A meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing reboxetine, a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of major depressive disorder

Evaluation of Antidepressive-like Behaviours and Oxidative Stress Parameters in Mice Receiving Imipramine-Zinc Complex Compound

The study aimed to evaluate the antidepressant-like effects of an imipramine-zinc (IMI-Zn) complex compound on mice and assess the level of oxidative stress parameters. The research also investigated whether the IMI-Zn complex showed superior antidepressant activity compared to individual treatments of both compounds at effective doses and their joint administration at subtherapeutic doses. The study was conducted on mice. Forced swim (FST), tail suspension (TST), and locomotor activity tests were used for behavioral studies. The results demonstrated the IMI-Zn complex's dose-dependent antidepressant potential when orally administered to mice. Its efficacy was similar to the separate administration of therapeutic doses of imipramine (IMI) and zinc (Zn) and their joint administration at subtherapeutic doses. Moreover, subjecting mice to acute stress did not significantly affect the activity of on glutathione peroxidase (GPX), glutathione reductase (GR), and total antioxidant status (TAS), possibly due to the short exposure time to the stress stimulus. By developing the IMI-Zn complex, it might be possible to simplify the treatment approach, potentially improving patient compliance by combining the therapeutic effects of both IMI and Zn within a single compound, thus addressing one of the contributing factors to non-compliance in depression therapy. The IMI-Zn complex could be a valuable strategy to optimize therapeutic outcomes and balance efficacy and tolerability.

Acute and chronic stress predict anti-depressant treatment outcome and naturalistic course of major depression: A CAN-BIND report

BACKGROUND

In treatment studies of major depressive disorder (MDD), exposure to major life events predicts less symptom improvement and greater likelihood of relapse. In contrast, the impact of minor life events has received less attention. We hypothesized that the impact of minor events on symptom improvement and risk of relapse would be heightened in the presence of concurrent chronic stress. We also hypothesized that major events would predict less symptom improvement and greater risk of relapse independently of chronic stress.

METHODS

Adult patients experiencing an episode of MDD were enrolled into a 16-week trial with antidepressant treatments (n = 156). Forty-three fully remitted patients agreed to participate in a naturalistic 18-month follow-up, and 30 had full data for analyses. Life events and chronic stressors were assessed using a contextual life stress interview.

RESULTS

Greater exposure to minor events predicted greater improvement in symptoms during acute treatment, but this relation was specific to those who reported greater severity of chronic stress. During follow-up, however, major life events predicted increased risk of relapse, and this effect was not moderated by chronic stress.

LIMITATION

High attrition rates led to a small sample size for the follow-up analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to minor events may provide an opportunity to practice problem-solving skills, thereby facilitating symptom improvement. Nevertheless, acute treatment did not protect patients from relapse when they subsequently faced major events during follow-up. Therefore, adjunctive strategies may be needed to enhance outcomes during pharmacotherapy, consolidating benefits from acute treatment and providing skills to prevent relapse.

Analysis of HAM-D scores and working ability in an observational study of Japanese patients with major depressive disorder and painful physical symptoms treated with duloxetine or SSRI monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship between Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score and psychiatrists' judgment of working ability in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and painful physical symptoms.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational, 12-week study in patients who received duloxetine or a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Patients were ≥20 years old, resided in Japan, and had at least moderate depression (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology ≥16) and at least moderate painful physical symptoms (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form average pain ≥3). The main outcome in this post-hoc analysis was the HAM-D17 cutoff best corresponding with patients' working ability according to the investigator's judgment. Area under the receiver-operator curve was used to determine the time point with the strongest relationship between HAM-D17 and working ability. The optimal HAM-D17 cutoff was determined based on the maximum of sensitivity (true positive rate) minus ([1 minus specificity] [true negative rate]). For the evaluation of binary data, a mixed effects model with repeated measures analysis was used.

RESULTS

For the estimation of the HAM-D17 cutoff, the area under the receiver-operator curve was maximal at 12 weeks, when a HAM-D17 score of 6 resulted in the best correspondence with working ability in the combined study population. At 12 weeks, a HAM-D17 score of 6 also resulted in the maximum predictive ability in each of the two treatment groups separately. For predicted working ability at 12 weeks, 52.7% of duloxetine-treated patients achieved the HAM-D17 cutoff of ≤6, whereas 48.5% of SSRIs-treated patients achieved HAM-D17 ≤6 (P=0.477).

CONCLUSION

In this study of patients with major depressive disorder and painful physical symptoms, a HAM-D17 score ≤6 corresponded best with patients' working ability. This finding is consistent with previous studies showing that a HAM-D17 cutoff of ≤7 may overestimate functional recovery from MDD.

Restoring function in major depressive disorder: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Functional impairment contributes to significant disability and economic burden in major depressive disorder (MDD). Treatment response is measured by improvement in depressive symptoms, but functional improvement often lags behind symptomatic improvement. Residual deficits are associated with relapse of depressive symptoms.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the following terms: "major depressive disorder," "functional impairment," "functional outcomes," "recovery of function," "treatment outcome," "outcome assessment," "social functioning," "presenteeism," "absenteeism," "psychiatric status rating scales," and "quality of life." Search limits included publication date (January 1, 1995 to August 31, 2016), English language, and human clinical trials. Controlled, acute-phase, nonrecurrent MDD treatment studies in adults were included if a functional outcome was measured at baseline and endpoint.

RESULTS

The qualitative analysis included 35 controlled studies. The Sheehan Disability Scale was the most commonly used functional assessment. Antidepressant treatments significantly improved functional outcomes. Early treatment response predicted functional improvement, while baseline disease severity did not.

LIMITATIONS

Clinical studies utilized various methodologies and assessments for functional impairment, and were not standardized or adequately powered.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of synchronicity between symptomatic and functional improvement highlights an unmet need for MDD. Treatment guided by routine monitoring of symptoms and functionality may minimize residual functional impairments.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological and somatic interventions in adult patients with treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Major depressive disorder (MDD) affects about 10-15% of the general population in a lifetime. A considerable number of patients fail to achieve full symptom remission despite adequate treatment and are considered treatment resistant (TRD). The current study compared the relative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological and somatic TRD interventions by means of a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An electronic literature search of MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PsycInfo, EconLit and Cochrane Library databases for trials published between September 2003 and September 2014 was conducted. Key outcomes extracted were disease severity change from baseline, response and remission rates at various timepoints and discontinuation due to adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 3876 abstracts identified, 31 publications/randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the analysis; 19 RCTs investigating 13 pharmacological interventions and 12 RCTs investigating electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). The evidence synthesis investigating efficacy outcomes of TRD treatments demonstrated superior efficacy for ketamine compared to pharmacological and somatic interventions at 2 weeks after treatment initiation. At 4, 6 and 8 weeks, quetiapine augmentation (800 mg/day) and risperidone augmentation were found to be the first and second best treatments, respectively. Networks were small for response rate and remission rate outcomes at most timepoints. The most tolerable treatment was lamotrigine augmentation showing a comparable profile to placebo/sham.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis revealed scarcity of long-term data on sustained remission that would allow a comparative long-term efficacy assessment. Key limitations of the analysis can be considered the search timeframe and the use of mapping formula for the depression scores.

