Brexpiprazole as adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder with anxious distress: Results from a post-hoc analysis of two randomised controlled trials

Effects of Adjunctive Brexpiprazole on Individual Depressive Symptoms and Functioning in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder and Anxious Distress: Post Hoc Analysis of Three Placebo-Controlled Studies

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Anxiety symptoms in major depressive disorder (MDD) are frequent, and they decrease response to antidepressant treatment (ADT), and affect patient functioning. This post hoc analysis examined the efficacy of adjunctive brexpiprazole on individual depressive symptoms and functioning in patients with MDD with anxious distress.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

Data were included from three 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive brexpiprazole in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01360645, NCT01360632, NCT02196506). Patients were stratified using proxy criteria for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, anxious distress. Changes in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale item scores and Sheehan Disability Scale mean score from baseline to week 6 were determined for ADT + brexpiprazole (2 and 2-3 mg) versus ADT + placebo.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

At baseline, 450 of 746 patients (60.3%, 2 mg analysis) and 670 of 1162 patients (57.7%, 2-3 mg analysis) had anxious distress. In patients with anxious distress, ADT + brexpiprazole 2 mg or 2 to 3 mg showed greater improvements than ADT + placebo (P < 0.05) on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale items of apparent sadness, reported sadness, inner tension, reduced sleep, reduced appetite, lassitude, inability to feel, and pessimistic thoughts (Cohen d effect sizes, 0.18-0.44), and on Sheehan Disability Scale mean score (effect sizes, 0.21-0.23).

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive brexpiprazole is efficacious in reducing core depressive symptoms, sleep, and appetite, as well as improving functioning, in patients with MDD and anxious distress who have inadequate response to ADTs.

How significant is the assessment of the DSM-5 'anxious distress' specifier in patients with major depressive disorder without comorbid anxiety disorders in the continuation/maintenance phase?

OBJECTIVE

Anxious distress (ANXD), which is common in major depressive disorder (MDD), is associated with poor outcomes. We investigated clinical characteristics of MDD patients with the DSM-5 ANXD specifier and only mild residual symptoms without comorbid anxiety disorders in the continuation/maintenance phase.

METHODS

We recruited 110 outpatients with MDD without comorbid anxiety disorders. They were interviewed; the presence of the DSM-5 ANXD specifier was assessed. They completed the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS), the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (S-EPQ), the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris and San Diego-Autoquestionnaire (TEMPS-A).

RESULTS

The mean QIDS total score was 9.7 ± 5.5. The DSM-5 ANXD specifier was identified in 73 patients (66.4%). A univariate analysis indicated ANXD was significantly associated with younger age; unmarried status; living alone; higher QIDS total score; higher S-EPQ neuroticism score; and higher TEMPS-A cyclothymic, depressive and irritable scores. After covariate adjustment, a multivariable linear regression analysis revealed a significant association between the QIDS total score and ANXD (three different models).

CONCLUSION

The DSM-5 ANXD was also common among MDD patients without comorbid anxiety disorders in the continuation/maintenance phase; it was significantly associated with greater depression severity and might be related to temperament associated with bipolar disorder.Key pointsDSM-5 anxious distress is common among MDD patients without comorbid anxiety disorders in the continuation/maintenance phase and correlated with some of their socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. • The presence of DSM-5 anxious distress was significantly associated with greater severity of depression and might be related to temperament associated with bipolar disorder.• The evaluation of the DSM-5 anxiety distress was revealed to have some significance not only in the acute phase but also in the continuation/maintenance phase of MDD.

Validity of the Aktibipo Self-rating Questionnaire for the Digital Self-assessment of Mood and Relapse Detection in Patients With Bipolar Disorder: Instrument Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Self-reported mood is a valuable clinical data source regarding disease state and course in patients with mood disorders. However, validated, quick, and scalable digital self-report measures that can also detect relapse are still not available for clinical care.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aim to validate the newly developed ASERT (Aktibipo Self-rating) questionnaire-a 10-item, mobile app-based, self-report mood questionnaire consisting of 4 depression, 4 mania, and 2 nonspecific symptom items, each with 5 possible answers. The validation data set is a subset of the ongoing observational longitudinal AKTIBIPO400 study for the long-term monitoring of mood and activity (via actigraphy) in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Patients with confirmed BD are included and monitored with weekly ASERT questionnaires and monthly clinical scales (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] and Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS]).

