are no less safe than TCAs. We focused on comparing the common side effects of TCAs with those of newer generation antidepressants including SSRIs, SNRIs, mirtazapine, and bupropion. The main purpose was to investigate safety profile differences among drug classes rather than the individual antidepressants, so studies containing comparison data on drug groups were prioritized. In terms of safety after overdose, the common belief on newer generation antidepressants having fewer side effects than TCAs appears to be true. TCAs were also associated with higher drop-out rates, lower tolerability, and higher cardiac side-effects. However, evidence regarding side effects including dry mouth, gastrointestinal side effects, hepatotoxicity, seizure, and weight has been inconsistent, some studies demonstrated the superiority of SSRIs and SNRIs over TCAs, while others found the opposite. Some other side effects such as sexual dysfunction, bleeding, and hyponatremia were more prominent with either SSRIs or SNRIs.

Efficacy and safety of levomilnacipran, vilazodone and vortioxetine compared with other second-generation antidepressants for major depressive disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Second-generation antidepressants dominate the medical management of major depressive disorder (MDD). Levomilnacipran, vilazodone and vortioxetine are the latest therapeutic options approved for the treatment of MDD. This systematic review aims to compare the benefits and harms of vilazodone, levomilnacipran, and vortioxetine with one another and other second-generation antidepressants.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases up to September 2017 and reviewed reference lists and pharmaceutical dossiers to detect published and unpublished studies. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full text articles, and rated the risk of bias of included studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled observational studies including adult outpatients with MDD were eligible for inclusion. We conducted network meta-analyses on response to treatment using frequentist multivariate meta-analyses models. Placebo- and active-controlled trials were eligible for network meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies met our inclusion criteria. Direct comparisons were limited to vilazodone versus citalopram, and vortioxetine versus duloxetine, paroxetine, or venlafaxine XR (extended release). Results of head-to-head trials and network meta-analyses, overall, indicated similar efficacy among levomilnacipran, vilazodone, or vortioxetine and other second-generation antidepressants. Although rates of overall adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events were similar, RCTs reported several differences in specific adverse events. For most outcomes the strength of evidence was low.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations are the focus of literature searches on studies published in English, possible reporting biases, and general methodological limitations of network meta-analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the available evidence does not indicate greater benefits or fewer harms of levomilnacipran, vilazodone, and vortioxetine compared with other second-generation antidepressants.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 8-week trial of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 5, 10, and 20 mg/day vortioxetine in adults with major depressive disorder

AIM

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of vortioxetine in adults with major depressive disorder.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 600 patients with major depressive disorder were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive vortioxetine 5, 10, or 20 mg, or placebo once daily for 8 weeks. The primary end-point was change from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 8, evaluated by the last-observation-carried-forward method. Secondary end-points included response (≥ 50% decrease in the MADRS total score from baseline) and remission (MADRS total score ≤ 10), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, and change from baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale. Adverse events were summarized.

RESULTS

Vortioxetine failed to show significant differences from placebo in the primary end-point. Nominally significant improvements over placebo were observed for vortioxetine doses of 10 and 20 mg when the primary end-point was evaluated using the mixed model for repeated measures as the secondary analysis, and 10 mg in secondary measures of response and patient functioning. Vortioxetine was well tolerated. Nausea, constipation, dry mouth, dizziness, and insomnia each occurred at a >twofold higher rate than placebo. Discontinuation symptom scores were comparable between all groups after 1 and 2 weeks following withdrawal of the study drug.

CONCLUSION

While vortioxetine failed to meet significance versus placebo in the primary efficacy analysis, there was evidence of efficacy for the 10- and 20-mg doses in secondary analyses. Vortioxetine was safe and well tolerated. Additional studies appear warranted.

Effective Vortioxetine Dose Varies with Extent of Antidepressant Use Across Countries

OBJECTIVE

One of the possible explanations for the antidepressant resistance is tolerance to the effect of increasing synaptic serotonin. Vortioxetine is thought to work through a combination of two pharmacological modes of action: serotonin reuptake inhibition and modification of serotonin receptor activity, in a dose-dependent manner. This mechanism of action allows for examination of the hypothesis that antidepressant non-response may be due to exposure to persistently elevated synaptic amine levels.

