Evaluation of low-dose venlafaxine hydrochloride for the therapy of hot flushes in breast cancer survivors

Evaluation and Comparison of Citalopram and Venlafaxine for Management of Hot Flashes in Women with Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. Premature menopause and hot flashes are the main complications of breast cancer treatments. About 40 to 50 percent of breast cancer women who undergo chemotherapy are experiencing premature menopause symptoms, including hot flashes. Some endocrine therapies such as tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors are associated with induction or aggravating hot flashes. Hot flashes are often debilitating and significantly impair daily functions. Therefore many therapeutic options have been studied so far for the management of this adverse effect. However, there are still some clinical challenges in managing hot flashes in patients with breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of venlafaxine and citalopram on hot flashes in breast cancer women receiving tamoxifen.

DESIGN

We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in forty-one, 35 to 65 years old female patients. The study lasted for four weeks, and the follow-up was for two months. Venlafaxine and citalopram treatments started with doses of 37.5 mg or 10 mg, respectively. Venlafaxine and citalopram dosages were increased in the second week to 75 and 20 mg, respectively. The study was conducted during the year 2017.

KEY RESULTS

The results indicated that the total efficacy was significantly different in groups receiving citalopram, venlafaxine, and placebo. Total efficacy in the placebo group, venlafaxine, and citalopram was 14.3, 53.8, and 64.3%, respectively (p=0.02). During the second week, the efficacy in groups receiving citalopram, venlafaxine, and placebo was 57.1, 53.8, and 14.3%, respectively (p=0.04). Generally, both citalopram and venlafaxine were well tolerated. The associated adverse effects were mild to moderate in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although citalopram was associated with more adverse effects, including constipation, it was more effective in reducing the frequency of hot flashes when compared to venlafaxine or placebo.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anticancer treatment, suicide risk and possibly the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in this population are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (aged 18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants, in adults (aged 18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was 1. efficacy as a continuous outcome. Our secondary outcomes were 2. efficacy as a dichotomous outcome, 3. Social adjustment, 4. health-related quality of life and 5. dropouts. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 studies (1364 participants), 10 of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Six of these compared antidepressants and placebo, three compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update, we included four additional studies, three of which contributed data for the primary outcome. For acute-phase treatment response (six to 12 weeks), antidepressants may reduce depressive symptoms when compared with placebo, even though the evidence is very uncertain. This was true when depressive symptoms were measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to -0.12; 7 studies, 511 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and when measured as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.96; 5 studies, 662 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons, we retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and for mirtazapine versus TCAs. There was no difference between the various classes of antidepressants (continuous outcome: SSRI versus TCA: SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18; 3 studies, 237 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mirtazapine versus TCA: SMD -4.80, 95% CI -9.70 to 0.10; 1 study, 25 participants). There was a potential beneficial effect of antidepressants versus placebo for the secondary efficacy outcomes (continuous outcome, response at one to four weeks; very low-certainty evidence). There were no differences for these outcomes when comparing two different classes of antidepressants, even though the evidence was very uncertain. In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; 9 studies, 889 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and TCAs (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.22; 3 studies, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of the heterogeneous quality of the studies, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide CIs, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were few and of low quality. This review found a potential beneficial effect of antidepressants against placebo in depressed participants with cancer. However, the certainty of evidence is very low and, on the basis of these results, it is difficult to draw clear implications for practice. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which drug to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of people with major depression, also taking into account that data on people with other serious medical conditions suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Furthermore, this update shows that the usage of the newly US Food and Drug Administration-approved antidepressant esketamine in its intravenous formulation might represent a potential treatment for this specific population of people, since it can be used both as an anaesthetic and an antidepressant. However, data are too inconclusive and further studies are needed. We conclude that to better inform clinical practice, there is an urgent need for large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer who have depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder.