METHODS

The content validity of the ASERT questionnaire was assessed using principal component analysis, and the Cronbach α was used to assess the internal consistency of each factor. The convergent validity of the depressive or manic items of the ASERT questionnaire with the MADRS and YMRS, respectively, was assessed using a linear mixed-effects model and linear correlation analyses. In addition, we investigated the capability of the ASERT questionnaire to distinguish relapse (YMRS≥15 and MADRS≥15) from a nonrelapse (interepisode) state (YMRS<15 and MADRS<15) using a logistic mixed-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 99 patients with BD were included in this study (follow-up: mean 754 days, SD 266) and completed an average of 78.1% (SD 18.3%) of the requested ASERT assessments (completion time for the 10 ASERT questions: median 24.0 seconds) across all patients in this study. The ASERT depression items were highly associated with MADRS total scores (P<.001; bootstrap). Similarly, ASERT mania items were highly associated with YMRS total scores (P<.001; bootstrap). Furthermore, the logistic mixed-effects regression model for scale-based relapse detection showed high detection accuracy in a repeated holdout validation for both depression (accuracy=85%; sensitivity=69.9%; specificity=88.4%; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=0.880) and mania (accuracy=87.5%; sensitivity=64.9%; specificity=89.9%; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve=0.844).

CONCLUSIONS

The ASERT questionnaire is a quick and acceptable mood monitoring tool that is administered via a smartphone app. The questionnaire has a good capability to detect the worsening of clinical symptoms in a long-term monitoring scenario.

Neurobiology of resilience in depression: immune and vascular insights from human and animal studies

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a chronic and recurrent psychiatric condition characterized by depressed mood, social isolation and anhedonia. It will affect 20% of individuals with considerable economic impacts. Unfortunately, 30-50% of depressed individuals are resistant to current antidepressant treatments. MDD is twice as prevalent in women and associated symptoms are different. Depression's main environmental risk factor is chronic stress, and women report higher levels of stress in daily life. However, not every stressed individual becomes depressed, highlighting the need to identify biological determinants of stress vulnerability but also resilience. Based on a reverse translational approach, rodent models of depression were developed to study the mechanisms underlying susceptibility vs resilience. Indeed, a subpopulation of animals can display coping mechanisms and a set of biological alterations leading to stress resilience. The aetiology of MDD is multifactorial and involves several physiological systems. Exacerbation of endocrine and immune responses from both innate and adaptive systems are observed in depressed individuals and mice exhibiting depression-like behaviours. Increasing attention has been given to neurovascular health since higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases is found in MDD patients and inflammatory conditions are associated with depression, treatment resistance and relapse. Here, we provide an overview of endocrine, immune and vascular changes associated with stress vulnerability vs. resilience in rodents and when available, in humans. Lack of treatment efficacy suggests that neuron-centric treatments do not address important causal biological factors and better understanding of stress-induced adaptations, including sex differences, could contribute to develop novel therapeutic strategies including personalized medicine approaches.

Therapeutic Effect of Novel Antidepressant Drugs Acting at Specific Receptors of Neurotransmitters and Neuropeptides

BACKGROUND

Major depression is a frequent psychiatric disease. One- third of the depressive patients remain treatment-resistant; thus, it is urgent to find novel antidepressant drugs.

OBJECTIVE

In major depression, in several brain areas the neural networks involved and the alterations of neurotransmitters and neuropeptides are updated. According to these networks, new pharmacological agents and effective combinations of antidepressant drugs achieving a more efficacious antidepressant treatment are suggested.

RESULTS

In the neural networks, the prefrontal cortex has been included. In this brain area, glutamatergic neurons, which receive an activating potential from D2 dopaminergic neurons, presynaptically inhibit M1 muscarinic cholinergic neurons via NMDA receptors. Medium spiny GABAergic/somatostatin neurons, which receive projections from M1 muscarinic cholinergic neurons, presynaptically inhibit D2 dopaminergic neurons via GABAA/somatostatin1 receptors. The combination of an NMDA receptor antagonist with an M1 muscarinic cholinergic receptor antagonist can achive a rapid, long-lasting antidepressant effect.

