Are studies of psychotherapies for depression more or less generalizable than studies of antidepressants?

The outcomes of mental health care for depression over time: A meta-regression analysis of response rates in usual care

BACKGROUND

Over the past decades dozens of randomized trials have shown that psychological treatments are more effective than care-as-usual (CAU). It could be expected that these treatments are implemented in routine care and that the response rates in usual care improve over time. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to examine if response and remission rates in usual care have improved over time.

METHODS

We used an existing meta-analytic database of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of psychological treatments of depression and selected CAU control groups from these trials. We only included CAU conditions in primary care, specialized mental health care, perinatal care and general medical care. The response rate (50 % symptom reduction) was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

We included 125 CAU control groups (8542 participants). The response rate for all CAU control groups was 0.22 (95 % CI: 0.19; 0.24) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 83; 95 % CI: 80; 85), with somewhat higher rates in primary care (0.27; 95 % CI: 0.23; 0.31). We found hardly any indications that the outcomes have improved over the years. The meta-regression analysis with publication year as predictor in the full dataset resulted in a coefficient of 0.1 (SE = 0.01; p = 0.0.35). A series of sensitivity analyses supported the main findings. Remission rates and pre-post effect sizes also did not significantly improve over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Response and remission rates in usual care are low, with the large majority of patients not responding or remitting, and the outcomes have probably not improved over time.

Data-driven personalized medicine approaches to cognitive-behavioral therapy allocation in a large sample: A reanalysis of the ENRICHED study

BACKGROUND

Although effective treatments for common mental health problems are available, individual responses to treatments are difficult to predict. Treatment efficacy could be optimized by targeting interventions using individual predictions of treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop a prediction algorithm using data from one of the largest randomized controlled trials on psychological interventions for common mental health problems.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease study investigating the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and care as usual (CAU) for depression and low perceived social support following acute myocardial infarction. 2481 participants were randomly assigned to CBT and CAU. Baseline social-demographics, depression characteristics, comorbid symptoms, and stress and adversity measures were used to build an algorithm predicting post-treatment depression severity using elastic net regularization. Performance and generalizability of this algorithm were determined in a hold-out sample (n = 1203).

RESULTS

Treatment matching based on predictions in the hold-out sample resulted in inconsistent and small effects (d = 0.15), that were more pronounced for individuals matched to CBT (d = 0.22). We identified a small subgroup of individuals for which CBT did not appear more efficacious than CAU.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations are a poorly defined CAU condition, a low-severity sample, specific exclusion criteria and unavailability of certain baseline variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Small matching effects are likely a realistic representation of the performance and generalizability of multivariable prediction algorithms based on clinical measures. Results indicate that future work and new approaches are needed.

Race, Ethnicity, and Other Cultural Background Factors in Trials of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There is a growing interest in developing scalable interventions, including internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT), to meet the increasing demand for mental health services. Given the growth in diversity worldwide, it is essential that the clinical trials of iCBT for depression include diverse samples or, at least, report information on the race, ethnicity, or other background indicators of their samples. Unfortunately, the field lacks data on how well diversity is currently reported and represented in the iCBT literature.

OBJECTIVE

Thus, the main objective of this systematic review was to examine the overall reporting of racial and ethnic identities in published clinical trials of iCBT for depression. We also aimed to review the representation of specific racial and ethnic minoritized groups and the inclusion of alternative background indicators such as migration status or country of residence.

METHODS

Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials in which iCBT was compared to a waiting list, care-as-usual, active control, or another iCBT. The included papers also had to have a focus on acute treatment (eg, 4 weeks to 6 months) of depression, be delivered via the internet on a website or a smartphone app and use guided or unguided self-help. Studies were initially identified from the METAPSY database (n=59) and then extended to include papers up to 2022, with papers retrieved from Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane (n=3). Risk of bias assessment suggested that reported studies had at least some risk of bias due to use of self-report outcome measures.

RESULTS

A total of 62 iCBT randomized controlled trials representing 17,210 participants are summarized in this study. Out of those 62 papers, only 17 (27%) of the trials reported race, and only 12 (19%) reported ethnicity. Reporting outside of the United States was very poor, with the United States accounting for 15 (88%) out of 17 of studies that reported race and 9 (75%) out of 12 for ethnicity. Out of 3,623 participants whose race was reported in the systematic review, the racial category reported the most was White (n=2716, 74.9%), followed by Asian (n=209, 5.8%) and Black (n=274, 7.6%). Furthermore, only 25 (54%) out of the 46 papers conducted outside of the United States reported other background demographics.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to note that the underreporting observed in this study does not necessarily indicate an underrepresentation in the actual study population. However, these findings highlight the poor reporting of race and ethnicity in iCBT trials for depression found in the literature. This lack of diversity reporting may have significant implications for the scalability of these interventions.

