Efficacy of celecoxib add-on treatment for immuno-metabolic depression: Protocol of the INFLAMED double-blind placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial

Efficacy of inflammation-based stratification for add-on celecoxib or minocycline in major depressive disorder: Protocol of the INSTA-MD double-blind placebo-controlled randomised clinical trial

Introduction

Different lines of evidence confirm the involvement of the immune system in the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder. Up to 30% of depressed patients present with an immune-mediated subtype, characterized by peripheral inflammation (high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP) ≥ 3 mg/l) and an atypical symptom profile with fatigue, anhedonia, increased appetite, and hypersomnia. This immune-mediated subtype of MDD is associated with poorer response to first-line antidepressant treatment. Consequently, strategies for immune-targeted augmentation should be prioritised towards patients with this subtype. Meta-analyses have shown modest but heterogeneous treatment effects with immune-targeted augmentation in unstratified MDD cohorts, with celecoxib and minocycline as most promising first-line treatment options. However, no study has prospectively evaluated the effectiveness of a priori stratification by baseline inflammation levels for add-on celecoxib or minocycline in MDD.

Methods

The INSTA-MD trial is a multicentre, 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group stratified clinical trial of adjunctive minocycline or celecoxib to treatment-as-usual for patients with MDD. Two hundred forty adult patients with Major Depressive Disorder who failed to remit with one or two trials of antidepressant treatment will be enrolled and allocated to high-hsCRP (hsCRP ≥3 mg/L) or low-hsCRP (hsCRP <3 mg/L) strata, where disproportional stratified sampling will ensure equally sized strata. Participants in each hsCRP stratum will be randomised to augment their ongoing antidepressant treatment with either adjunctive minocycline, celecoxib or placebo for a duration of 12 weeks, resulting in six treatment arms of each 40 participants. The primary objective is to evaluate the efficacy of immune-targeted augmentation with minocycline or celecoxib versus placebo, and the use of baseline hsCRP stratification to predict treatment response. Additionally, we will perform a head-to-head analysis between the two active compounds. The primary outcome measure is change in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) total score. Secondary outcome measures will be response and remission rates, and change in inflammation-specific symptoms, adverse events and therapy acceptability (adherence). Further exploratory analyses will be performed with an array of peripheral inflammatory biomarkers, metabolic outcomes and physiological data.

Expected impact

The aim of INSTA-MD is to advance the use of immune-targeted precision psychiatry, by supporting the implementation of targeted hsCRP screening and treatment of immune-mediated MDD as a cost-effective intervention in primary care settings. Based on previous studies, we expect immune-targeted augmentation with minocycline or celecoxib to yield a superior remission rate of 15-30% compared to treatment as usual for immune-mediated cases of MDD. By treating immune-related depression early in the treatment algorithm with repurposed first-line anti-inflammatory treatments, we can significantly improve the outcomes of these patients, and reduce the global societal and economic burden of depression.

Ethics and dissemination

This protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Board (CTR - 04/08/2023).

Registration details

Trial registration number NCT05644301 (Clinical trial.gov), EU-CT 2022-501692-35-00.

Inflammation-stratified augmentation of vortioxetine with celecoxib: Results from a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in major depressive disorder

Low-grade inflammation is considered as a pathophysiological mechanism in a subtype of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Anti-inflammatory drugs have shown efficacy in treating MDD. However, it remains unclear how to identify suitable patients for anti-inflammatory treatment of depression. This study investigates the predictive value of pre-treatment high-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP) stratification on the outcome of celecoxib augmentation of vortioxetine. The PREDDICT study was conducted as a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-week trial on augmentation of vortioxetine with celecoxib between December 2017 and April 2020 at the University of Adelaide (Australia). The present analysis focusses on the question of whether the pre-treatment hsCRP measurement and stratification of patients to depression with inflammation (hsCRP >3 mg/L) or without inflammation (hsCRP ≤3 mg/L) has an impact on the outcome of anti-inflammatory treatment with celecoxib. A total of n = 119 mostly treatment-resistant MDD patients with moderate to severe symptomatology were recruited in the trial. There was no effect of treatment group (celecoxib or placebo), pre-treatment hsCRP strata (with/without inflammation), or interaction between the two terms on treatment outcome. The results of the current analysis do not support the hypothesis that pre-treatment hsCRP level is predictive for response to anti-inflammatory treatment with celecoxib in MDD patients. Further research is needed to identify appropriate biomarkers for the prediction of anti-inflammatory treatment outcome in depression. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12617000527369p. Registered on 11 April 2017, http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12617000527369p.