METHODS

We hypothesized that lower doses of vortioxetine, which exclusively inhibit serotonin reuptake, would not be effective in the setting of prolonged exposure to antidepressants, but higher doses, which interact in various ways to multiple post-synaptic serotonin receptors, would be relatively more effective in the setting of prolonged, prestudy antidepressant exposure. We examined the relationship between Defined Daily Dose (DDD), which is a measure of the extent of antidepressant use in each country, and the minimal effective dose of vortioxetine.

PRINCIPAL OBSERVATION

There is a significant relationship between the DDD and effective vortioxetine dose (P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

In countries with high antidepressant utilization, higher doses of vortioxetine were required, and obverse was true in countries with lower antidepressant utilization. These data support the hypothesis that tolerance to serotonin reuptake inhibition drives poor antidepressant response.

Assessment and management of sexual dysfunction in the context of depression

Sexual dysfunction (SD) is pervasive and underreported, and its effects on quality of life are underestimated. Due in part to its bidirectional relationship with depression, SD can be difficult to diagnose; it is also a common side effect of many antidepressants, leading to treatment noncompliance. While physicians often count on patients to spontaneously report SD, treatment is optimized when the clinician instead performs a thorough assessment of sexual functioning before and during drug therapy using a standardized questionnaire such as the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX). Separating the effects of the disorder from those of medications is challenging; we present a concise, evidence-based schematic to assist physicians in minimizing treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction (TESD) while treating depression. Vascular, hormonal, neurogenic, and pharmacological factors should be considered when a patient presents with SD. We also recommend that physicians obtain patient information about baseline and historical sexual functioning before prescribing a drug that may lead to SD and follow up accordingly. When the goal is to treat depression while attenuating the risk of sexual symptoms, physicians may wish to consider agomelatine, bupropion, desvenlafaxine, moclobemide, trazodone, vilazodone, and vortioxetine.

Relative short-term efficacy and acceptability of agomelatine versus vortioxetine in adult patients suffering from major depressive disorder

Agomelatine and vortioxetine are antidepressants with different mechanisms of action compared to other pharmaceutical treatment options. The objective of this present analysis is to determine the relative efficacy and acceptability of agomelatine (25-50 mg) compared to vortioxetine (10-15-20 mg) in adult patients with major depressive disorder. We performed an adjusted indirect comparison using placebo as a common control. The main outcomes were efficacy (response to treatment by Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale/Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) and acceptability (withdrawal rate for any reason or due to adverse events). 10 agomelatine and 11 vortioxetine studies were included in the analysis. For efficacy, no difference was shown between agomelatine and vortioxetine (E[95% CI] = -0.03 [-0.12;0.05]). For acceptability, no significant difference was found between both antidepressants. These findings substantiate current understanding that most antidepressants are of similar average efficacy and tolerability. Such equivalent therapeutic benefit of both compounds, measured by a quantitative clinical research approach, has to be discussed with the knowledge of a qualitative estimation in routine practice.

The role of new antidepressants in clinical practice in Canada: a brief review of vortioxetine, levomilnacipran ER, and vilazodone

Although many branded and generic antidepressants are approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in Canada, efficacy and tolerability differ among patients, and new treatment options are needed. Symptom types (eg, fatigue, energy/motivation, cognition, and functioning), medication type, treatment duration, and the need for maintenance therapy are factors that may influence treatment effectiveness. Three antidepressants, vortioxetine, levomilnacipran extended-release (ER), and vilazodone have recently become available in Canada. The aim of this review is to contextualize differences in their mechanistic and clinical profiles, thereby providing practitioners with knowledge to support treatment decisions. In trials versus placebo, each drug improved depressive symptoms in adult patients with MDD. The antidepressant effect of vortioxetine may be related to enhanced serotonergic activity via reuptake inhibition and agonism and/or antagonism of various serotonin receptors. Vortioxetine may also improve cognitive functioning in MDD, and has proven efficacious in relapse prevention. Nausea was the most commonly reported adverse event (AE); rates of sexual dysfunction were low and abrupt discontinuation was well tolerated. Levomilnacipran ER, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, demonstrated greater improvement versus placebo in functional impairment as well as depressive symptoms; in post hoc analyses, improvement in symptoms of motivation and energy were observed. Nausea was the most commonly reported AE; gradual discontinuation is recommended to avoid discontinuation syndrome. Vilazodone is a serotonin reuptake inhibitor and partial serotonergic 5-HT1A receptor agonist. In addition to improvement in depressive symptoms, evidence suggests that vilazodone may be particularly well suited for depressed patients with high anxiety levels. Diarrhea, nausea, and headache were the most common AEs; low rates of sexual dysfunction were reported. The 2016 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments guidelines for MDD includes vortioxetine as a first-line treatment; levomilnacipran ER and vilazodone are considered as second-line treatments due to lack of relapse prevention data at the time of approval.