Prognostic Risk Factors in Randomized Clinical Trials of Face-to-Face and Internet-Based Psychotherapy for Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis

Importance

Variables such as severe symptoms, comorbidity, and sociodemographic characteristics (eg, low educational attainment or unemployment) are associated with a poorer prognosis in adults treated for depressive symptoms. The exclusion of patients with a poor prognosis from RCTs is negatively associated with the generalizability of research findings.

Objective

To compare the prognostic risk factors (PRFs) in patient samples of RCTs of face-to-face therapy (FTF) and internet-based therapy (IBT) for depression.

Data Sources

PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, and reference lists of published meta-analyses were searched from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2021.

Study Selection

RCTs that compared FTF (individual or group therapy) and IBT (guided or self-guided interventions) against a control (waitlist or treatment as usual) in adults with symptoms of depression were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were extracted by 2 independent observers. The Cochrane revised risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The study was preregistered with OSF Registries and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the standardized mean difference (Hedges g effect size) in depressive symptoms at treatment termination (assessed with standard patient self-report questionnaires), with a positive standardized mean difference indicating larger improvements in the intervention compared with those in the control group. Meta-regression analyses were adjusted for the type of control group. Three preregistered and 2 exploratory sensitivity analyses were conducted. A prognostic risk index (PROG) was created that calculated the sum of 12 predefined individual indicators, with scores ranging from 0 to 12 and higher scores indicating that a sample comprised patients with poorer prognoses.

Results

This systematic review and meta-regression analysis identified 105 eligible RCTs that comprised 18 363 patients. In total, 48 studies (46%) examined FTF, and 57 studies (54%) examined IBT. The PROG was significantly higher in the RCTs of FTF than in the RCTs of IBT (FTF: mean [SD], 3.55 [1.75]; median [IQR], 3.5 [2.0-4.5]; IBT: mean [SD], 2.27 [1.66]; median [IQR], 2.0 [1.0-3.5]; z = -3.68, P < .001; Hedges g = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.36-1.15). A random-effects meta-regression analysis found no association of the PROG with the effect size. Sensitivity analyses with outliers excluded and accounting for risk of bias or small-study effects yielded mixed results on the association between the PROG and effect size.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this systematic review and meta-regression analysis suggest that samples of RCTs of FTF vs IBT differ with regard to PRFs. These findings have implications for the generalizability of the current evidence on IBT for depression. More RCTs of internet-based interventions with clinically representative samples are needed, and the reporting of PRFs must be improved.

Evaluation of randomized controlled trials: a primer and tutorial for mental health researchers

BACKGROUND

Considered one of the highest levels of evidence, results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain an essential building block in mental health research. They are frequently used to confirm that an intervention "works" and to guide treatment decisions. Given their importance in the field, it is concerning that the quality of many RCT evaluations in mental health research remains poor. Common errors range from inadequate missing data handling and inappropriate analyses (e.g., baseline randomization tests or analyses of within-group changes) to unduly interpretations of trial results and insufficient reporting. These deficiencies pose a threat to the robustness of mental health research and its impact on patient care. Many of these issues may be avoided in the future if mental health researchers are provided with a better understanding of what constitutes a high-quality RCT evaluation.

METHODS

In this primer article, we give an introduction to core concepts and caveats of clinical trial evaluations in mental health research. We also show how to implement current best practices using open-source statistical software.

RESULTS

Drawing on Rubin's potential outcome framework, we describe that RCTs put us in a privileged position to study causality by ensuring that the potential outcomes of the randomized groups become exchangeable. We discuss how missing data can threaten the validity of our results if dropouts systematically differ from non-dropouts, introduce trial estimands as a way to co-align analyses with the goals of the evaluation, and explain how to set up an appropriate analysis model to test the treatment effect at one or several assessment points. A novice-friendly tutorial is provided alongside this primer. It lays out concepts in greater detail and showcases how to implement techniques using the statistical software R, based on a real-world RCT dataset.

DISCUSSION

Many problems of RCTs already arise at the design stage, and we examine some avoidable and unavoidable "weak spots" of this design in mental health research. For instance, we discuss how lack of prospective registration can give way to issues like outcome switching and selective reporting, how allegiance biases can inflate effect estimates, review recommendations and challenges in blinding patients in mental health RCTs, and describe problems arising from underpowered trials. Lastly, we discuss why not all randomized trials necessarily have a limited external validity and examine how RCTs relate to ongoing efforts to personalize mental health care.