CONCLUSION

In preclinical studies, the antidepressant effect of orvepitant, an NK1 receptor antagonist, has been demonstrated: this antagonist reaches a complete blockade of NK1 receptors. In clinical studies, the combination of an NMDA receptor antagonist with an M1 muscarinic cholinergic receptor antagonist should be investigated indepth as well as the therapeutic effect of orvepitant. In clinical studies, the antidepressant effect of a triple reuptake inhibitor should be examined and compared to current antidepressant drugs.

Is the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview a valid measure of anxiety in patients with generalized anxiety disorder: A comparison to the Hamilton Anxiety Scale

DSM-5 includes criteria for an anxious distress specifier for major depressive disorder, and measures have been developed to assess these criteria. The validity of measures of the severity of anxious distress has been established in depressed patients. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined whether a severity measure of anxious distress was as valid as the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) as a measure of the severity of anxiety in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Eighty-five patients with GAD were interviewed by trained raters who administered the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview (DADSI), HAMA, and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). The patients completed self-report measures of depression, anxiety, and irritability. The DADSI and HAMA were significantly correlated (r  0.52, p < .001). Both the DADSI and HAMA were more highly correlated with measures of anxiety than with measures of the other symptom domains. The HAMD was significantly more highly correlated with the HAMA than with the DADSI. Both measures were significantly correlated with measures of positive mental health, functioning, life satisfaction, and general well-being. Both measures were sensitive to change in response to treatment. Both the DADSI and HAMA were valid measures of anxiety severity in patients with GAD, though the HAMA was more highly confounded with the HAMD than the DADSI. The DADSI is briefer than the HAMA, and thus may be more practical to use in research studies as well as clinical practice.

Brexpiprazole as Adjunctive Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder Following Treatment Failure With at Least One Antidepressant in the Current Episode: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis included double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of brexpiprazole adjunctive treatment (0.5-3 mg/d) for major depressive disorder where antidepressant treatment had failed.

METHODS

The outcomes were the response rate (primary), remission rate (secondary), Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score (secondary), Sheehan Disability Scale scores (secondary), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement/Severity scores, discontinuation rate, and individual adverse events. A subgroup meta-analysis of the data at week 6 compared outcomes by dose >2 mg/d or ≤2 mg/d (2 mg/d is the recommended dose).

RESULTS

We identified 9 studies (n = 3391). Compared with placebo, brexpiprazole (any dose) was superior for response rate (risk ratio [RR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 0.89-0.97, number needed to treat = 17), remission rate (RR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.93-0.98, number needed to treat = 25), Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score (standardized mean difference = -0.20, 95% CI = -0.29, -0.11), Sheehan Disability Scale score (standardized mean difference = -0.12, 95% CI = -0.21, -0.04), and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement/Severity scores but was associated with a higher discontinuation rate, akathisia, insomnia, restlessness, somnolence, and weight increase. Doses >2 mg/d had a significantly higher RR for response rate than ≤2 mg/d (0.96 vs 0.89); moreover, compared with placebo, doses >2 mg/d were associated with higher incidences of akathisia (RR = 4.58) and somnolence (RR = 7.56) as well as were marginally associated with a higher incidence of weight increase (RR = 3.14, P = .06). Compared with placebo, doses ≤2 mg/d were associated with higher incidences of akathisia (RR = 2.28) and weight increase (RR = 4.50).

CONCLUSIONS

Brexpiprazole adjunctive treatment is effective for major depressive disorder when antidepressant treatment fails. At 6 weeks, doses ≤2 mg/d presented a better risk/benefit balance than >2 mg/d.