Drug repositioning for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Esophageal cancer (EC) remains a significant challenge globally, having the 8th highest incidence and 6th highest mortality worldwide. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the most common form of EC in Asia. Crucially, more than 90% of EC cases in China are ESCC. The high mortality rate of EC is likely due to the limited number of effective therapeutic options. To increase patient survival, novel therapeutic strategies for EC patients must be devised. Unfortunately, the development of novel drugs also presents its own significant challenges as most novel drugs do not make it to market due to lack of efficacy or safety concerns. A more time and cost-effective strategy is to identify existing drugs, that have already been approved for treatment of other diseases, which can be repurposed to treat EC patients, with drug repositioning. This can be achieved by comparing the gene expression profiles of disease-states with the effect on gene-expression by a given drug. In our analysis, we used previously published microarray data and identified 167 differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Using weighted key driver analysis, 39 key driver genes were then identified. These driver genes were then used in Overlap Analysis and Network Analysis in Pharmomics. By extracting drugs common to both analyses, 24 drugs are predicted to demonstrate therapeutic effect in EC patients. Several of which have already been shown to demonstrate a therapeutic effect in EC, most notably Doxorubicin, which is commonly used to treat EC patients, and Ixazomib, which was recently shown to induce apoptosis and supress growth of EC cell lines. Additionally, our analysis predicts multiple psychiatric drugs, including Venlafaxine, as repositioned drugs. This is in line with recent research which suggests that psychiatric drugs should be investigated for use in gastrointestinal cancers such as EC. Our study shows that a drug repositioning approach is a feasible strategy for identifying novel ESCC therapies and can also improve the understanding of the mechanisms underlying the drug targets.

Anxiety and depression after breast cancer: The predictive role of monoamine levels

PURPOSE

Despite the fact that the prevalence of anxiety and depression in breast cancer survivors is higher than in the general female population, the psychobiological substrate of this phenomenon has yet to be elucidated. We aimed to examine the predictive role of peripheral dopamine (DA), noradrenaline (NA), serotonin (5-HT) and kynurenine (KYN) in anxiety and depression among breast cancer survivors.

METHOD

We evaluated 107 women using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and monoamine levels were analyzed via high-performance liquid chromatography.

RESULTS

High KYN levels predicted both disorders, while low NA and DA predicted anxiety and depressive symptoms, respectively. A negative conditional effect of 5-HT was found for anxiety and depression among younger women only, while being both middle-aged and younger influenced the negative conditional effect of DA on depression.

CONCLUSION

Monoamine variations may render breast cancer survivors more vulnerable to anxiety and depression, with young women being especially vulnerable to the detrimental effect of low DA and 5-HT. Assessing subclinical psychobiological markers allows mental health nurses to identify vulnerable survivors prior to the onset of anxiety and depression, and to adjust nursing interventions accordingly.

A Systematic Review on Analytical Methods to Determine Chiral and Achiral Forms of Venlafaxine and its Metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine

Background:

Venlafaxine (VEN) is a bicyclic phenylethylamine derivative and possesses a marked structural difference from other antidepressant drugs present in the market. It works by eliciting the neurotransmitter action in CNS. It occurs in two enantiomeric forms i.e. R and S VEN. After the first pass metabolism, it gets metabolized into more active form O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV) which also exist in the enantiomeric forms. So it is important to develop a suitable analytical and bioanalytical method for the determination of VEN and its metabolite to quantify them accurately.

Methods and Results:

The current review summarizes methods to determine chiral and achiral forms of VEN and ODV. According to the literature, it is clear that most widely used method for the determination of VEN and ODV is liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy, other methods used for routine analysis include UV spectroscopy, reverse phase high-performance liquid chromatography with PDA detector. For the determination of enantiomeric forms of VEN and ODV, different chiral columns have been utilized. Capillary electrophoresis with charged cyclodextrins is also used to determine the enantiomeric forms.

Conclusion:

Various analytical methods for determining VEN and its metabolite in different matrices have been discussed thoroughly in the present review.