Efficacy of an Unguided, Digital Single-Session Intervention for Internalizing Symptoms in Web-Based Workers: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The Common Elements Toolbox (COMET) is an unguided digital single-session intervention (SSI) based on principles of cognitive behavioral therapy and positive psychology. Although unguided digital SSIs have shown promise in the treatment of youth psychopathology, the data are more mixed regarding their efficacy in adults.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of COMET-SSI versus a waiting list control in depression and other transdiagnostic mental health outcomes for Prolific participants with a history of psychopathology.

METHODS

We conducted an investigator-blinded, preregistered randomized controlled trial comparing COMET-SSI (n=409) with an 8-week waiting list control (n=419). Participants were recruited from the web-based workspace Prolific and assessed for depression, anxiety, work and social functioning, psychological well-being, and emotion regulation at baseline and at 2, 4, and 8 weeks after the intervention. The main outcomes were short-term (2 weeks) and long-term (8 weeks) changes in depression and anxiety. The secondary outcomes were the 8-week changes in work and social functioning, well-being, and emotion regulation. Analyses were conducted according to the intent-to-treat principle with imputation, without imputation, and using a per-protocol sample. In addition, we conducted sensitivity analyses to identify inattentive responders.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 61.9% (513/828) of women, with a mean age of 35.75 (SD 11.93) years. Most participants (732/828, 88.3%) met the criteria for screening for depression or anxiety using at least one validated screening scale. A review of the text data suggested that adherence to the COMET-SSI was near perfect, there were very few inattentive respondents, and satisfaction with the intervention was high. However, despite being powered to detect small effects, there were negligible differences between the conditions in the various outcomes at the various time points, even when focusing on subsets of individuals with more severe symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results do not support the use of the COMET-SSI in adult Prolific participants. Future work should explore alternate ways of intervening with paid web-based participants, including matching individuals to SSIs they may be most responsive to.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05379881, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05379881.

Statistical power in clinical trials of interventions for mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders

BACKGROUND

Previous research has suggested that statistical power is suboptimal in many biomedical disciplines, but it is unclear whether power is better in trials for particular interventions, disorders, or outcome types. We therefore performed a detailed examination of power in trials of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders.

METHODS

We extracted data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Mental Health). We focused on continuous efficacy outcomes and estimated power to detect predetermined effect sizes (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.20-0.80, primary SMD = 0.40) and meta-analytic effect sizes (ESMA). We performed meta-regression to estimate the influence of including underpowered studies in meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We included 256 reviews with 10 686 meta-analyses and 47 384 studies. Statistical power for continuous efficacy outcomes was very low across intervention and disorder types (overall median [IQR] power for SMD = 0.40: 0.32 [0.19-0.54]; for ESMA: 0.23 [0.09-0.58]), only reaching conventionally acceptable levels (80%) for SMD = 0.80. Median power to detect the ESMA was higher in treatment-as-usual (TAU)/waitlist-controlled (0.49-0.63) or placebo-controlled (0.12-0.38) trials than in trials comparing active treatments (0.07-0.13). Adequately-powered studies produced smaller effect sizes than underpowered studies (B = -0.06, p ⩽ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Power to detect both predetermined and meta-analytic effect sizes in psychiatric trials was low across all interventions and disorders examined. Consistent with the presence of reporting bias, underpowered studies produced larger effect sizes than adequately-powered studies. These results emphasize the need to increase sample sizes and to reduce reporting bias against studies reporting null results to improve the reliability of the published literature.

Acceptability and Outcomes of Transdiagnostic Guided Self-help Bibliotherapy for Internalizing Disorder Symptoms in Adults: A Fully Remote Nationwide Open Trial

Introduction

Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) is a five-module transdiagnostic guided self-help (GSH) intervention developed by the World Health Organization, originally in a group-based format. In a sample of individuals recruited from across the United States, we conducted an open trial to study the feasibility and acceptability of an adaptation of DWM in which guidance was provided individually and remotely via phone and videoconferencing.

Methods

We assessed internalizing symptoms, psychological well-being, work and social functioning, usability of the intervention, and emotion regulation over the course of 6 weeks.

Results

A total of 263 individuals completed our screening. Of those, 75.29% (n = 198) qualified for the intervention. We reached most participants who qualified (71.21%, n = 141) via phone to schedule a GSH session. Most of those scheduled attended a study session (84.4%, n = 119), and most of those who attended a session completed more than half the treatment (84.03%, n = 100). Retention rates were comparable to meta-analytic estimates of dropout rates in GSH. Participants showed improvement on internalizing symptoms, psychological well-being, work and social functioning, usability of the intervention, and emotion regulation.