Aerobic Exercise as a Tool to Improve Hippocampal Plasticity and Function in Humans: Practical Implications for Mental Health Treatment

Aerobic exercise (AE) has been widely praised for its potential benefits to cognition and overall brain and mental health. In particular, AE has a potent impact on promoting the function of the hippocampus and stimulating neuroplasticity. As the evidence-base rapidly builds, and given most of the supporting work can be readily translated from animal models to humans, the potential for AE to be applied as a therapeutic or adjunctive intervention for a range of human conditions appears ever more promising. Notably, many psychiatric and neurological disorders have been associated with hippocampal dysfunction, which may underlie the expression of certain symptoms common to these disorders, including (aspects of) cognitive dysfunction. Augmenting existing treatment approaches using AE based interventions may promote hippocampal function and alleviate cognitive deficits in various psychiatric disorders that currently remain untreated. Incorporating non-pharmacological interventions into clinical treatment may also have a number of other benefits to patient well being, such as limiting the risk of adverse side effects. This review incorporates both animal and human literature to comprehensively detail how AE is associated with cognitive enhancements and stimulates a cascade of neuroplastic mechanisms that support improvements in hippocampal functioning. Using the examples of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, the utility and implementation of an AE intervention to the clinical domain will be proposed, aimed to reduce cognitive deficits in these, and related disorders.

Social functioning in major depressive disorder

Depression is associated with social risk factors, social impairments and poor social functioning. This paper gives an overview of these social aspects using the NIMH Research and Domain Criteria 'Systems for Social Processes' as a framework. In particular, it describes the bio-psycho-social interplay regarding impaired affiliation and attachment (social anhedonia, hyper-sensitivity to social rejection, competition avoidance, increased altruistic punishment), impaired social communication (impaired emotion recognition, diminished cooperativeness), impaired social perception (reduced empathy, theory-of-mind deficits) and their impact on social networks and the use of social media. It describes these dysfunctional social processes at the behavioural, neuroanatomical, neurochemical and genetic levels, and with respect to animal models of social stress. We discuss the diagnostic specificity of these social deficit constructs for depression and in relation to depression severity. Since social factors are importantly involved in the pathogenesis and the consequences of depression, such research will likely contribute to better diagnostic assessments and concepts, treatments and preventative strategies both at the diagnostic and transdiagnostic level.

Current Trends in Identifying Rapidly Acting Treatments for Depression

Traditional antidepressant medications generally take weeks-to-months to achieve effect. However, the breakthrough finding of ketamine's rapidly acting antidepressant properties has inspired a decade-and-a-half of progress towards the identification of treatments that work quickly-within hours-to-days. This paradigm-shift in the discovery of antidepressant therapies has significantly changed the current landscape of antidepressant drug development. Building on this, the current review briefly highlights the recent trends in research towards identifying rapidly-acting antidepressants. Specifically, ketamine, GLYX-13, nitrous oxide, metabotropic glutamatergic receptor modulators, scopolamine, opioid-receptor modulators, and low field magnetic stimulation are discussed.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Dose-Response Relationship of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies suggested that the treatment response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in major depressive disorder follows a flat response curve within the therapeutic dose range. The present study was designed to clarify the relationship between dosage and treatment response in major depressive disorder.

METHOD

The authors searched PubMed for randomized placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy of SSRIs for treating adults with major depressive disorder. Trials were also required to assess improvement in depression severity at multiple time points. Additional data were collected on treatment response and all-cause and side effect-related discontinuation. All medication doses were transformed into imipramine-equivalent doses. The longitudinal data were analyzed with a mixed-regression model. Endpoint and tolerability analyses were analyzed using meta-regression and stratified subgroup analysis by predefined SSRI dose categories in order to assess the effect of SSRI dosing on the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs for major depressive disorder.

RESULTS

Forty studies involving 10,039 participants were included. Longitudinal modeling (dose-by-time interaction=0.0007, 95% CI=0.0001-0.0013) and endpoint analysis (meta-regression: β=0.00053, 95% CI=0.00018-0.00088, z=2.98) demonstrated a small but statistically significant positive association between SSRI dose and efficacy. Higher doses of SSRIs were associated with an increased likelihood of dropouts due to side effects (meta-regression: β=0.00207, 95% CI=0.00071-0.00342, z=2.98) and decreased likelihood of all-cause dropout (meta-regression: β=-0.00093, 95% CI=-0.00165 to -0.00021, z=-2.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher doses of SSRIs appear slightly more effective in major depressive disorder. This benefit appears to plateau at around 250 mg of imipramine equivalents (50 mg of fluoxetine). The slightly increased benefits of SSRIs at higher doses are somewhat offset by decreased tolerability at high doses.

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance for the management of mood disorders, based on scientific evidence supplemented by expert clinical consensus and formulate recommendations to maximise clinical salience and utility.

METHODS

Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed and EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (MDC) (e.g., books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Information was reviewed and discussed by members of the MDC and findings were then formulated into consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous successive consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, the public, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders.

RESULTS

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders (Mood Disorders CPG) provide up-to-date guidance and advice regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The Mood Disorders CPG is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mood Disorder CPG is the first Clinical Practice Guideline to address both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.

MOOD DISORDERS COMMITTEE

Professor Gin Malhi (Chair), Professor Darryl Bassett, Professor Philip Boyce, Professor Richard Bryant, Professor Paul Fitzgerald, Dr Kristina Fritz, Professor Malcolm Hopwood, Dr Bill Lyndon, Professor Roger Mulder, Professor Greg Murray, Professor Richard Porter and Associate Professor Ajeet Singh.

INTERNATIONAL EXPERT ADVISORS

Professor Carlo Altamura, Dr Francesco Colom, Professor Mark George, Professor Guy Goodwin, Professor Roger McIntyre, Dr Roger Ng, Professor John O'Brien, Professor Harold Sackeim, Professor Jan Scott, Dr Nobuhiro Sugiyama, Professor Eduard Vieta, Professor Lakshmi Yatham.

AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND EXPERT ADVISORS

Professor Marie-Paule Austin, Professor Michael Berk, Dr Yulisha Byrow, Professor Helen Christensen, Dr Nick De Felice, A/Professor Seetal Dodd, A/Professor Megan Galbally, Dr Josh Geffen, Professor Philip Hazell, A/Professor David Horgan, A/Professor Felice Jacka, Professor Gordon Johnson, Professor Anthony Jorm, Dr Jon-Paul Khoo, Professor Jayashri Kulkarni, Dr Cameron Lacey, Dr Noeline Latt, Professor Florence Levy, A/Professor Andrew Lewis, Professor Colleen Loo, Dr Thomas Mayze, Dr Linton Meagher, Professor Philip Mitchell, Professor Daniel O'Connor, Dr Nick O'Connor, Dr Tim Outhred, Dr Mark Rowe, Dr Narelle Shadbolt, Dr Martien Snellen, Professor John Tiller, Dr Bill Watkins, Dr Raymond Wu.

Deviation from intention to treat analysis in randomised trials and treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether deviation from the standard intention to treat analysis has an influence on treatment effect estimates of randomised trials.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, via PubMed, searched between 2006 and 2010; 43 systematic reviews of interventions and 310 randomised trials were included.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

From each year searched, random selection of 5% of intervention reviews with a meta-analysis that included at least one trial that deviated from the standard intention to treat approach. Basic characteristics of the systematic reviews and randomised trials were extracted. Information on the reporting of intention to treat analysis, outcome data, risk of bias items, post-randomisation exclusions, and funding were extracted from each trial. Trials were classified as: ITT (reporting the standard intention to treat approach), mITT (reporting a deviation from the standard approach), and no ITT (reporting no approach). Within each meta-analysis, treatment effects were compared between mITT and ITT trials, and between mITT and no ITT trials. The ratio of odds ratios was calculated (value <1 indicated larger treatment effects in mITT trials than in other trial categories).

RESULTS

50 meta-analyses and 322 comparisons of randomised trials (from 84 ITT trials, 118 mITT trials, and 108 no ITT trials; 12 trials contributed twice to the analysis) were examined. Compared with ITT trials, mITT trials showed a larger intervention effect (pooled ratio of odds ratios 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.96), P=0.01; between meta-analyses variance τ(2)=0.13). Adjustments for sample size, type of centre, funding, items of risk of bias, post-randomisation exclusions, and variance of log odds ratio yielded consistent results (0.80 (0.69 to 0.94), P=0.005; τ(2)=0.08). After exclusion of five influential studies, results remained consistent (0.85 (0.75 to 0.98); τ(2)=0.08). The comparison between mITT trials and no ITT trials showed no statistical difference between the two groups (adjusted ratio of odds ratios 0.92 (0.70 to 1.23); τ(2)=0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Trials that deviated from the intention to treat analysis showed larger intervention effects than trials that reported the standard approach. Where an intention to treat analysis is impossible to perform, authors should clearly report who is included in the analysis and attempt to perform multiple imputations.

Learning from the past and looking to the future: Emerging perspectives for improving the treatment of psychiatric disorders

Modern neuropsychopharmacology commenced in the 1950s with the serendipitous discovery of first-generation antipsychotics and antidepressants which were therapeutically effective yet had marked adverse effects. Today, a broader palette of safer and better-tolerated agents is available for helping people that suffer from schizophrenia, depression and other psychiatric disorders, while complementary approaches like psychotherapy also have important roles to play in their treatment, both alone and in association with medication. Nonetheless, despite considerable efforts, current management is still only partially effective, and highly-prevalent psychiatric disorders of the brain continue to represent a huge personal and socio-economic burden. The lack of success in discovering more effective pharmacotherapy has contributed, together with many other factors, to a relative disengagement by pharmaceutical firms from neuropsychiatry. Nonetheless, interest remains high, and partnerships are proliferating with academic centres which are increasingly integrating drug discovery and translational research into their traditional activities. This is, then, a time of transition and an opportune moment to thoroughly survey the field. Accordingly, the present paper, first, chronicles the discovery and development of psychotropic agents, focusing in particular on their mechanisms of action and therapeutic utility, and how problems faced were eventually overcome. Second, it discusses the lessons learned from past successes and failures, and how they are being applied to promote future progress. Third, it comprehensively surveys emerging strategies that are (1), improving our understanding of the diagnosis and classification of psychiatric disorders; (2), deepening knowledge of their underlying risk factors and pathophysiological substrates; (3), refining cellular and animal models for discovery and validation of novel therapeutic agents; (4), improving the design and outcome of clinical trials; (5), moving towards reliable biomarkers of patient subpopulations and medication efficacy and (6), promoting collaborative approaches to innovation by uniting key partners from the regulators, industry and academia to patients. Notwithstanding the challenges ahead, the many changes and ideas articulated herein provide new hope and something of a framework for progress towards the improved prevention and relief of psychiatric and other CNS disorders, an urgent mission for our Century.

Two Chronic Stress Models Based on Movement Restriction in Rats Respond Selectively to Antidepressant Drugs: Aldolase C As a Potential Biomarker

BACKGROUND

Clinically depressed individuals respond to different types of antidepressants, suggesting that different neurobiological mechanisms may be responsible for their depression. However, animal models to characterize this are not yet available.

METHODS

We induced depressive-like behaviors in rats using 2 different chronic stress models: restraint in small cages or immobilization in adaptable plastic cones. Both models increased anxiety responses evaluated by novelty-suppressed feeding and the elevated plus-maze; increased learned helplessness evaluated by the tail suspension and forced swimming tests; and increased anhedonia evaluated by the sucrose preference test.

RESULTS

We assessed the ability of 2 different types of antidepressants to ameliorate depressive-like behaviors. We administered the serotonin reuptake inhibitor fluoxetine or the noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor reboxetine once daily for 28 days to rats that received either chronic restraint or immobilization stress, or no stress. Behavioral analysis revealed that fluoxetine ameliorated depressive-like behaviors when induced by chronic restraint stress, whereas reboxetine ameliorated these behaviors when induced by chronic immobilization stress. To further test biological differences between both models, we evaluated the levels of Aldolase C, an enzyme expressed by forebrain astrocytes that is regulated by antidepressant treatment, in the cerebrospinal fluid: chronic restraint stress, but not immobilization stress, increased the levels of Aldolase C. Moreover, the presence of astrocyte-derived Aldolase C-GFP in the cerebrospinal fluid indicates its central origin.

CONCLUSIONS

Two stress paradigms induced depressive-like behaviors that were sensitive to different antidepressant treatments. Biomarkers such as Aldolase C could help determine optimal antidepressant treatments for clinically depressed patients.

Cognitive tolerability following successful long term treatment of major depression and anxiety disorders with SSRi antidepressants

BACKGROUND

The present study aims to evaluate cognitive tolerability profile of SSRIs in long-term treatment. The secondary aim is to explore differences of side effects profile between patients with major depression (MD) and anxiety disorders (AD).

METHODS

Sixty-seven consecutive patients, successfully treated with SSRIs in monotherapy for at least six months for MD or AD, were assessed for side effects, with a special focus on cognition.