Medication-Induced Akathisia with Newly Approved Antipsychotics in Patients with a Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Akathisia is a common and distressing movement disorder that can be associated with the use of antipsychotics. It is characterized by a subjective (inner restlessness) and an objective (excessive movements) component. Akathisia can have a negative impact on clinical outcome and even lead to treatment discontinuation. Although medication-induced akathisia is more commonly associated with the use of first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs), it also occurs with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), including the newly approved antipsychotics (NAPs) asenapine, lurasidone, iloperidone, cariprazine, and brexpiprazole. Until now, no meta-analysis has been published on the risk of akathisia for all NAPs, as monotherapy or adjunctive treatment, in patients with a severe mental illness.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to (i) compare akathisia incidence rates of the NAPs, as monotherapy or adjunctive treatment, in adult patients with a severe mental illness (i.e., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder), using data from published and unpublished randomized controlled trials; and (ii) examine the role of several study characteristics explaining differences in akathisia incidence rates between studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search, using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (until October 2018), was conducted for English-language placebo- as well as active-controlled clinical trials, including subjective (percentage of patients reporting akathisia) and/or scale-defined medication-induced akathisia incidence rates with NAPs (as monotherapy or as adjunctive treatment) in adult patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder. Additional unpublished clinical trials were identified through the ClinicalTrials.gov electronic database. Two meta-analyses (incidence rates and odds ratio [OR] [placebo vs. active] of medication-induced akathisia with NAPs) were performed to obtain an optimal estimation of akathisia risks of adult patients with a severe mental illness under these treatment conditions and to assess the role of study characteristics.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirteen reports were selected as potentially eligible for our meta-analysis. Of these, 48 met the inclusion criteria. Eight records, identified through the ClinicalTrials.gov database and cross-referencing, and which fulfilled the inclusion criteria, were added, resulting in a total of 56 records (iloperidone = 5, asenapine = 11, lurasidone = 15, brexpiprazole = 13, cariprazine = 12). The estimated weighted mean incidence rate of akathisia was 7.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.5-9.1), with estimates being 3.9% (95% CI 2.4-6.3) for iloperidone, 6.8% (95% CI 5.1-9.0) for asenapine, 10.0% (95% CI 7.4-13.5) for brexpiprazole, 12.7% (95% CI 10.1-16.1) for lurasidone, and 17.2% (95% CI 13.4-22.1) for cariprazine. After Tukey-adjustment for multiple testing, the incidence rate of akathisia was significantly (p < 0.05) lower for iloperidone than for brexpiprazole, lurasidone, and cariprazine. In addition, the incidence rate of akathisia was significantly (p < 0.05) lower for asenapine than for lurasidone and cariprazine. Finally, the incidence rate of akathisia was significantly (p < 0.05) lower for brexpiprazole than for cariprazine. Type of medication (p < 0.0001), diagnosis (p = 0.02), and race (p = 0.0003) significantly explained part of the heterogeneity of the incidence estimates of akathisia between studies. The estimated weighted OR of akathisia under medication, compared with placebo, was 2.43 (95% CI 1.91-3.10). The OR was smallest for iloperidone (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.42-3.45) and increased for brexpiprazole (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.09-3.83), asenapine (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.32-4.27), lurasidone (OR 3.74; 95% CI 2.32-6.02), and cariprazine (OR 4.35; 95% CI 2.80-6.75). Only type of medication (p = 0.03) explained systematic differences in the OR for akathisia between placebo versus active treatment across studies. After Tukey-adjustment for multiple testing, no significant differences between these ORs were found. The severity of akathisia with NAPs generally is mild to moderate, only leading to treatment discontinuation in a minority of cases (< 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a NAP raises the akathisia risk more than two-fold when compared with patients receiving placebo. Although distinctions between the different NAPs were not clear in placebo-controlled trials, the results of our meta-analyses and systematic review generally indicate that these differences more than likely reflect real differences, with iloperidone showing the most and cariprazine showing the least benign akathisia profile. Moreover, due to patient characteristics and methodological issues, incidence rates of akathisia with NAPs found in this meta-analysis may even be an underestimation of true incidence rates.