Conclusion

DWM is a freely available, seemingly efficacious transdiagnostic intervention for internalizing disorder symptoms.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10608-022-10338-5.

The Road to Cognitive Skill Acquisition: Psychometric Evaluation of the Competencies of Cognitive Therapy Scale

OBJECTIVE

Cognitive therapy (CT) skills are an index of treatment progress. They predict changes in patients' acute depressive symptoms and symptom relapses. However, the psychometric properties of the various measures of CT skills are poorly understood. This study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the Competencies of Cognitive Therapy Scale-Self Report (CCTS-SR) and assess its concurrent validity.

METHODS

The psychometric properties of the CCTS-SR were explored by using data from a panel of online respondents (N=410). The fit of a one-factor solution was explored by using a confirmatory factor analysis. Exploratory bifactor analyses (EBFA) were then conducted to determine other possible factor structures.

RESULTS

The one-factor solution did not fit the data well. Results of the EBFA suggested that the factor structure of the CCTS-SR may be characterized by a single underlying dimension capturing the general use of CT skills as well as by more specific factors the authors labeled "behavioral activation" and "CT comprehension." The variance captured by the factor initially labeled as CT comprehension was correlated with measures of depression and emotional dysregulation, suggesting that these items do not capture CT comprehension and should be removed from the scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCTS-SR seems to be characterized by more than a single factor, and items that seemingly compose CT comprehension (i.e., items 13 and 14) may need to be removed. Although the CCTS-SR may be a valid index of therapy progress, more attention needs to be paid to its psychometric properties.

Outcomes of student trainee-delivered cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) on internalizing symptoms, CBT skills, and life satisfaction

Increased quality of life (QoL) is rated by patients as a primary factor in determining recovery from psychopathology. Cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBTs) are the most well-researched psychotherapies for internalizing disorders and appear effective at reducing symptoms even when delivered by trainees. Existing research suggests that the effects of CBTs on QoL are more modest than their effects on symptoms. However, little is known about the effects of trainee-delivered CBT on life satisfaction, a subjective measure of QoL. We analyzed data from 93 clients treated by students (n=23) in a graduate-level training clinic using an intent-to-treat approach, completers case analyses, and random forest imputation. Across methods of handling missing data, improvements in anxiety, depression, and CBT skills were more marked than improvements in QoL. Exploratory analyses suggested baseline life satisfaction was the strongest predictor of end-of-treatment life satisfaction. Future research should explore alternatives to "standard" CBT for clients with low life satisfaction.

What works for mental health problems in youth? Survey of real-world experiences of treatments and side effects

AIM

Despite youth being the most common age group for onset of mental disorders, there is less knowledge on the benefits and harms of treatments in young people. In addition, efficacy data from randomized controlled trials may not generalize to how treatment works outside of research settings. This study aimed to investigate young people's perceived effectiveness of different treatments for mental health problems, the professionals who delivered these, and the experience of negative effects.

METHODS

We developed a consumer report website where young people who were ever diagnosed with a mental disorder provided ratings on the helpfulness or harmfulness of different types of professionals, mental health treatments (medical, psychological complementary/alternative) and self-help strategies, and whether they had experienced particular negative effects.

RESULTS

Here, 557 young people aged 12-25 years, who were recruited from English-speaking, high-income countries, provided 1258 ratings of treatments. All treatments showed varied perceptions of effectiveness. Medical and psychological treatments were rated moderately helpful on average with low rates of harmfulness. Self-help strategies were rated as being as helpful as professional treatments. Side effects related to the head or mind (e.g., concentration difficulties, inability to feel emotions, depression and irritability) were the most common across all types of medicines. For psychological treatments, treatment being too expensive and feeling worse at the end of a session were the most commonly reported negative effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings may be a useful guide to clinicians, researchers, young people and their families about what is likely to work in real-world settings.

Effects of somatic treatments on suicidal ideation and completed suicides

OBJECTIVE

This work was undertaken to define and characterize the role of currently available somatic treatments in psychiatry in either increasing or reducing the risk for suicide.

METHODS

Members of the Suicide Prevention Task Group of the National Network of Depression Centers performed a literature review of somatic treatments known to increase or reduce the risk for suicide. The reviews ventured to include all relevant information about the risk for both suicide ideation and completed suicides.