Vortioxetine: A new alternative for the treatment of major depressive disorder

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a serious psychiatric condition. Its treatment remains a challenge nowadays. Vortioxetine is a novel antidepressant with a unique profile, as it acts as a multimodal serotoninergic agent. Its efficacy in MDD has been established in many short- and long-term studies, with 7 positive, 4 negative and 1 failed randomized controlled trials. Moreover, its ability to modulate a wide range of neurotransmitters (serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, histamine, glutamate or GABA) confers vortioxetine pro-cognitive effects. Side effects are also different from conventional antidepressants, according to its low incidence of sexual dysfunction, weight gain or cardiovascular alterations. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety profile of vortioxetine, as well as its potential effectiveness in improving cognitive symptoms.

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.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vortioxetine for the treatment of major depressive disorder in patients aged 55 years or older

OBJECTIVE

These post hoc analyses evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vortioxetine versus placebo in patients aged ≥55 years with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Study-level efficacy data from 12 short-term, fixed-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of vortioxetine 5-20 mg/day were assessed using a random-effects meta-analysis. Adverse events (AEs), vital signs, ECG values, liver enzymes, and body weight were pooled from the same studies. Patients had baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores ranging from 22-30.

RESULTS

1508 patients (mean age=62.4 years; range, 55-88 years) were included. Mean differences from placebo in change from baseline to study end (6/8 weeks) in MADRS were -2.56 (5 mg, n=324, P=0.035), -2.87 (10 mg, n=222, P=0.007), -1.32 (15 mg, n=90, P=NS), and -4.65 (20 mg, n=165, P=0.012). Odds ratios for response versus placebo were 1.6 (5 mg, P=NS), 1.8 (10 mg, P=0.002), 1.2 (15 mg, P=NS), and 2.5 (20 mg, P<0.001), and for remission versus placebo were 1.5 (5 mg, P=NS), 1.5 (10 mg, P=NS), 1.4 (15 mg, P=NS), and 2.7 (20 mg, P=0.001). The proportion of patients with AEs for placebo and vortioxetine 5-20 mg was 61.5% and 62.3%, respectively, with no increase at increased doses. Vortioxetine demonstrated a placebo-level incidence of serious AEs (1.2%). AEs occurring in ≥5% of any treatment group were nausea, headache, diarrhea, dizziness, dry mouth, constipation, fatigue, vomiting, and anxiety. No clinically significant mean changes in vital signs, ECG values, liver enzymes, or body weight emerged during treatment.

CONCLUSION

Vortioxetine 5-20 mg/day is efficacious and well tolerated in MDD patients aged ≥55 years, a group that is often comorbid with other conditions and treated with other medications.