RESULTS

Over 20% of MD and AD patients in long term treatment with SSRIs reported cognitive symptoms including fatigue, inattentiveness, lack of concentration, memory impairment and apathy. Recall memory impairment, attention deficit and somnolence were most frequently rated as moderate or severe. There were no significant differences in SSRI cognitive side effects profile between MD and AD patients.

LIMITATIONS

Subjective measure of cognitive functioning, limited sample size, lack of a control group.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of depressed and anxious patients treated successfully with SSRIs for over six months reported cognitive, affective, motivational symptoms. These symptoms are likely to represent SSRI side effects rather than residual depressive symptomatology.

Emerging antidepressants to treat major depressive disorder

Depression is a common disorder with an annual risk of a depressive episode in the United States of 6.6%. Only 30-40% of patients remit with antidepressant monotherapy, leaving 60-70% of patients who do not optimally respond to therapy. Unremitted depressive patients are at increased risk for suicide. Considering the prevalence of treatment resistant depression and its consequences, treatment optimization is imperative. This review summarizes the latest treatment modalities for major depressive disorder including pharmacotherapy, electroconvulsive therapy, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and psychotherapy. Through advancements in research to better understand the pathophysiology of depression, advances in treatment will be realized.

Allowing for non-adherence to treatment in a randomized controlled trial of two antidepressants (citalopram versus reboxetine): an example from the GENPOD trial

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses suggest that reboxetine may be less effective than other antidepressants. Such comparisons may be biased by lower adherence to reboxetine and subsequent handling of missing outcome data. This study illustrates how to adjust for differential non-adherence and hence derive an unbiased estimate of the efficacy of reboxetine compared with citalopram in primary care patients with depression.

METHOD

A structural mean modelling (SMM) approach was used to generate adherence-adjusted estimates of the efficacy of reboxetine compared with citalopram using GENetic and clinical Predictors Of treatment response in Depression (GENPOD) trial data. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses were performed to compare estimates of effectiveness with results from previous meta-analyses.

RESULTS

At 6 weeks, 92% of those randomized to citalopram were still taking their medication, compared with 72% of those randomized to reboxetine. In ITT analysis, there was only weak evidence that those on reboxetine had a slightly worse outcome than those on citalopram [adjusted difference in mean Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores: 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.52 to 2.90, p = 0.17]. There was no evidence of a difference in efficacy when differential non-adherence was accounted for using the SMM approach for mean BDI (-0.29, 95% CI -3.04 to 2.46, p = 0.84) or the other mental health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence of a difference in the efficacy of reboxetine and citalopram when these drugs are taken and tolerated by depressed patients. The SMM approach can be implemented in standard statistical software to adjust for differential non-adherence and generate unbiased estimates of treatment efficacy for comparisons of two (or more) active interventions.

Reboxetine and its influence on the action of classical antiepileptic drugs in the mouse maximal electroshock model

BACKGROUND

Our previous studies revealed that different classes of antidepressant drugs differently affect seizure phenomena. Continuing our research in this field, in the present study we wanted to investigate the influence of acute and chronic treatment with reboxetine, a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, on the anticonvulsant action of classical antiepileptic drugs.

METHODS

Experiments were conducted in the model of electroconvulsive threshold and maximal electroshock in mice. Motor coordination was evaluated in the chimney test and long term memory in the step-through passive avoidance task. Brain concentrations of antiepileptic drugs were detected by fluorescence polarization immunoassay.

RESULTS

Acute treatment with reboxetine (8-16 mg/kg) significantly raised the electroconvulsive threshold. In contrast, chronic reboxetine (2-16 mg/kg) did not affect this parameter. Single administration of the antidepressant applied at its subthreshold doses enhanced the action of valproate, carbamazepine and phenobarbital. The antielectroshock effect of phenytoin was also potentiated by acute reboxetine, but only at doses increasing the threshold. Repeated administration of reboxetine (8-12 mg/kg) enhanced the anticonvulsant action of carbamazepine, but not that of three remaining antiepileptic drugs. Neither acute nor chronic reboxetine changed the brain concentrations of valproate, carbamazepine, phenytoin or phenobarbital. Therefore, all revealed interactions seem to be pharmacodynamic. In terms of undesired effects, acute/chronic reboxetine and its combinations with classical antiepileptic drugs did not significantly impair motor performance or long-term memory in mice.

CONCLUSIONS

As far as the obtained data can be extrapolated into clinical conditions, it seems that reboxetine may be safely used in the treatment of depressive disorders in epileptic patients.

Iatrogenic neurology

Iatrogenic disease is one of the most frequent causes of hospital admissions and constitutes a growing public health problem. The most common type of iatrogenic neurologic disease is pharmacologic, and the central and peripheral nervous systems are particularly vulnerable. Despite this, iatrogenic disease is generally overlooked as a differential diagnosis among neurologic patients. The clinical picture of pharmacologically mediated iatrogenic neurologic disease can range from mild to fatal. Common and uncommon forms of drug toxicity are comprehensively addressed in this chapter. While the majority of neurologic adverse effects are listed and referenced in the tables, the most relevant issues are further discussed in the text.

Pharmacological management of unipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

To be used in conjunction with 'Psychological management of unipolar depression' [Lampe et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013;127(Suppl. 443):24-37] and 'Lifestyle management of unipolar depression' [Berk et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013;127(Suppl. 443):38-54]. To provide clinically relevant recommendations for the use of pharmacological treatments in depression derived from a literature review.

METHOD

Using our previous Clinical Practice Guidelines [Malhi et al. Clinical practice recommendations for bipolar disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2009;119(Suppl. 439):27-46] as a foundation, these clinician guidelines target key practical considerations when prescribing pharmacotherapy. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted using electronic database searches (PubMed, MEDLINE), and the findings have been synthesized and integrated alongside clinical experience.

RESULTS

The pharmacotherapy of depression is an iterative process that often results in partial and non-response. Beyond the initiation of antidepressants, the options within widely used strategies, such as combining agents and switching between agents, are difficult to prescribe because of the paucity of pertinent research. However, there is some evidence for second-line strategies, and a non-prescriptive algorithm can be derived that is based broadly on principles rather than specific steps.

CONCLUSION

Depression is by its very nature a heterogeneous illness that is consequently difficult to treat. Invariably, situation-specific factors often play a significant role and must be considered, especially in the case of partial and non-response. Consulting with colleagues and trialling alternate treatment paradigms are essential strategies in the management of depression.

Antidepressant treatment and emotional processing: can we dissociate the roles of serotonin and noradrenaline?