RESULTS

Lithium and clozapine are the only two somatic treatments that have high-quality data documenting their antisuicide effects in mood disorders and schizophrenia, respectively. Lithium discontinuation is also associated with increased suicide risk. Ketamine and esketamine may have a small, but immediate, antisuicide effect. Despite the recent Food and Drug Administration approval of esketamine use in depressed suicidal patients, the small disproportional overrepresentation of suicide in subjects who had received esketamine versus placebo (3 vs. 0 among > 3500 subjects) requires ongoing evaluation. The purported antisuicide effect of electroconvulsive therapy is based on low-quality data. The effect of antidepressants is not at all clear. There appears to be direct evidence for antidepressants increasing suicidal ideation and the risk for suicide over the short-term in young people, but indirect (low quality) evidence that antidepressants reduce suicide risk over the long term.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians have an expanding pharmacopeia to address suicide potential in their patients. Some of the agents with documented antisuicide effects may also increase suicidality under specific circumstances.

Heterogeneity in major depression and its melancholic and atypical specifiers: a secondary analysis of STAR*D

OBJECTIVES

The melancholic and atypical specifiers for a major depressive episode (MDE) are supposed to reduce heterogeneity in symptom presentation by requiring additional, specific features. Fried et al. (2020) recently showed that the melancholic specifier may increase the potential heterogeneity in presenting symptoms. In a large sample of outpatients with depression, our objective was to explore whether the melancholic and atypical specifiers reduced observed heterogeneity in symptoms.

METHODS

We used baseline data from the Inventory of Depression Symptoms (IDS), which was available for 3,717 patients, from the Sequenced Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial. A subsample met criteria for MDE on the IDS ("IDS-MDE"; N =2,496). For patients with IDS-MDE, we differentiated between those with melancholic, non-melancholic, non-melancholic, atypical, and non-atypical depression. We quantified the observed heterogeneity between groups by counting the number of unique symptom combinations pertaining to their given diagnostic group (e.g., counting the melancholic symptoms for melancholic and non-melancholic groups), as well as the profiles of DSM-MDE symptoms (i.e., ignoring the specifier symptoms).

RESULTS

When considering the specifier and depressive symptoms, there was more observed heterogeneity within the melancholic and atypical subgroups than in the IDS-MDE sample (i.e., ignoring the specifier subgroups). The differences in number of profiles between the melancholic and non-melancholic groups were not statistically significant, irrespective of whether focusing on the specifier symptoms or only the DSM-MDE symptoms. The differences between the atypical and non-atypical subgroups were smaller than what would be expected by chance. We found no evidence that the specifier groups reduce heterogeneity, as can be quantified by unique symptom profiles. Most symptom profiles, even in the specifier subgroups, had five or fewer individuals.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence that the atypical and melancholic specifiers create more symptomatically homogeneous groups. Indeed, the melancholic and atypical specifiers introduce heterogeneity by adding symptoms to the DSM diagnosis of MDE.

Not sad enough for a depression trial? A systematic review of depression measures and cut points in clinical trial registrations

INTRODUCTION

Patient reported outcomes are central to the evaluation of behavioral, drug, or somatic interventions focusing depression. Continuous measures are mostly interpreted with cut points that serve as inclusion criteria and define remission. The present review provides an overview of measures (BDI; BDI-II; CESD; HADS; HAMD-17; MADRS; PHQ-9; QIDS) and cut points in clinical trials on depression and tests for systematic differences concerning varying types of interventions.

METHODS

We analyzed 2632 trials registered via clinicaltrials.gov registered between 2000/01/01 - 2019/12/31 that used one or more pre-specified measures of depression of which 1600 reported cut points for either inclusion of participants or the definition of clinical remission.

RESULTS

The included studies more often used clinician-administered scales than self-report questionnaires as criterion for the inclusion of study participants and for the definition of clinical remission. Clinician administered scales are dominating in drug trials, while self-report questionnaires are primarily used in behavioral trials. This trend accelerated during the last 20 years. Compared to studies on behavioral therapies, studies with drug or other interventions used higher cut points to include patients. Comparisons between the interventions revealed highly significant differences in the used cut points of MADRS, HAMD-17 and PHQ-9.

CONCLUSIONS

Choice of measure and cut points is an important aspect of trial design and should be homogenized in order to make trials of different types of interventions more readily comparable. Similarly, systematic differences between treatment types in how patients are included and how remission is defined also hamper the comparisons between different treatment modalities.

Generalizability of pharmacologic and psychotherapy trial results for late-life unipolar depression

OBJECTIVES

Despite evidence of low representativeness of clinical trial results for depression in adults, the generalizability of clinical trial results for late-life depression is unknown. This study sought to quantify the representativeness of pharmacologic and psychotherapy clinical trial results for late-life unipolar depression.