Vortioxetine for depression in adults

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder is a common mental disorder affecting a person's mind, behaviour and body. It is expressed as a variety of symptoms and is associated with substantial impairment. Despite a range of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options, there is still room for improvement of the pharmacological treatment of depression in terms of efficacy and tolerability. The latest available antidepressant is vortioxetine. It is assumed that vortioxetine's antidepressant action is related to a direct modulation of serotonergic receptor activity and inhibition of the serotonin transporter. The mechanism of action is not fully understood, but it is claimed to be novel. Vortioxetine was placed in the category of "Other" antidepressants and may therefore provide an alternative to existing antidepressant drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and acceptability of vortioxetine compared with placebo and other antidepressant drugs in the treatment of acute depression in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane's Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register to May 2016 without applying any restrictions to date, language or publication status. We checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, regulatory agency reports and trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy, tolerability, or both of vortioxetine versus placebo or any other antidepressant agent in the treatment of acute depression in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies and extracted data. We extracted data on study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability. We analysed intention-to-treat (ITT) data only and used risk ratios (RR) as effect sizes for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analyses used random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (7746 participants) in this review. Seven studies were placebo controlled; eight studies compared vortioxetine to serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). We were unable to identify any study that compared vortioxetine to antidepressant drugs from other classes, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).Vortioxetine may be more effective than placebo across the three efficacy outcomes: response (Mantel-Haenszel RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.49; 14 studies, 6220 participants), remission (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.53; 14 studies, 6220 participants) and depressive symptoms measured using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Scale (MADRS) (score range: 0 to 34; higher score means worse outcome: MD -2.94, 95% CI -4.07 to -1.80; 14 studies, 5566 participants). The quality of the evidence was low for response and remission and very low for depressive symptoms. We found no evidence of a difference in total dropout rates (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.19; 14 studies, 6220 participants). More participants discontinued vortioxetine than placebo because of adverse effects (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81; 14 studies, 6220 participants) but fewer discontinued due to inefficacy (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.90, P = 0.02; 14 studies, 6220 participants). The quality of the evidence for dropouts was moderate.The subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not reveal factors that significantly influenced the results.In comparison with other antidepressants, very low-quality evidence from eight studies showed no clinically significant difference between vortioxetine and SNRIs as a class for response (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 3159 participants) or remission (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 3155 participants). There was a small difference favouring SNRIs for depressive symptom scores on the MADRS (MD 1.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.53; 8 studies, 2807 participants). Very low quality evidence from eight studies (3159 participants) showed no significant differences between vortioxetine and the SNRIs as a class for total dropout rates (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.08), dropouts due to adverse events (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.08) and dropouts due to inefficacy (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.30).Against individual antidepressants, analyses suggested that vortioxetine may be less effective than duloxetine in terms of response rates (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94; 6 studies, 2392 participants) and depressive symptoms scores on the MADRS scale (MD 1.99, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.83; 6 studies; 2106 participants). Against venlafaxine, meta-analysis of two studies found no statistically significant differences (response: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.25; 767 participants; depressive symptom scores: MD 0.02, 95% CI -2.49 to 2.54; 701 participants). In terms of number of participants reporting at least one adverse effect (tolerability), vortioxetine was better than the SNRIs as a class (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.94; 8 studies, 3134 participants) and duloxetine (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.95; 6 studies; 2376 participants). However, the sensitivity analysis casts some doubts on this result, as only two studies used comparable dosing.We judged none of the studies to have a high risk of bias for any domain, but we rated all studies to have an unclear risk of bias of selective reporting and other biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The place of vortioxetine in the treatment of acute depression is unclear. Our analyses showed vortioxetine may be more effective than placebo in terms of response, remission and depressive symptoms, but the clinical relevance of these effects is uncertain. Furthermore, the quality of evidence to support these findings was generally low. In comparison to SNRIs, we found no advantage for vortioxetine. Vortioxetine was less effective than duloxetine, but fewer people reported adverse effects when treated with vortioxetine compared to duloxetine. However, these findings are uncertain and not well supported by evidence. A major limitation of the current evidence is the lack of comparisons with the SSRIs, which are usually recommended as first-line treatments for acute depression. Studies with direct comparisons to SSRIs are needed to address this gap and may be supplemented by network meta-analyses to define the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of depression.

The effect of vortioxetine on overall patient functioning in patients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this meta-analysis of data from randomized, placebo-controlled studies were to assess the effect of vortioxetine on overall functioning (primary) and functional remission (secondary) using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Data from nine short-term (6/8 weeks) pivotal studies that included patient functioning assessments were included in this random-effects meta-analysis, which used aggregated study-level data for all therapeutic vortioxetine doses and a mixed-effect model for repeated measures using the full analysis set.

RESULTS

A total of 4,216 patients received ≥1 dose of study treatment (1,522 placebo, 2,694 vortioxetine 5-20 mg/day). At study end, the meta-analysis showed improvement for vortioxetine versus placebo (n = 911) in SDS total score (vortioxetine 5 mg, n = 564, change from baseline versus placebo [Δ] -0.24, p = NS; 10 mg, n = 445, Δ -1.68, p ≤ .001; 15 mg, n = 204, Δ -0.91, p = NS; 20 mg, n = 340, Δ -1.94, p ≤ .01). Functional remission (SDS total score ≤6) was observed with vortioxetine 10 mg (n = 170/573; odds ratio [OR] relative to placebo 1.7, p < .001) and 20 mg (n = 144/447; OR 1.6, p < .05), but not 5 mg (n = 207/757; OR 1.1, p = NS) or 15 mg (n = 92/295; OR 1.3, p = NS).

CONCLUSION

Vortioxetine 5-20 mg for 6/8 weeks improved overall patient functioning in patients with MDD. Relative to placebo, vortioxetine 10 and 20 mg demonstrated significant improvement in SDS total score and functional remission.