The ability to match individual patients to tailored treatments has the potential to greatly improve outcomes for individuals suffering from major depression. In particular, while the vast majority of antidepressant treatments affect either serotonin or noradrenaline or a combination of these two neurotransmitters, it is not known whether there are particular patients or symptom profiles which respond preferentially to the potentiation of serotonin over noradrenaline or vice versa. Experimental medicine models suggest that the primary mode of action of these treatments may be to remediate negative biases in emotional processing. Such models may provide a useful framework for interrogating the specific actions of antidepressants. Here, we therefore review evidence from studies examining the effects of drugs which potentiate serotonin, noradrenaline or a combination of both neurotransmitters on emotional processing. These results suggest that antidepressants targeting serotonin and noradrenaline may have some specific actions on emotion and reward processing which could be used to improve tailoring of treatment or to understand the effects of dual-reuptake inhibition. Specifically, serotonin may be particularly important in alleviating distress symptoms, while noradrenaline may be especially relevant to anhedonia. The data reviewed here also suggest that noradrenergic-based treatments may have earlier effects on emotional memory that those which affect serotonin.

A review of the adverse effects and safety of noradrenergic antidepressants

There are a variety of noradrenergic antidepressants available, most of which act by inhibiting neuronal noradrenaline re-uptake, although few drugs are specific for this action. Where drugs have numerous actions the adverse effects of noradrenaline reuptake may be difficult to isolate, although in this respect the adverse effects of reboxetine, a specific noradrenaline re-uptake inhibitor, are illuminating. Noradrenergic antidepressants typically cause minor changes in blood and heart rate, sweating and insomnia. Other pharmacological actions shown by non-specific antidepressants may act to worsen or mitigate these adverse effects. Noradrenergic drugs are less likely than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to cause sexual dysfunction but more likely to cause urinary hesitancy. Doubts remain over the relative propensity for antidepressants with different modes of action to cause diabetes and hyponatraemia. Noradrenergic actions do not seem to confer a risk of death in overdose.

Role of GIRK channels on the noradrenergic transmission in vivo: an electrophysiological and neurochemical study on GIRK2 mutant mice

Dysfunctional noradrenergic transmission is related to several neuropsychiatric conditions, such as depression. Nowadays, the role of G protein-coupled inwardly rectifying potassium (GIRK)2 subunit containing GIRK channels controlling neuronal intrinsic excitability in vitro is well known. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of GIRK2 subunit mutation on the central noradrenergic transmission in vivo. For that purpose, single-unit extracellular activity of locus coeruleus (LC) noradrenergic neurons and brain monoamine levels using the HPLC technique were measured in wild-type and GIRK2 mutant mice. Girk2 gene mutation induced significant differences among genotypes regarding burst activity of LC neurons. In fact, the proportion of neurons displaying burst firing was increased in GIRK2 heterozygous mice as compared to that recorded from wild-type mice. Furthermore, this augmentation was even greater in the homozygous genotype. However, neither the basal firing rate nor the coefficient of variation of LC neurons was different among genotypes. Noradrenaline and serotonin basal levels were altered in the dorsal raphe nucleus from GIRK2 heterozygous and homozygous mice, respectively. Furthermore, noradrenaline levels were increased in LC projecting areas such as the hippocampus and amygdale from homozygous mice, although not in the prefrontal cortex. Finally, potency of clonidine and morphine inhibiting LC activity was reduced in GIRK2 mutant mice, although the efficacy remained unchanged. Altogether, the present study supports the role of GIRK2 subunit-containing GIRK channels on the maintenance of tonic noradrenergic activity in vivo. Electric and neurochemical consequences derived from an altered GIRK2-dependent signalling could facilitate the understanding of the neurobiological basis of pathologies related to a dysfunctional monoaminergic transmission.

Pharmacological treatment of unipolar depression

Antidepressants were first developed serendipitously 60 years ago and gave rise to the monoamine hypothesis of depression and antidepressant action which has persisted in various forms ever since. Although we have made huge strides in our understanding of the pharmacology of antidepressants, and in the neuroscience of depression, our current antidepressants have changed little since the original drugs. In this chapter I first review some controversies in the use of antidepressant drugs including whether they actually work, and then go on to describe the current state of our clinical use of antidepressants, looking both at the principles and practice of treatment and reviewing the evidence for efficacy, tolerability and safety in acute and sequenced treatments. I finally briefly consider future directions and the aspiration of developing more effective antidepressants.

Quetiapine monotherapy in acute phase for major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia and bipolar depression trials suggest that quetiapine may have an antidepressant effect.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of quetiapine treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). Only the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparison between quetiapine and placebo were included. The authors searched such clinical trials carried out between 1991 and February 2012.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched in February 2012. Study populations comprised adults with MDD or major depression. STUDY ELIGIBLE CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Eligible studies were randomized, placebo-controlled trials of quetiapine monotherapy carried out in adults with MDD and presenting endpoint outcomes relevant to: i) depression severity, ii) response rate, iii) overall discontinuation rate, or iv) discontinuation rate due to adverse events. No language restriction was applied.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

All abstracts identified by the electronic searches were examined. The full reports of relevant studies were assessed, and the data of interest were extracted. Based on the Cochrane methods of bias assessment, risks of bias were determined. The studies with two risks or less were included. The efficacy outcomes were the mean change scores of depression rating scales, the overall response rate, and the overall remission rates. The overall discontinuation rate was considered as a measure of acceptability. The discontinuation rate due to adverse events was a measure of tolerability. Relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed by using a random effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 1,497 participants in three RCTs were included. All trials examined the quetiapine extended-release (XR). The pooled mean change scores of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) of the quetiapine-treated group were higher than those of the placebo-treated group with the WMDs (95%CI) of -3.37 (-3.95, -2.79) and -2.46 (-3.47, -1.45), respectively. All studies defined the response and remission as ≥ 50% reduction of the MADRS total score and the MADRS total score of ≤8 at endpoint, respectively. The overall response and remission rates were significantly greater in the quetiapine-treated group with RRs (95%CIs) of 1.44 (1.26, 1.64) and 1.37 (1.12, 1.68), respectively. The pooled discontinuation rate was not significantly different between groups with an RR (95%CI) of 1.16 (0.97, 1.39). The pooled discontinuation rate due to adverse event was greater in the quetiapine group with an RR (95%CI) of 2.90 (1.87, 4.48). With respect to sleep time, the pooled mean change Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores of the quetiapine-treated group was also significantly higher than that of the placebo-treated group [WMD (95%CI) of -1.21 (-1.81, -0.61)].

LIMITATIONS

Variety of quetiapine XR doses and the small number of RCTs were key limitations of this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limited evidence obtained from three RCTs, quetiapine XR is effective for adult patients with MDD. The high dropout rate due to adverse events suggests that some MDD patients may not be able to tolerate quetiapine XR. Due to the balance of its efficacy benefit and risk of side effects, as the overall discontinuation rate shown, the acceptability of this agent is not more than placebo. These results should be viewed as the very preliminary one. Further studies in this area are warranted. IMPLICATION OF KEY FINDINGS: Quetiapine may be an alternative antidepressant. However, both risk and benefit of this agent should be taken into account for an individual patient with MDD.