Features of immunometabolic depression as predictors of antidepressant treatment outcomes: pooled analysis of four clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Profiling patients on a proposed 'immunometabolic depression' (IMD) dimension, described as a cluster of atypical depressive symptoms related to energy regulation and immunometabolic dysregulations, may optimise personalised treatment.

AIMS

To test the hypothesis that baseline IMD features predict poorer treatment outcomes with antidepressants.

METHOD

Data on 2551 individuals with depression across the iSPOT-D (n = 967), CO-MED (n = 665), GENDEP (n = 773) and EMBARC (n = 146) clinical trials were used. Predictors included baseline severity of atypical energy-related symptoms (AES), body mass index (BMI) and C-reactive protein levels (CRP, three trials only) separately and aggregated into an IMD index. Mixed models on the primary outcome (change in depressive symptom severity) and logistic regressions on secondary outcomes (response and remission) were conducted for the individual trial data-sets and pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Although AES severity and BMI did not predict changes in depressive symptom severity, higher baseline CRP predicted smaller reductions in depressive symptoms (n = 376, βpooled = 0.06, P = 0.049, 95% CI 0.0001-0.12, I2 = 3.61%); this was also found for an IMD index combining these features (n = 372, βpooled = 0.12, s.e. = 0.12, P = 0.031, 95% CI 0.01-0.22, I2= 23.91%), with a higher - but still small - effect size compared with CRP. Confining analyses to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor users indicated larger effects of CRP (βpooled = 0.16) and the IMD index (βpooled = 0.20). Baseline IMD features, both separately and combined, did not predict response or remission.

CONCLUSIONS

Depressive symptoms of people with more IMD features improved less when treated with antidepressants. However, clinical relevance is limited owing to small effect sizes in inconsistent associations. Whether these patients would benefit more from treatments targeting immunometabolic pathways remains to be investigated.

Anti-inflammatory Drugs in the Treatment of Depression

The last two decades have seen a flourishing of research into the immunobiology of psychiatric phenotypes, in particular major depressive disorder. Both preclinical and clinical data have highlighted pathways and possible mechanisms that might link changes in immunobiology, most especially inflammation, to clinically relevant behaviour. From a therapeutics perspective, a major impetus has been the action of Biologics, often monoclonal antibodies, that target specific cytokines acting as "molecular scalpels" helping to uncover the actions of those proteins. These interventions have been associated with improvements in mood and related symptoms. There are now enough studies and participants to permit meta-analytic analyses of the actions of these and other anti-inflammatory agents.In this chapter, the focus is on the evidence for the role of inflammation biology in depression and the meta-analytic data from trials. The putative mechanisms that might underpin the antidepressant effect of anti-inflammatory drugs are also explored. Lastly, I describe the more stubborn difficulties around heterogeneity, deep phenotyping and stratification as well as improved animal models and greater understanding of the biology that might be addressed by future studies.

Pro-inflammatory markers are associated with response to sequential pharmacotherapy in major depressive disorder: a CAN-BIND-1 report

OBJECTIVE

There is limited literature on associations between inflammatory tone and response to sequential pharmacotherapies in major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

In a 16-week open-label clinical trial, 211 participants with MDD were treated with escitalopram 10-20 mg daily for 8 weeks. Responders continued escitalopram while non-responders received adjunctive aripiprazole 2-10 mg daily for 8 weeks. Plasma levels of pro-inflammatory markers-C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-17, interferon-gamma (IFN)-Γ, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, and Chemokine C-C motif ligand-2 (CCL-2)-measured at baseline, and after 2, 8 and 16 weeks were included in logistic regression analyzes to assess associations between inflammatory markers and treatment response.