Tamoxifen and CYP2D6: A Controversy in Pharmacogenetics

Tamoxifen reduces the rate of breast cancer recurrence by about one-half. It is converted to more active metabolites by enzymes encoded by polymorphic genes, including cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) and transported by ATP-binding cassette transporters. Genetic polymorphisms that confer reduced CYP2D6 activity or concurrent use of CYP2D6-inhibiting drugs may reduce the clinical efficacy of tamoxifen. The issue of the clinical utility of CYP2D6 genotype testing is subject to considerable and ongoing academic and clinical controversy. In this chapter, we outline tamoxifen's clinical pharmacology and give an overview of the research to date on the association between CYP2D6 inhibition and tamoxifen effectiveness. Based on the evidence to date, the impact of drug-induced and/or gene-induced inhibition of CYP2D6 activity is likely to be null or small, or at most moderate in subjects carrying two reduced function alleles. Future research should examine the effect of polymorphisms in genes encoding enzymes in tamoxifen's complete metabolic pathway, should comprehensively evaluate other biomarkers that affect tamoxifen effectiveness, such as the transport enzymes, and focus on subgroups of patients, such as premenopausal breast cancer patients, for whom tamoxifen is the only guideline approved endocrine therapy.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in this population are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (aged 18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to June week 4 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 2017 week 27) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to July week 4 2017). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants, in adults (aged 18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved a total of 10 studies (885 participants), seven of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update we included one additional unpublished study. These new data contributed to the secondary analysis, while the results of the primary analysis remained unchanged.For acute-phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found no difference between antidepressants as a class and placebo on symptoms of depression measured both as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants; very low certainty evidence) and as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants; very low certainty evidence). No trials reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, showing no difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants; very low certainty evidence). No clear evidence of a beneficial effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from our analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low certainty evidence). In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants as a class compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38, seven RCTs, 479 participants; very low certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty (quality) of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low certainty evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results, clear implications for practice cannot be deduced. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. To better inform clinical practice, there is an urgent need for large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer who have depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder.

Duloxetine and escitalopram for hot flushes: efficacy and compliance in breast cancer survivors

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) might be an effective treatment for hot flushes (HFs) in breast cancer survivors (BCSs). This study aims to compare the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine (SNRI) versus escitalopram (SSRI) in reducing frequency and severity of HFs in BCSs and to assess the effect on depression. Thirty-four symptomatic BCSs with emotional impairment received randomly duloxetine 60 mg daily or escitalopram 20 mg daily for 12 weeks. Patients were asked to record in a diary HF frequency and severity at baseline and after 4 and 12 weeks of treatment. Depression was evaluated through validated questionnaires (Beck Depression Inventory and Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale) at baseline and after 4 and 12 weeks of treatment. Both drugs showed a significant reduction of HF frequency and severity after 12 weeks of treatment with no significant difference between the two groups. A significant improvement in depression symptoms was observed at the end of the study period within both the groups, without difference between the two drugs. In conclusion, escitalopram and duloxetine are both effective treatment for the relief of HFs in BCSs, with similar beneficial effect. A significant improvement of depression was obtained with no major side effects.

Impact of Fertility Concerns on Tamoxifen Initiation and Persistence

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant tamoxifen reduces breast cancer recurrence risk and mortality; however, initiation and treatment persistence are poor for younger patients. We hypothesized that a unique set of factors, including fertility concerns, would contribute to the poor tamoxifen use among premenopausal patients.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2012, 515 premenopausal patients younger than age 45 years, with stage 0 to III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, for whom tamoxifen was recommended, were identified. Clinical and pathologic tumor characteristics, treatment regimens, and fertility concerns were recorded. Clinical factors associated with tamoxifen noninitiation and discontinuation were identified using univariate and multivariable analysis. After the recommendation for tamoxifen, patient reasons for tamoxifen noninitiation or discontinuation were also documented. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Based on multivariable analysis, fertility concerns were statistically associated with both noninitiation (odds ratio = 5.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.29 to 11.07) and early discontinuation (hazard ratio = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.09 to 3.38) of tamoxifen. Other independent predictors of noninitiation included a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ, declining radiation, and not receiving chemotherapy (stage I-III). Additionally, smoking and not receiving radiation therapy were statistically significant predictors of early withdrawal from therapy. Primary patient reasons for noninitiation and early discontinuation included concerns about side effects and fertility.