Does baseline fatigue influence treatment response to reboxetine or citalopram in depression? An open label randomized controlled trial

It has been suggested that antidepressants that increase noradrenergic transmission should be better than serotonergic antidepressants at treating fatigue in depression. We conducted a secondary analysis of an RCT in which patients with depression were randomly assigned to reboxetine (a noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor [NARI]) or citalopram (a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor [SSRI]). We investigated the difference between citalopram and reboxetine in treating the symptom of fatigue in depression, and also in treating depression with high levels of baseline fatigue. We found no difference between citalopram and reboxetine in terms of improvement in fatigue at six weeks (0.11, 95% confidence interval (-0.28, 0.49); p = 0.59:), or at 12 weeks. Using the Beck Depression Inventory at 12 weeks as the outcome measure, we found some evidence in support of our hypothesis that reboxetine is more effective than citalopram in treating depression in those with high baseline fatigue (interaction term: -2.87, 95% confidence interval (-5.15, -0.60); p = 0.01). We conclude that there is no evidence of any difference between reboxetine and citalopram in their efficacy in treating fatigue as a symptom of depression, but that reboxetine may be more effective in treating depression with high levels of fatigue. Fatigue might be useful in the prediction of response to NARIs or SSRIs.

Severity of depression and response to antidepressants: GENPOD randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant prescribing is widespread. Nonetheless, response to antidepressants is variable. If it was possible to predict response to medication and thus tailor treatment accordingly, this would not only improve patient outcomes but may also have economic benefits.

AIMS

To test the hypothesis that individuals with more severe depression would benefit more from noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (NARIs) than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) compared with individuals with less severe depression.

METHOD

Individuals recruited from UK primary care who met ICD-10 criteria for a depressive episode and scored 15 or more on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) were randomised to either an SSRI (citalopram 20 mg daily) or a NARI (reboxetine 4 mg twice daily). Randomisation was by means of a remote automated telephone system. The main outcome was depressive symptoms measured by the BDI total score 6 weeks after randomisation. (

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN31345163.)

RESULTS

In total, 601 participants were randomised (citalopram: n = 298, reboxetine: n = 303). Ninety-one per cent were followed up at 6 weeks (citalopram: n = 274, reboxetine: n = 272). There was little evidence to support an interaction between treatment and severity of depression (interaction term: 0.02, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.62, P = 0.96). Adjustment for potential confounders (age, gender, employment status, history of depression, number of life events and social support) did not affect the findings (interaction term: 0.06, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.66, P = 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with NARIs does not confer any advantage over SSRI treatment for outcome in those with more severe depressive illness presenting in primary care.

Neuroanatomical targets of reboxetine and bupropion as revealed by pharmacological magnetic resonance imaging

RATIONALE

One of the key targets of psychopharmacology research is to determine the potential sites of action of antidepressants in order to characterise their underlying mechanism of action.

OBJECTIVE

Using blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) pharmacological magnetic resonance imaging (phMRI), the neuroanatomical target-sites of reboxetine (a selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor) and bupropion (an antidepressant with stimulatory effects on dopamine and potentially on noradrenaline) were mapped.

METHODS

Separate groups of rats were challenged acutely or chronically (daily injections for 14 days) with saline or psychoactive compounds and scanned. Subsequent statistical parametric mapping of the main effects of the drug was performed by identifying changes in the BOLD signal.

RESULTS

Acute reboxetine challenge at a low dose (10 mg/kg i.p.) produced positive BOLD responses specifically in the hypothalamus, whereas a larger dose (30 mg/kg i.p.) produced activations in the hypothalamus, anterior hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. Chronic reboxetine (30 mg/kg i.p.) treatment induced increased BOLD responses in the posterior hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, while no significant contrast changes were observed in the hypothalamus and a significant decrease was apparent in the amygdala. In contrast, acute bupropion (15 and 30 mg/kg i.p.) challenge in both doses produced no significant contrast changes in the regions of interest. However, chronic bupropion treatment (30 mg/kg i.p.) produced robust increases in BOLD responses in the hippocampus, amygdala and prefrontal cortex.

CONCLUSION

In summary, this study demonstrates that reboxetine and bupropion evoke a significant increase in BOLD functional activity in specific regions of the brain, including the hypothalamus, hippocampus, prefrontal cortex and amygdala. Furthermore, the study illustrates the potential value of pharmacological MRI in rodents to delineate pharmacologically induced changes in regional brain function.

[Psychotropic drugs and diabetes]

Psychotropic drugs, such as antipsychotics and antidepressants, are widely used substances which can display marked metabolic side effects. Psychiatric patients display increased morbidity and mortality which, besides disease specific factors, may be attributed to metabolic side effects of psychotropic drugs. Commonly observed side effects of antipsychotics are weight gain as well as disturbances in glucose and lipid metabolism. Additionally, antipsychotics have been shown to increase diabetes risk. Also, the use of some of the antidepressant substances is associated with an increased diabetes risk. However, large inter-substance variations have been observed. Conversely, diabetics have an increased risk of depression. Metabolic side effects of psychotropic drugs pose a serious impairment for psychiatric patients and their management can play a pivotal role in therapeutic compliance and success. This review aims to give an overview of metabolic side effects of commonly used psychotic drugs and to give an insight into possible underlying mechanisms.

Locus coeruleus and dorsal raphe neuron activity and response to acute antidepressant administration in a rat model of Parkinson's disease

In addition to noradrenergic and serotonergic systems, dopaminergic neurotransmission seems to play an important role in the aetiopathogenesis of, and recovery from, depression. Moreover, the incidence of depression is higher in patients affected by diseases where the dopaminergic system is highly impaired, such us Parkinson's disease. Here, we investigated the effects of dopamine degeneration on the activity and response to antidepressants of locus coeruleus (LC) noradrenergic and dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) serotonergic neurons. To this end, single-unit extracellular recordings were performed in control and 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA)-lesioned animals. In this latter group, LC neurons showed a lower basal firing rate as well as less sensitivity to the administration of the serotonin reuptake inhibitor, fluoxetine. The rest of electrophysiological parameters and the response to the administration of the α2-adrenoceptor agonist, clonidine and the noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, reboxetine remained unaltered. In the DRN, dopamine depletion did not modify the basal electrophysiological characteristics and the response to clonidine or fluoxetine administration. In contrast, the administration of reboxetine more efficiently induced an inhibitory effect in the lesioned group. In additional analyses it was observed that while in control animals, LC and DRN basal firing rate was significantly correlated, this relationship was lost after the 6-OHDA lesion. In conclusion, dopaminergic degeneration alters LC neuron basal activity, the relationship/synteny between both nuclei, and their response to antidepressants. These findings shed fresh light on our understanding of the role of dopamine in depression and the mechanism action of antidepressants.