METHOD

Data were derived from the 2004-2005 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC), a nationally representative sample of 34,653 adults from the United States population. To assess the generalizability of clinical trial results for late-life depression, we applied a standard set of eligibility criteria representative of pharmacologic and psychotherapy clinical trials to all individuals aged 65 years and older in NESARC with a DSM-IV diagnosis of MDE and no lifetime history of mania/hypomania (n = 273) and in a subsample of individuals seeking help for depression (n = 78).

RESULTS

More than four of ten respondents and about two of ten respondents would have been excluded by at least one exclusion criterion in a typical pharmacologic and psychotherapy efficacy trial, respectively. Similar results (i.e.41.1% and 25.9%, respectively) were found in the subsample of individuals seeking help for depression. Excess percentage of exclusion in typical pharmacologic studies was accounted for by the criterion "significant medical condition". We also found that populations typically included in pharmacologic and psychotherapy clinical trials for late-life unipolar depression may substantially differ.

CONCLUSION

Psychotherapy trial results may be representative of most patients with late-life unipolar depression in routine clinical practice. By contrast, pharmacologic clinical trials may not be readily generalizable to community samples.

The effectiveness of intravenous ketamine in adults with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder presenting with prominent anxiety: Results from the Canadian Rapid Treatment Center of Excellence

BACKGROUND

Individuals meeting criteria for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) are differentially affected by high levels of anxiety symptoms.

AIMS

There is a need to identify the efficacy of novel rapid-onset treatments in adults with mood disorders and comorbid anxious-distress.

METHODS

This study included patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD) who were receiving intravenous (IV) ketamine treatment at a community-based clinic.Anxious-distress was proxied using items from the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report 16-item (QIDS-SR₁₆) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD7) scales. The difference in QIDS-SR₁₆ total score, QIDS-SR₁₆ suicidal ideation (SI) item and GAD7 score were analyzed between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 209 adults with MDD (n = 177) and BD (n = 26) were included in this analysis. From this sample, 94 patients (mean = 45 ± 13.9 years) met the criteria for anxious-distress. Individuals meeting the criteria for anxious-distress exhibited a significantly greater reduction in QIDS-SR₁₆ total score following four infusions (p = 0.02) when compared with patients not meeting the anxious-distress criteria. Both anxious-distressed and low-anxiety patients exhibited a significant reduction in SI (p < 0.0001) following four infusions.Finally, there was a significantly greater reduction in anxiety symptoms in the anxious-distress group compared with the non-anxious distress group following three (p = 0.02) and four infusions (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with TRD and prominent anxiety receiving IV ketamine exhibited a significant reduction in depressive, SI and anxiety symptoms.

The 2020 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

OBJECTIVES

To provide advice and guidance regarding the management of mood disorders, derived from scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus to formulate s that maximise clinical utility.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists mood disorders clinical practice guidelines 2020 (MDcpg²⁰²⁰) provide up-to-date guidance regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The guideline is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, primary care physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.

CONCLUSION

The MDcpg²⁰²⁰ builds on the previous 2015 guidelines and maintains its joint focus on 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

Gin S Malhi (Chair), Erica Bell, Darryl Bassett, Philip Boyce, Richard Bryant, Philip Hazell, Malcolm Hopwood, Bill Lyndon, Roger Mulder, Richard Porter, Ajeet B Singh and Greg Murray.

The clinical characterization of the adult patient with depression aimed at personalization of management

Depression is widely acknowledged to be a heterogeneous entity, and the need to further characterize the individual patient who has received this diagnosis in order to personalize the management plan has been repeatedly emphasized. However, the research evidence that should guide this personalization is at present fragmentary, and the selection of treatment is usually based on the clinician's and/or the patient's preference and on safety issues, in a trial-and-error fashion, paying little attention to the particular features of the specific case. This may be one of the reasons why the majority of patients with a diagnosis of depression do not achieve remission with the first treatment they receive. The predominant pessimism about the actual feasibility of the personalization of treatment of depression in routine clinical practice has recently been tempered by some secondary analyses of databases from clinical trials, using approaches such as individual patient data meta-analysis and machine learning, which indicate that some variables may indeed contribute to the identification of patients who are likely to respond differently to various antidepressant drugs or to antidepressant medication vs. specific psychotherapies. The need to develop decision support tools guiding the personalization of treatment of depression has been recently reaffirmed, and the point made that these tools should be developed through large observational studies using a comprehensive battery of self-report and clinical measures. The present paper aims to describe systematically the salient domains that should be considered in this effort to personalize depression treatment. For each domain, the available research evidence is summarized, and the relevant assessment instruments are reviewed, with special attention to their suitability for use in routine clinical practice, also in view of their possible inclusion in the above-mentioned comprehensive battery of measures. The main unmet needs that research should address in this area are emphasized. Where the available evidence allows providing the clinician with specific advice that can already be used today to make the management of depression more personalized, this advice is highlighted. Indeed, some sections of the paper, such as those on neurocognition and on physical comorbidities, indicate that the modern management of depression is becoming increasingly complex, with several components other than simply the choice of an antidepressant and/or a psychotherapy, some of which can already be reliably personalized.