Efficacy of venlafaxine extended release in major depressive disorder patients: effect of baseline anxiety symptom severity

Effects of baseline anxiety on the efficacy of venlafaxine extended release versus placebo were examined in a post hoc pooled subgroup analysis of 1573 patients enrolled in eight short-term studies of major depressive disorder. Anxiety subgroups were defined based on baseline 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression Item 10 score <3 (low) versus ≥3 (high). Change from baseline to final visit in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale response and remission rates were analyzed. Change from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score and response and remission rates was significantly greater for venlafaxine extended release versus placebo in both low and high anxiety subgroups (all P < 0.0001). A statistically significant baseline anxiety by treatment interaction was observed for Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score only (P = 0.0152). The adjusted mean change from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score was significantly greater in the high anxiety subgroup versus low anxiety subgroup for patients treated with venlafaxine extended release (-6.27 versus -3.89; P = 0.0440) but not placebo. These results support the efficacy of venlafaxine extended release for major depressive disorder treatment in patients with anxiety symptoms.

What is anxious depression? Overlap and agreement between different definitions

Anxiety is common in depressed patients. However, a problem with the research on the significance of anxiety in depressed patients is that anxiety has been characterized in different ways. Little research has examined the concordance and overlap between the various definitions of anxious depression. With research on the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier just beginning, it will be important to understand how defining anxious depression according to DSM-5 agrees with previously studied definitions. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project we examined the association between the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier and 6 other approaches towards defining anxious depression. Three hundred thirty-one patients with a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder were evaluated with semi-structured diagnostic interviews. The mean number of anxious depression definitions met was 4.7 (SD = 2.1). Only 4.2% (n = 14) of the 331 patients did not meet any anxious depression definition, and 28.1% (n = 93) met all 7 definitions. The level of agreement between the definitions was significant, albeit modest (median kappa = .28). The modest association between the different definitions of anxious depression suggests that the results based on one approach towards subtyping may not generalize to the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier. It therefore cannot be assumed that the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier is valid just because other definitions of anxious depression have been shown to be valid.

Association between anxious distress in a major depressive episode and bipolarity

PURPOSE

Mixed features in a major depressive episode (MDE) predict bipolar disorder (BD). The mixed features specifier included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5) could be restrictive because it excludes the symptoms common to both mania/hypomania and depression, including psychomotor agitation. On the other hand, an anxious distress (ANXD) specifier has also been introduced in the DSM-5, and psychomotor agitation has been defined as a severity of ANXD. In this study, we retrospectively investigated the association between presence of ANXD in an MDE and bipolarity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The subjects were patients admitted with an MDE to the Department of Psychiatry at Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital from December 2014 to March 2016. Eligible patients were older than 20 years of age and met the DSM-5 criteria for major depressive disorder or BD. All data were extracted from medical records. The subjects were grouped according to whether they did or did not have ANXD. The demographics and clinical features of these groups were compared. Severity of illness was evaluated according to the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) score on admission.

RESULTS

ANXD was present in 31 and absent in 33 of 64 patients with MDE. The HRSD score was significantly higher in the group with ANXD than in the group without ANXD (P=0.0041). Mixed features (P=0.0050) and suicide attempts (P=0.0206) were significantly more common in the group with ANXD than in the group without ANXD.

CONCLUSION

We found that the presence of ANXD in an MDE was associated with greater severity and more mixed features and suicide attempts. It is important to evaluate a patient with an MDE for ANXD so that a diagnosis of mixed depression is not missed. More studies in larger samples are needed to investigate further the association between ANXD in MDE and bipolarity.

Validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier for major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

DSM-5 introduced the anxious distress specifier in recognition of the clinical significance of anxiety in depressed patients. Recent studies that supported the validity of the specifier did not use measures that were designed to assess the criteria of the specifier but instead approximated the DSM-5 criteria from scales that were part of an existing data base. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the validity of the specifier diagnosed with a semistructured interview.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty patients with a principal diagnosis of major depressive disorder were evaluated with semistructured diagnostic interviews. The patients were rated on clinician rating scales of depression, anxiety and irritability, and completed self-report measures.

