Using filled prescription sequences to rank antidepressants according to their acceptability in the general population: The Constances cohort

Using filled prescription sequences to rank antidepressants: A nationwide replication study

Ranking antidepressants according to their acceptability (i.e., a combination of both efficacy and tolerability) in the general population may help choosing the best first-line medication. This study aimed to replicate the results of a proof-of-concept study ranking anti-depressants according to the proportion of filled prescription sequences consistent with a continuation of the first treatment versus those consistent with a change. We used a nationwide cohort from the French national health data system (SNDS) to support the use of this method as a widely available tool to rank antidepressant treatments in real life settings. About 1.2 million people were identified as new antidepressant users in the SNDS in 2011. The outcome was clinical acceptability as measured by the continuation/failure ratio over the six-month period following the introduction of the first-line treatment. Continuation was defined as at least two refills of the same treatment. Failure was defined as a psychiatric hospitalization, death or at least one filled prescription of another antidepressant, an antipsychotic medication, or a mood-stabilizer. Adjusted Odds Ratios (aOR) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) were computed through multivariable binary logistic regressions. We ranked antidepressant medications according to clinical acceptability. Escitalopram again was the most acceptable option, and the five following antidepressants were the same as in the replication sample of the proof-of-concept study, in order Fluoxetine, Paroxetine, Sertraline, Citalopram and Venlafaxine with aOR (95% CI) for continuation ranging from 0.79 (0.77-0.81) to 0.66 (0.64-0.67). The present study provides evidence that filled prescription sequences is a widely available, robust and reproductible tool to rank antidepressant treatments in real life settings.

Outcomes associated with antidepressant treatment according to the number of prescriptions and treatment changes: 5-year follow-up of a nation-wide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Naturalistic studies regarding clinical outcomes associated with antidepressant treatment duration have yielded conflicting results, possibly because they did not consider the occurrence of treatment changes. This nation-wide population-based study examined the association between the number of filled prescriptions and treatment changes and long-term psychiatric outcomes after antidepressant treatment initiation.

METHODS

Based on the French national health insurance database, 842,175 adults who initiated an antidepressant treatment in 2011 were included. Cox proportional-hazard multi-adjusted regression models examined the association between the number of filled prescriptions and the occurrence of treatment changes 12 months after initiation and four outcomes during a 5-year follow-up: psychiatric hospitalizations, suicide attempts, sick leaves for a psychiatric diagnosis, new episodes of antidepressant treatment.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 4.5 years, the incidence rates of the four above-mentioned outcomes were 13.49, 2.47, 4.57, and 92.76 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. The number of filled prescriptions was associated with each outcome (adjusted HRs [95% CI] for one additional prescription ranging from 1.01 [1.00-1.02] to 1.10 [1.09-1.11]), as was the occurrence of at least one treatment change vs. none (adjusted HRs [95% CI] ranging from 1.18 [1.16-1.21] to 1.57 [1.79-1.65]). Furthermore, the adjusted HRs [95% CI] of the number of filled prescriptions were greater in patients with (vs. without) a treatment change for psychiatric hospitalizations (1.12 [1.11-1.14] vs. 1.09 [1.08-1.10], p for interaction = 0.002) and suicide attempts (1.12 [1.09-1.15] vs. 1.06 [1.04-1.08], p for interaction = 0.006).

LIMITATIONS

Lack of clinical data about the disorders warranting the prescriptions or their severity.

CONCLUSION

Considering treatment changes is critical when using administrative claims database to examine the long-term psychiatric outcomes of antidepressant treatments in real-life settings.

Acceptability of escitalopram versus duloxetine in outpatients with depression who did not respond to initial second-generation antidepressants: A randomized, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUNDS

Antidepressants are widely used to treat major depressive disorder. First-line treatments with antidepressants are only successful in one-third of patients; however, evidence from randomized controlled trials on second-line treatments is limited. Moreover, recently acceptability is suggested to be a good indicator of overall treatment success.

METHODS

This is a multi-center two-arm, three-phased randomized controlled trial performed in Japan from December 2013 to March 2017 comparing the acceptability of escitalopram and duloxetine as a second-line drug. Patients, who failed to respond to antidepressants such as sertraline, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, milnacipran or mirtazapine for at least 3 weeks, were randomized to either escitalopram (Group A) or duloxetine (Group B) in Step 1 (8 weeks). In Step 2 (8 weeks), the drug was switched to the other if the first drug failed. The discontinuation rate at the end of Step 1 was the primary endpoint and non-inferiority of escitalopram vs duloxetine was tested. In addition, change in clinical measures from baseline were also assessed at the end of Step 1, 2 and up to 52 weeks.

RESULTS

At the end of Step 1, Group A (n = 82) was significantly superior to Group B (n = 78) in discontinuation rate (4.9% to 19.2%, P = 0.007). The change in clinical indices from baseline were not different between the groups at either timepoint.

LIMITATIONS

As the major reason for discontinuation in Group B was the "withdrawal of consent" the concrete reason could not be verified.

CONCLUSIONS

As a second-line treatment drug, escitalopram was suggested to be non-inferior to duloxetine in acceptability.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMINCTR(UMIN000012367), registered on December 1st, 2013 and last updated on April 4th, 2017.