The effectiveness of repeated intravenous ketamine on depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation and functional disability in adults with major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder: Results from the Canadian Rapid Treatment Center of Excellence

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of intravenous (IV) ketamine in adults with treatment resistant depression (TRD) receiving care in real-word settings is insufficiently characterized. Herein, results from a naturalistic, retrospective study are presented from a Canadian outpatient IV ketamine clinic.

METHODS

Adults (N = 213; M_age = 45) with Major Depressive Disorder or Bipolar Disorder, with a minimum of Stage 2 antidepressant resistance, received IV ketamine at a community-based multi-disciplinary clinic. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline to post-infusion 4 on the Quick Inventory for Depression Symptomatology-Self Report-16 (QIDS-SR₁₆; n = 190). Secondary measures included QIDS-SR₁₆-measured response and remission rates, changes from baseline to endpoint in Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Scale (GAD-7; n = 188) and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS; n = 168).

RESULTS

Significant improvement in total depressive symptoms severity (p < 0.0001) was observed after four infusions of IV ketamine 0.5-0.75 mg/kg. Moreover, the response rate (QIDS-SR₁₆ total score change ≥ 50%) was 27% and remission (QIDS-SR₁₆ total score ≤5) rate was 13%. Patients receiving IV ketamine exhibited anxiolytic effects (p < 0.0001,), improved overall psychosocial function (p < 0.0001), and reduced suicidal ideation (p < 0.0001). Compared to the baseline infusion, dissociation severity significantly reduced in subsequent infusions.

LIMITATIONS

This was a naturalistic, retrospective study, without a control group.

CONCLUSIONS

IV ketamine was safe, well-tolerated, and effective at improving depressive, anxiety, and functional impairment symptoms in a well-characterized cohort of adults with TRD.

Double trouble: Do symptom severity and duration interact to predicting treatment outcomes in adolescent depression?

Studies suggest that depression severity and duration interact to predict outcomes in depression treatment. To our knowledge, no study has explored this question in a sample with a placebo control, two therapies, and their combination nor with adolescents. We used data from the Treatment of Adolescent Depression Study (N=439), in which adolescent were randomized to placebo (PBO), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), antidepressants medications (MEDs), or their combination (COMB). We explore the interaction between depression severity, chronicity, and treatments (vs. placebo) in predicting outcomes. There was interaction between severity and chronicity when comparing COMB and CBT with PBO, but not MEDs. In non-chronic depression, the effects of CBT were inversely related to severity to the point that CBT appeared iatrogenic with more severe depression. In chronic depression, the effects of CBT did not vary by severity, but the relative effects of COMB grew, being smallest in milder, more dysthymic-like depression, and largest in chronic-severe depression. These findings support calls to classify depression by severity and chronicity as well efforts to risk stratify patients to different intensity of care according to these variables.

Personalized prognostic prediction of treatment outcome for depressed patients in a naturalistic psychiatric hospital setting: A comparison of machine learning approaches

OBJECTIVE

Research on predictors of treatment outcome in depression has largely derived from randomized clinical trials involving strict standardization of treatments, stringent patient exclusion criteria, and careful selection and supervision of study clinicians. The extent to which findings from such studies generalize to naturalistic psychiatric settings is unclear. This study sought to predict depression outcomes for patients seeking treatment within an intensive psychiatric hospital setting and while comparing the performance of a range of machine learning approaches.

METHOD

Depressed patients (N = 484; ages 18-72; 89% White) receiving treatment within a psychiatric partial hospital program delivering pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioral therapy were split into a training sample and holdout sample. First, within the training sample, 51 pretreatment variables were submitted to 13 machine learning algorithms to predict, via cross-validation, posttreatment Patient Health Questionnaire-9 depression scores. Second, the best performing modeling approach (lowest mean squared error; MSE) from the training sample was selected to predict outcome in the holdout sample.