CONCLUSION

This study provided insight into factors associated with tamoxifen use for reproductive-aged breast cancer survivors, with a new focus on fertility. Fertility concerns negatively impacted tamoxifen initiation and continuation among premenopausal patients. Interventions to optimize treatment initiation and persistence for young cancer patients should include access to fertility preservation options.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in this population group are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April week 3, 2014), EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2014 week 17) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to April week 4, 2014). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs allocating adults (18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis) comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into RevMan 5 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved a total of nine studies (861 participants), with seven studies contributing to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants and one-three armed study compared two antidepressants and a placebo arm. For the acute phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class on symptoms of depression compared with placebo when measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants) or as a proportion of people who had depression (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants). No trials reported data on the follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, providing very low quality evidence for the difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants). No clear evidence of an effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from the analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low quality evidence). We found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class in terms of dropouts due to any cause compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.53, six RCTs, 455 participants), as well as between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low quality evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results clear implications for practice cannot be made. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent should be prescribed may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer with depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder, are urgently needed to better inform clinical practice.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in this population group are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April week 3, 2014), EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2014 week 17) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to April week 4, 2014). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs allocating adults (18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis) comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into RevMan 5 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved a total of nine studies (861 participants), with seven studies contributing to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants and one-three armed study compared two antidepressants and a placebo arm. For the acute phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class on symptoms of depression compared with placebo when measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants) or as a proportion of people who had depression (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants). No trials reported data on the follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, providing very low quality evidence for the difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants). No clear evidence of an effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from the analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low quality evidence). We found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class in terms of dropouts due to any cause compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.53, six RCTs, 455 participants), as well as between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low quality evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results clear implications for practice cannot be made. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent should be prescribed may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer with depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder, are urgently needed to better inform clinical practice.

Hormone therapy in oophorectomized BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

OBJECTIVE

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers have greatly elevated lifetime risks of breast, ovarian, and fallopian tube cancers. Bilateral prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy is recommended to prevent cancer in these women. As it is often performed before natural menopause, it may be accompanied by menopausal symptoms, impaired quality of life, and increased cardiovascular risk.

METHODS

In this review, we describe the indications, timing, and implications of salpingo-oophorectomy for BRCA-positive women, with a special focus on the risks and benefits of hormone therapy (HT). Furthermore, retrospective and prospective trials of HT in BRCA mutation carriers undergoing prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy are debated.

RESULTS

Hormonal deprivation after prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy may negatively impact health and quality of life; most women experience menopausal symptoms shortly after surgical operation. Literature data suggest that HT generally reduces vasomotor symptoms related to surgical menopause, improving sexual functioning without affecting survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limitations of retrospective and prospective observational studies, short-term HT seems to improve quality of life and does not seem to have an adverse effect on oncologic outcomes in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers without a personal history of breast cancer. Therefore, randomized and larger trials are urgently needed.

Metabolism and transport of tamoxifen in relation to its effectiveness: new perspectives on an ongoing controversy

Tamoxifen reduces the rate of breast cancer recurrence by approximately a half. Tamoxifen is metabolized to more active metabolites by enzymes encoded by polymorphic genes, including cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). Tamoxifen is a substrate for ATP-binding cassette transporter proteins. We review tamoxifen's clinical pharmacology and use meta-analyses to evaluate the clinical epidemiology studies conducted to date on the association between CYP2D6 inhibition and tamoxifen effectiveness. Our findings indicate that the effect of both drug-induced and/or gene-induced inhibition of CYP2D6 activity is likely to be null or small, or at most moderate in subjects carrying two reduced function alleles. Future research should examine the effect of polymorphisms in genes encoding enzymes in tamoxifen's complete metabolic pathway, should comprehensively evaluate other biomarkers that affect tamoxifen effectiveness, such as the transport enzymes, and focus on subgroups of patients, such as premenopausal breast cancer patients, for whom tamoxifen is the only guideline endocrine therapy.

How are Interactions Taken into Account in Studies on Conventional and Complementary Therapies for Breast Cancer Patients with Menopausal Complaints?