RESULTS

Approximately three-quarters of the depressed patients met the criteria for the anxious distress specifier. Patients with anxious distress had a higher frequency of anxiety disorders, particularly panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, as well as higher scores on measures of anxiety, depression, and anger. The patients meeting the anxious distress subtype reported higher rates of drug use disorders, poorer functioning during the week before the evaluation, and poorer coping ability compared to the patients who did not meet the anxious distress specifier. Moreover, anxious distress was associated with poorer functioning and coping after controlling for the presence of an anxiety disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study indicate that anxious distress is common in depressed patients and support the validity of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier.

Adjunctive brexpiprazole in patients with major depressive disorder and anxiety symptoms: post hoc analyses of three placebo-controlled studies

OBJECTIVE

Episodes of major depressive disorder (MDD) characterized by high levels of anxiety symptoms are less likely to respond to some forms of antidepressant treatment (ADT). This report examines the effects of adjunctive brexpiprazole on depressive symptoms among patients with MDD and anxiety symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of 1,171 patients from the 6-week, randomized, double-blind phases of three studies in adults with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs (NCT01360645, NCT01360632, NCT02196506). Data were pooled for brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day and for placebo (adjunct to ADT). Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale Total score changes were assessed in subgroups of patients with and without anxious distress (based on proxies for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria) and anxious depression (defined as a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Anxiety/somatization factor score of ≥7). Safety was assessed by the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

RESULTS

Benefits were seen for adjunctive brexpiprazole (compared with adjunctive placebo) in both anxiety definition subgroups. For patients with anxious distress, the least squares mean difference (95% CI) at week 6 was -3.00 (-4.29, -1.71; P<0.0001) and, for those without anxious distress, was -1.38 (-2.71, -0.05; P=0.043). For patients with anxious depression, the difference was -2.19 (-3.60, -0.78; P=0.0023), compared with -2.34 (-3.58, -1.10; P=0.0002) for those without anxious depression. The most common TEAEs among patients with anxiety symptoms receiving ADT + brexpiprazole were akathisia, headache, restlessness, somnolence, and weight increase. There were no clinically meaningful differences in the rates of these TEAEs according to the presence or absence of anxiety symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Adjunctive brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day may be efficacious in reducing depressive symptoms, and was well tolerated, in patients with clinically relevant anxiety symptoms.

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

PURPOSE

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

DESIGN AND METHODS

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

FINDINGS

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

IMPLICATIONS

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

Brexpiprazole: a new leaf on the partial dopamine agonist branch

OBJECTIVES

Brexpiprazole is a new dopamine partial agonist antipsychotic in the same class as aripiprazole. This paper will briefly review brexpiprazole and compare it with aripiprazole.

CONCLUSIONS

Brexpiprazole and aripiprazole are both partial agonists at dopamine D₂, and serotonin 5-HT_1A and antagonists at serotonin 5-HT_2A and noradrenergic α_1B receptors. However, the two drugs are significantly different in potencies at various receptors; neurochemical profiles predict that brexpiprazole may be comparable with aripiprazole in its antipsychotic efficacy but may cause less akathisia, extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) and activation. In pivotal trials brexpiprazole demonstrated antipsychotic efficacy in short and long-term studies; it was also found to be an effective adjunct in patients with major depression resistant to antidepressants. Akathisia can occur early in treatment with brexpiprazole, as can minor weight gain and prolactin elevation. Indirect data extrapolations from pivotal studies suggest that brexpiprazole and aripiprazole have comparable efficacy but brexpiprazole may cause less akathisia. Like aripiprazole, brexpiprazole has been approved in the USA for use in schizophrenia and antidepressant-resistant depression. Although much more clinical experience is needed, brexpiprazole appears to be distinct from aripiprazole and a promising new 'metabolically-friendly' antipsychotic option for treatment of psychoses and mood disorders.

Patients with anxious depression: overview of prevalence, pathophysiology and impact on course and treatment outcome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Major depressive disorder with a comorbid anxiety disorder or with significant anxiety symptoms (here called anxious depression) is common and has been associated with poor clinical course trajectories. However, various dichotomous as well as dimensional definitions have been used to label anxious depression and it remains unclear to which extent these result in inconsistent findings. This review provides an overview of recent literature on the impact of anxiety in depressed patients on clinical course trajectories, treatment outcomes, and underlying neurobiological dysregulations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Anxious depression seems associated with poorer clinical course trajectories and treatment nonresponse as compared with 'pure' depression, regardless of which definition is used. Recent studies have attempted to determine specific efficacy of novel pharmacological treatments for anxious depressed patients, but have not been conclusive because of the insufficient number of studies and differences in definitions and assessment of anxious depression. Neurobiology studies suggest that anxious depression is associated with increased immune dysregulation, more cortical thinning, and corticolimbic dysfunctions as compared with 'pure' depression.