Safety and efficacy of esreboxetine in patients with fibromyalgia: An 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Esreboxetine is an investigational, highly selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor that has been reported to have antinociceptive effects in preclinical pain models.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the efficacy and safety profile of esreboxetine in the management of fibromyalgia.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients aged ≥18 years who met American College of Rheumatology criteria for fibromyalgia. Eligible patients were required to have a score ≥40 mm on the 100-mm visual analog scale of the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire at screening and randomization, and a mean score ≥4 on an 11-point pain rating scale (from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain) based on the weekly mean pain score in the week before randomization. After a 1-week baseline period and a 2-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to receive esreboxetine or placebo for 8 weeks, followed by a 1-week follow-up period. Esreboxetine dosing was started at 2 mg/d and was escalated by 2 mg/d every 2 weeks until attainment of a dose of 8 mg/d or the maximum tolerated dose. The primary efficacy outcome was the change from baseline to week 8 in weekly mean pain scores, as derived from patients' daily pain ratings on the 11-point scale. Additional primary efficacy outcomes included changes in the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total score and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). The safety profile was evaluated based on observed and spontaneously reported adverse events, laboratory tests, and other safety measures.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-four patients were randomized to each study group, but 1 patient in the placebo group did not receive treatment. Thus, the study population consisted of 267 patients (89.5% female; 88.4% white; mean age, ∼50 years [range, 20-84 years]). Twenty-seven patients in each group discontinued the study. Adverse events were the most common reason for discontinuation in the esreboxetine group (11 patients), compared with 3 discontinuing due to adverse events in the placebo group. Patient default (withdrawal of consent and loss to follow-up) was the most common reason for discontinuation in the placebo group (13 patients), compared with 10 in the esreboxetine group. The esreboxetine group had significantly greater improvement in the weekly mean pain score compared with the placebo group (mean [SE] change from baseline: -1.55 [0.16] vs -0.99 [0.16], respectively; P = 0.006). A significantly greater percentage of patients in the esreboxetine group reported a ≥30% reduction in pain scores compared with the placebo group (37.6% [50/133] vs 22.6% [30/133]; P = 0.004). Esreboxetine was associated with significant improvement compared with placebo in the FIQ total score (mean change from baseline: -15.63 [1.56] vs -8.07 [1.54]; P < 0.001). On the PGIC, significantly more patients in the esreboxetine group than in the placebo group reported their condition much or very much improved (odds ratio = 2.42; 90% CI, 1.549-3.786; P < 0.001). Esreboxetine also was associated with significant improvements in secondary outcomes compared with placebo. These included fatigue, as reflected in scores on the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (mean [SE] change from baseline: -6.39 [0.75] vs -2.82 [0.75], respectively; P < 0.001), and scores on measures of patient function and health-related quality of life, including the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (mean change from baseline: 4.36 [0.59] vs 1.86 [0.59]; P = 0.002), the SF-36 Mental Component Summary (mean change from baseline: 4.25 [0.83] vs 1.81 [0.83]; P = 0.019), and the Sheehan Disability Scale total score (mean change from baseline: -6.50 [0.64] vs -2.79 [0.61]; P < 0.001). Numerically more patients in the esreboxetine group than in the placebo group reported at least one adverse event (71.6% vs 57.1%), most commonly constipation (17.2% vs 5.3%), insomnia (15.7% vs 3.0%), dry mouth (15.7% vs 2.3%), and headache (10.4% vs 2.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this 8-week trial in patients with fibromyalgia, esreboxetine was associated with significant reductions in pain scores compared with placebo. It was also associated with improvements in outcomes relevant to fibromyalgia, including the PGIC, function, and fatigue. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00357825.

Reboxetine for acute treatment of major depression: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished placebo and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of reboxetine versus placebo or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the acute treatment of depression, and to measure the impact of potential publication bias in trials of reboxetine.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis including unpublished data.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, BIOSIS, and Cochrane Library), clinical trial registries, trial results databases, and regulatory authority websites up until February 2009, as well as unpublished data from the manufacturer of reboxetine (Pfizer, Berlin).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Double blind, randomised, controlled trials of acute treatment (six weeks or more) with reboxetine versus placebo or SSRIs in adults with major depression.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Remission and response rates (benefit outcomes), as well as rates of patients with at least one adverse event and withdrawals owing to adverse events (harm outcomes).

DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS

The procedures for data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were always conducted by one person and checked by another. If feasible, data were pooled by meta-analyses (random effects model). Publication bias was measured by comparing results of published and unpublished trials.

RESULTS

We analysed 13 acute treatment trials that were placebo controlled, SSRI controlled, or both, which included 4098 patients. Data on 74% (3033/4098) of these patients were unpublished. In the reboxetine versus placebo comparison, no significant differences in remission rates were shown (odds ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.51; P=0.216). Substantial heterogeneity (I(2)=67.3%) was shown in the meta-analysis of the eight trials that investigated response rates for reboxetine versus placebo. A sensitivity analysis that excluded a small inpatient trial showed no significant difference in response rates between patients receiving reboxetine and those receiving placebo (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.56; P=0.071; I(2)=42.1%). Reboxetine was inferior to SSRIs (fluoxetine, paroxetine, and citalopram) for remission rates (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.96; P=0.015) and response rates (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.95; P=0.01). Reboxetine was inferior to placebo for both harm outcomes (P<0.001 for both), and to fluoxetine for withdrawals owing to adverse events (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.05; P=0.031). Published data overestimated the benefit of reboxetine versus placebo by up to 115% and reboxetine versus SSRIs by up to 23%, and also underestimated harm.

CONCLUSIONS

Reboxetine is, overall, an ineffective and potentially harmful antidepressant. Published evidence is affected by publication bias, underlining the urgent need for mandatory publication of trial data.

Improvement of social adaptation in depression with serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors

Depression is a disabling condition resulting in significant impairment in social functioning, involving the patient's family, friends, work colleagues, and society at large. Although both psychologic and pharmacologic treatments generally improve many depressive symptoms, they do not always result in significant improvement in social functioning. The importance of recovery of social functioning in depressed patients is now widely appreciated, and studies are beginning to include it in evaluations of therapeutic efficacy. Among the various social adjustment evaluation rating scales, the Social Adaptation Self-Evaluation Scale, a social motivation and behavior scale, has been found to be simple to use and sensitive to change. Using this scale, the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, reboxetine, has been shown to be significantly more effective in improving social functioning than the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, fluoxetine. These findings are consistent with the notion that improvement in social adaptation involves functions depending primarily on noradrenergic neurotransmission. This hypothesis suggests that the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, venlafaxine, duloxetine, and milnacipran, could be particularly helpful in improving social functioning. Preliminary studies with the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors suggest that they significantly improve social functioning. Comparative studies with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on the effects on social functioning should be encouraged.