Introduction: Postmenopausal symptoms in breast cancer patients undergoing antihormone treatment lead to high drop-out rates from the therapy. From the therapeutic point of view, methods of both conventional and complementary medicine are concerned. Interactions are being discussed in cases of natural substances. However, they are also relevant for conventional medical substances. The aim of this analysis is to answer the question as to what extent potential interactions are taken into account in clinical studies and reviews on supportive therapies. Materials and Methods: Clinical studies and reviews were identified by means of a systematic search and analysed with regard to the consideration of potential interactions. Results: Altogether 46 clinical studies and one Cochrane review were found. Among the 35 studies on conventional drug therapies, 5 (14 %) took possible interactions into account. Among the 17 studies on complementary medicine, there were 2 (11.7 %) such publications. The Cochrane review did not mention interactions. Discussion: For future studies in which interactions cannot be excluded, a strategy to control for their clinically relevant consequences should be developed. The present authors suggest that the use of survival and recurrence data as secondary endpoints, also for studies on purely supportive therapies, is a reasonable approach. The resulting considerations for study routines are listed thematically.

Clinical epidemiology and pharmacology of CYP2D6 inhibition related to breast cancer outcomes

Adjuvant tamoxifen therapy of breast cancer patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumors reduces the rate of breast cancer recurrence by approximately a half. Tamoxifen is metabolized by several polymorphic enzymes, including cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6), to more active metabolites. We have reviewed the clinical pharmacology of tamoxifen and evaluated the evidence from clinical epidemiology studies regarding the association between CYP2D6 inhibition and tamoxifen effectiveness. We conclude that the impact of CYP2D6 inhibition on tamoxifen effectiveness is likely to be null or small, at least in the populations studied so far. Understanding the effect of variations in tamoxifen metabolism on breast cancer outcomes, if any, will likely require a broader perspective, including examination of the complete metabolic pathway and subgroups of patients with other markers of potentially poor tamoxifen response.

Managing menopausal symptoms and depression in tamoxifen users: implications of drug and medicinal interactions

OBJECTIVE

Tamoxifen, a medication used in the treatment of breast cancer, often induces menopausal symptoms. Certain medications and natural supplements taken or prescribed to alleviate tamoxifen-induced hot flashes and depressive states in women with breast cancer interact with tamoxifen. This paper reviews potentially problematic interactions and offers treatment recommendations.

METHODS

Medline (1950-June 1, 2010), Embase Classic+Embase (1947-June 1, 2010) and PsycINFO (1967-June 1, 2010) were searched through Ovid. The word "tamoxifen" was searched with "depression" and then with "menopaus*" and "symptoms", with "treatment" as a limit. "Tamoxifen" was later searched with the MeSH terms "drug interaction" or "drug incompatibility".

RESULTS

Venlafaxine is efficacious for the treatment of hot flashes and depression and safe to use in combination with tamoxifen. Gabapentin is also efficacious in treating tamoxifen-induced hot flashes and, since it does not interact with cytochrome P450 system, is likely safe to use in patients using tamoxifen. Desvenlafaxine and pregabalin may be alternatives to venlafaxine and gabapentin, respectively, although desvenlafaxine has not yet been studied in this population. Paroxetine, fluoxetine and bupropion are strong CYP2D6 inhibitors which should be avoided in tamoxifen users. Fluvoxamine and nefazodone both inhibit CYP3A, which could potentially affect the metabolism of tamoxifen. Clonidine can be an alternative agent but may carry significant side effects. Evidence of medicinal products for the treatment of tamoxifen-induced hot flashes is equivocal at best.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should remain cautious about using strong inhibitors and/or inducers of cytochrome 2D6 and 3A4 concomitantly with tamoxifen. Use of natural menopausal supplements and diets rich in isoflavones should not be encouraged in tamoxifen users until more data is available. There are however safe treatments for hot flashes and depression in tamoxifen users.