RESULTS

Pre-treatment IFN-Γ and CCL-2 levels were significantly associated with a lower of odds of response to escitalopram at 8 weeks. Increases in CCL-2 levels from weeks 8 to 16 in escitalopram non-responders were significantly associated with higher odds of non-response to adjunctive aripiprazole at week 16.

CONCLUSION

Higher pre-treatment levels of IFN-Γ and CCL-2 were associated with non-response to escitalopram. Increasing levels of these pro-inflammatory markers may be associated with non-response to adjunctive aripiprazole. These findings require validation in independent clinical populations.

Systemic Inflammatory Response Index (SIRI) at Baseline Predicts Clinical Response for a Subset of Treatment-Resistant Bipolar Depressed Patients

Background: in a recent double-blind, placebo controlled RCT we demonstrated that selective inhibition of cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX2) is an effective adjunctive strategy in treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBDD). To better clarify the mechanisms underlying TRBDD and treatment response, we conducted a retrospective exploratory analysis of the systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI = absolute neutrophils × absolute monocytes/absolute lymphocytes) in relation to other biomarkers and clinical outcomes after escitalopram (ESC), combined with the COX-2 inhibitor, celecoxib (CBX), versus placebo. Methods: Baseline measures of SIRI were compared between TRBDD and healthy controls (HC), and correlated with blood-based inflammatory cytokines, kynurenines, and growth factors. Post-treatment Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17 (HAMD-17) total scores (clinical outcome) were modelled according to SIRI adjusting for demographics (including relevant interactions with SIRI), baseline depression, treatment arm, and treatment timepoint using multiple linear regression and robust linear mixed effects models. Results: Baseline SIRI did not distinguish TRBDD from HC groups. Baseline SIRI was significantly correlated with lower baseline MCP-1. The relationship between SIRI and HAMD-17 was significant at treatment week 8, in contrast to baseline. Finally, baseline SIRI predicted elevated post-treatment HAMD-17 scores, amongst patients with elevated depression scores at baseline. Significance: High pre-treatment SIRI may predict poorer depressive outcomes amongst TRBDD patients with baseline elevated depression.

Metabolomics signatures of depression: the role of symptom profiles

Depression shows a metabolomic signature overlapping with that of cardiometabolic conditions. Whether this signature is linked to specific depression profiles remains undetermined. Previous research suggested that metabolic alterations cluster more consistently with depressive symptoms of the atypical spectrum related to energy alterations, such as hyperphagia, weight gain, hypersomnia, fatigue and leaden paralysis. We characterized the metabolomic signature of an "atypical/energy-related" symptom (AES) profile and evaluated its specificity and consistency. Fifty-one metabolites measured using the Nightingale platform in 2876 participants from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety were analyzed. An 'AES profile' score was based on five items of the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) questionnaire. The AES profile was significantly associated with 31 metabolites including higher glycoprotein acetyls (β = 0.13, p = 1.35*10^-12), isoleucine (β = 0.13, p = 1.45*10^-10), very-low-density lipoproteins cholesterol (β = 0.11, p = 6.19*10^-9) and saturated fatty acid levels (β = 0.09, p = 3.68*10^-10), and lower high-density lipoproteins cholesterol (β = -0.07, p = 1.14*10^-4). The metabolites were not significantly associated with a summary score of all other IDS items not included in the AES profile. Twenty-five AES-metabolites associations were internally replicated using data from the same subjects (N = 2015) collected at 6-year follow-up. We identified a specific metabolomic signature-commonly linked to cardiometabolic disorders-associated with a depression profile characterized by atypical, energy-related symptoms. The specific clustering of a metabolomic signature with a clinical profile identifies a more homogenous subgroup of depressed patients at higher cardiometabolic risk, and may represent a valuable target for interventions aiming at reducing depression's detrimental impact on health.