The pharmacological properties of antidepressants

Antidepressant drugs represent one of the main forms of effective treatment for the amelioration of depressive symptoms. Most available antidepressants increase extracellular levels of monoamines. However, it is now recognized that monoamine levels and availability are only part of the story, and that antidepressants whose mechanism of action is mainly based on the modulation of monoaminergic systems may not be able to satisfy the unmet needs of depression. Therefore, a number of compounds, developed for their potential antidepressant activity, are endowed with putative mechanisms of action not affecting traditional monoamine targets. This article briefly reviews, within a mechanistic perspective, the pharmacological profiles of representative antidepressants from each class, including monoamine oxidase inhibitors, tricyclics, norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antidepressants interacting with dopaminergic, melatonergic, glutamatergic, or neuropeptide systems. The undesirable side effects of currently used antidepressants, which can often be a reason for lack of compliance, are also considered.

Insomnia and depression: a multifaceted interplay

Historically, insomnia has been viewed as a symptom of depressive illness that is expected to resolve with adequate treatment of the depressive disorder. This article reviews the evidence that increasingly challenges this simplistic view and summarizes research demonstrating the multifaceted interplay between insomnia and depression. It discusses the prevalence, clinical significance, and time course of insomnia, distinguishing between poor sleep and an insomnia disorder. The article also discusses abnormalities in sleep architecture in major depressive disorder and theories about the pathways connecting sleep and depression. It concludes with a discussion of issues related to treatment, including the effects of antidepressants on sleep and new evidence of the utility of adding an insomnia-specific therapy for improved management of depressed patients with comorbid insomnia.

Extended release quetiapine fumarate monotherapy for major depressive disorder: results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy was evaluated in major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHOD

This was an 8-week (6-week randomized-phase; 2-week drug-discontinuation/tapering phase), double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study. The primary outcome measure was Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score randomization-to-Week 6 change. Other assessments included the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

723 patients were randomized: 182, 178, 179, and 184 to quetiapine XR 50, 150, 300 mg/day, and placebo, respectively. At Week 6, significant reductions occurred in MADRS score with quetiapine XR 50 mg/day (-13.56; P<.05), 150 mg/day (-14.50; P<.01) and 300 mg/day (-14.18; P<.01) versus placebo (-11.07); at Day 4, reductions for quetiapine XR (titrated to 50 or 150 mg/day according to dose group) versus placebo (-2.9) were: -4.7 (P<.01), -5.2 (P<.001), and -5.1 (P<.001), respectively. At endpoint, MADRS response (>or=50% reduction in score) was 42.7% (P<.01), 51.2% (P<.001), and 44.9% (P<or= .001) for quetiapine XR 50, 150, and 300 mg/day, respectively; 30.3% for placebo. Overall, quetiapine XR 150 mg/day provided consistently more positive secondary efficacy results than 50 mg/day and 300 mg/day versus placebo. The most common AEs in quetiapine XR-treated patients were dry mouth, sedation, somnolence, headache, and dizziness.

CONCLUSION

In patients with MDD, quetiapine XR monotherapy (50/150/300 mg/day) is effective in reducing depressive symptoms, with improvement from Day 4 onwards. Safety and tolerability were consistent with the known profile of quetiapine.

Clinical practice recommendations for depression

OBJECTIVE

To provide clinically relevant evidence-based recommendations for the management of depression in adults that are informative, easy to assimilate and facilitate clinical decision making.

METHOD

A comprehensive literature review of over 500 articles was undertaken using electronic database search engines (e.g. MEDLINE, PsychINFO and Cochrane reviews). In addition articles, book chapters and other literature known to the authors were reviewed. The findings were then formulated into a set of recommendations that were developed by a multidisciplinary team of clinicians who routinely deal with mood disorders. The recommendations then underwent consultative review by a broader advisory panel that included experts in the field, clinical staff and patient representatives.

RESULTS

The clinical practice recommendations for depression (Depression CPR) summarize evidence-based treatments and provide a synopsis of recommendations relating to each phase of the illness. They are designed for clinical use and have therefore been presented succinctly in an innovative and engaging manner that is clear and informative.

CONCLUSION

These up-to-date recommendations provide an evidence-based framework that incorporates clinical wisdom and consideration of individual factors in the management of depression. Further, the novel style and practical approach should promote uptake and implementation.

Toward achieving optimal response: understanding and managing antidepressant side effects

The safety and tolerability of antidepressants have improved considerably over the past two decades. Nevertheless, antidepressant side effects are still common and problematic. The majority of patients treated with contemporaty agents experience one or more bothersome side effects. These side effects often create barriers to achieving depressive remission, as well as to preventing relapse and recurrence. Clinicians tend to underestimate the prevalence of side effects, and as many as one quarter of patients discontinue their antidepressants because of difficult-to-tolerate side effects; others may continue on antidepressant therapy but experience diminished quality of life related to troublesome side effects. This article reviews the prevalence of side effects, the impact of side effects on treatment adherence, and methodological issues including the challenge of distinguishing side effects from residual depressive symptoms, discontinuation effects, and general medical problems. In addition, we address the most common side effects such as sexual dysfunction, gastrointestinal problems, sleep disturbance, apathy and fatigue, and offer strategies for management that may help patients achieve optimal response to pharmacotherapy

Escitalopram in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative antidepressant efficacy of escitalopram and comparator antidepressants.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed using studies in major depressive disorder (MDD) comparing escitalopram with active controls, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs] (citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline) and serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs] (venlafaxine, duloxetine). Adult patients had to meet DSM-IV criteria for MDD.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the treatment difference in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 8. Secondary outcome measures were response and remission (MADRS total score < or = 12) rates.

RESULTS

Individual patient data (N = 4549) from 16 randomized controlled trials were included in the analyses (escitalopram n = 2272, SSRIs n = 1750, SNRIs n = 527). Escitalopram was significantly more effective than comparators in overall treatment effect, with an estimated mean treatment difference of 1.1 points on the MADRS (p < 0.0001), and in responder (63.7 vs. 58.3%, p < 0.0001) and remitter (53.1 vs. 49.4%, p < 0.0059) analyses. Escitalopram was significantly superior to SSRIs, with an estimated difference in response of 62.1 vs. 58.4% and remission of 51.6 vs. 49.0%. In comparison to SNRIs, the estimated difference in response was 68.3 vs. 59.0% (p = 0.0007) and for remission the difference was 57.8 vs. 50.5% (p = 0.0088). These results were similar for severely depressed patients (baseline MADRS > or = 30). Sensitivity analyses were performed with data from articles reporting Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) scores. The 8-week withdrawal rate due to adverse events was 5.4% for escitalopram and 7.9% for the comparators (p < 0.01). This difference was accounted for by statistically significant higher attrition rates in the SNRI comparisons. This work may be limited by the clinical methodology underlying meta-analytic studies, in particular, the exclusion of trials that fail to meet predetermined criteria for inclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis, superior efficacy of escitalopram compared to SSRIs and SNRIs was confirmed, although the superiority over SSRIs was largely explained by differences between escitalopram and citalopram.