RESULTS

The best performing model in the training sample was elastic net regularization (ENR; MSE = 20.49, R2 = .28), which had comparable performance in the holdout sample (MSE = 11.26; R2 = .38). There were 14 pretreatment variables that predicted outcome. To demonstrate the translation of an ENR model to personalized prediction of treatment outcome, a patient-specific prognosis calculator is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Informed by pretreatment patient characteristics, such predictive models could be used to communicate prognosis to clinicians and to guide treatment planning. Identified predictors of poor prognosis may suggest important targets for intervention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrating the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) into clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

Diagnosis is a cornerstone of clinical practice for mental health care providers, yet traditional diagnostic systems have well-known shortcomings, including inadequate reliability, high comorbidity, and marked within-diagnosis heterogeneity. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a data-driven, hierarchically based alternative to traditional classifications that conceptualizes psychopathology as a set of dimensions organized into increasingly broad, transdiagnostic spectra. Prior work has shown that using a dimensional approach improves reliability and validity, but translating a model like HiTOP into a workable system that is useful for health care providers remains a major challenge.

METHOD

The present work outlines the HiTOP model and describes the core principles to guide its integration into clinical practice.

RESULTS

Potential advantages and limitations of the HiTOP model for clinical utility are reviewed, including with respect to case conceptualization and treatment planning. A HiTOP approach to practice is illustrated and contrasted with an approach based on traditional nosology. Common barriers to using HiTOP in real-world health care settings and solutions to these barriers are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

HiTOP represents a viable alternative to classifying mental illness that can be integrated into practice today, although research is needed to further establish its utility. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Severity and the Treatment of Depression: A Review of Two Controversies

Severity is an important consideration in treatment decision-making for depression. Two controversies in the treatment of depression are related to the issue of severity. First, are antidepressants only effective for severely depressed patients? Second, should the severity of depression be used as the basis for recommending medication or psychotherapy as first-line treatment? More specifically, should patients with severe depression preferentially be treated with medication? A related question is whether psychotherapy is beneficial for severely depressed patients. Some controversial articles sparked coverage in the popular press related to these questions and stimulated subsequent research on the impact of depression severity on treatment efficacy. The results of three recent large pooled analyses of patient level data indicate that the efficacy of antidepressants is not limited to the narrow band of patients who score highest on symptom severity scales. A meta-analysis of 132 controlled psychotherapy studies of more than 10,000 patients found that greater mean baseline symptom severity did not predict poorer response. A pooled analysis of individual patient data from 16 studies comparing antidepressants and cognitive behavior therapy found that severity was not associated with differential treatment outcome. These results are discussed in the context of recommendations in official treatment guidelines.

The Generalizability of Randomized Controlled Trials of Self-Guided Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depressive Symptoms: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis

Background

Self-guided internet-based cognitive behavioral therapies (iCBTs) for depressive symptoms may substantially increase accessibility to mental health treatment. Despite this, questions remain as to the generalizability of the research on self-guided iCBT.

Objective

We sought to describe the clinical entry criteria used in studies of self-guided iCBT, explore the criteria’s effects on study outcomes, and compare the frequency of use of these criteria with their use in studies of face-to-face psychotherapy and antidepressant medications. We hypothesized that self-guided iCBT studies would use more stringent criteria that would bias the sample toward those with a less complex clinical profile, thus inflating treatment outcomes.

Methods

We updated a recently published meta-analysis by conducting a systematic literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. We conducted a meta-regression analysis to test the effect of the different commonly used psychiatric entry criteria on the treatment-control differences. We also compared the frequency with which exclusion criteria were used in the self-guided iCBT studies versus studies of face-to-face psychotherapy and antidepressants from a recently published review.

Results

Our search yielded 5 additional studies, which we added to the 16 studies identified by Karyotaki and colleagues in 2017. Few self-guided iCBT studies excluded patients with severe depressive symptoms (6/21, 29%), but self-guided iCBT studies were more likely than antidepressant (14/170, 8.2%) studies to use this criterion. However, self-guided iCBT studies did not use this criterion more frequently than face-to-face psychotherapy studies (6/16, 38%). Beyond this, we found no evidence that self-guided iCBTs used more stringent entry criteria. Strong evidence suggested that they were actually less likely to use most entry criteria, especially exclusions on the basis of substance use or personality pathology. None of the entry criteria used had an effect on outcomes.

Conclusions

A conservative interpretation of our findings is that the patient population sampled in the literature on self-guided iCBT is relatively comparable with that of studies of antidepressants or face-to-face psychotherapy. Alternatively, studies of unguided cognitive behavioral therapy may sample from a more heterogeneous and representative patient population. Until evidence emerges to suggest otherwise, the patient population sampled in self-guided iCBT studies cannot be considered as less complex than the patient population from face-to-face psychotherapy or antidepressant studies.