SUMMARY

Anxious depression appears to be a common and clinically relevant subtype of depression as it predicts poorer course trajectories. As populations with anxious depression may benefit from specific treatment regimens, further research is necessary to better delineate its definition and neurobiology. The relatively new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 anxious distress specifier is a welcome development and should be further investigated and compared against other anxiety constructs.

Reliability and validity of the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview

BACKGROUND

To acknowledge the clinical significance of anxiety in depressed patients, DSM-5 included an anxious distress specifier for major depressive disorder (MDD). In the present report we describe the reliability and validity of a semi-structured interview assessing the features of the anxious distress specifier. Our goal was to develop an instrument that could be used for both diagnostic and outcome measurement purposes.

METHODS

One hundred seventy-three psychiatric patients with MDD were interviewed by a trained diagnostic rater who administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) supplemented with questions from the DSM-5 Anxious Distress Specifier Interview (DADSI). Inter-rater (n=25) and test-retest (n=25) reliability of the DADSI was examined in separate groups of patients. The patients were rated on clinician rating scales of depression, anxiety and irritability, and patients completed self-report measures of these constructs. Sensitivity to change was examined in 16 patients.

RESULTS

Approximately three-quarters of the depressed patients met the criteria for the anxious distress specifier (78.0%, n=135). The DADSI had excellent joint-interview reliability and good test-retest reliability. DADSI total scores were more highly correlated with other clinician-rated and self-report measures of anxiety than with measures of depression and anger. DADSI scores were significantly higher in depressed outpatients with a current anxiety disorder than depressed patients without a comorbid anxiety disorder. The DADSI was sensitive to improvement.

CONCLUSION

The DADSI is a reliable and valid measure of the presence of the DSM-5 anxious distress specifier for MDD as well as the severity of the features of the specifier.

Clinical role of brexpiprazole in depression and schizophrenia

Brexpiprazole, a serotonin-dopamine activity modulator, is the second D2 partial agonist to come to market and has been approved for the treatment of schizophrenia and as an adjunctive treatment in major depressive disorder. With less intrinsic activity than aripiprazole at the D2 receptor and higher potency at 5-HT2A, 5-HT1A, and α1B receptors, the pharmacological properties of brexpiprazole suggest a more tolerable side effect profile with regard to akathisia, extrapyramidal dysfunction, and sedation. While no head-to-head data are currently available, double-blind placebo-controlled studies show favorable results, with the number needed to treat (NNT) vs placebo of 6-15 for response in acute schizophrenia treatment and 4 for maintenance. NNT is 12 for response and 17-31 for remission vs placebo in major depression. In schizophrenia trials, treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) and discontinuation rates due to TEAEs were lower in treatment groups vs placebo (7.1%-9.2% vs 14.7%, respectively). Meanwhile, discontinuation rates due to TEAEs in depression studies were higher in treatment groups vs placebo (1.3%-3.5% vs 0-1.4%, respectively) and appeared dose dependent. Rates of akathisia are lower compared to those with aripiprazole and cariprazine, weight gain is more prominent than with aripiprazole, cariprazine, or ziprasidone, and sedation is less than with aripiprazole but more than with cariprazine. Brexpiprazole target dosing is 2-4 mg in schizophrenia and 2 mg in depression augmentation. Dose adjustments should be considered in hepatic or renal dysfunction and/or in poor cytochrome P450 2D6 metabolizers. While brexpiprazole represents an exciting second entry for D2 partial agonists with positive studies thus far, direct head-to-head comparisons will shed more light on the efficacy and side effect profile of brexpiprazole.

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

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

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

METHODS/PROCEDURES

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

FINDINGS/RESULTS

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

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

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