Challenges in clinical patient management

The use of endocrine therapy in breast cancer represents one of the earliest molecular targeting strategies used in cancer treatment. Tamoxifen, a selective estrogen-receptor (ER) modulator, has been the standard of care for women with receptor-positive breast cancer for the last 30 years. Tamoxifen suppresses the estrogen-dependent growth of breast cancer cells by specifically targeting the ER. Because of estrogenic effects, tamoxifen does not increase the risk of osteoporosis, but it can lead to endometrial cancer and thromboembolism. The third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs) exert their tumor antiproliferative action by targeting an enzyme critical for estrogen biosynthesis. The AIs thus have a different mechanism of action than tamoxifen, and a different safety profile. The majority of adverse events (AEs) related to the AIs are mild to moderate. Most of these AEs are common to menopause and are predictable and manageable. This review looks at AI-associated side effects and current clinical management strategies, with a particular emphasis on managing bone health. Compliance with long-term therapy, strategies to improve adherence, and considerations in elderly patients with hormone-responsive breast cancer are also discussed.

Gynaecologic challenging issues in the management of BRCA mutation carriers: oral contraceptives, prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and hormone replacement therapy

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have a 54-85% and 45% lifetime risk of developing breast cancer, respectively, and a 18-60% and 11-27% lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer, respectively. Oral contraceptives (OCs) significantly reduce the risk of ovarian cancer also in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers. The association between OC use and breast cancer risk in these women is controversial. Some studies showed a modestly increased risk especially among BRCA1 mutation carriers. The risk appears to be greater for women who took OCs for at least 5 years and who took OCs before the age of 30 years. Other studies reported that duration of use before first full-term pregnancy has a positive association with breast cancer risk. Salpingo-oophorectomy reduces the risk of coelomic epithelial cancer of 80-95% and the risk of breast cancer of approximately 50%. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers should be encouraged to undergo prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at the age of 35-40 years or when childbearing is complete. Short-term use of hormone replacement therapy may relieve menopausal symptoms and does not appear to affect the breast cancer risk reduction obtained with salpingo-oophorectomy.

Adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy: outcomes and safety

Adjuvant therapy with the third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs) anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane has largely replaced the use of tamoxifen (TAM) as standard adjuvant endocrine treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer. Treatment strategies investigated in large, randomized, well-controlled clinical studies include the use of an AI as an upfront replacement for TAM, as an alternative to continued treatment with TAM, and in the extended adjuvant setting after at least 5 years of TAM. The efficacy of AIs over TAM has been demonstrated, particularly in terms of improving disease-free survival (DFS), and reductions in early distant metastasis with AIs may ultimately translate into improved overall survival. As AI therapy offers prolonged DFS, safety is an important concern over the long term. The AIs are better tolerated than TAM in terms of troublesome gynecologic adverse events such as vaginal bleeding and discharge, as well as life-threatening complications such as venous thromboembolic events and endometrial cancer. On the other hand, AI therapy has been associated with losses in bone density and a potential effect on lipids and cardiovascular risk. In trials comparing AIs with TAM, only limited conclusions can be made because of the putative cardioprotective, lipid-lowering, and bone-sparing effects of TAM. Studies comparing AIs with placebo, and/or in healthy women, may be more useful in understanding the long-term safety of adjuvant AI therapy. Results of ongoing safety analyses within some of the large AI trials should provide further insight into the long-term tolerability of AI therapy in the adjuvant setting.

Efficacy and tolerability of desvenlafaxine succinate treatment for menopausal vasomotor symptoms: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine succinate (desvenlafaxine) with placebo for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled 707 healthy, postmenopausal women experiencing 50 or more moderate-to-severe hot flushes per week. Participants randomly received desvenlafaxine 50, 100, 150, or 200 mg or placebo daily. Trial duration was 52 weeks. Primary outcomes were change from baseline in average daily number of moderate-to-severe hot flushes and in daily hot flush severity score at weeks 4 and 12.

RESULTS

Six hundred twenty women with an average of 11 moderate-to-severe hot flushes per day at baseline completed at least one on-therapy evaluation for primary efficacy end points; 519 participants completed 12 weeks of treatment, and 368 completed the study. Desvenlafaxine 100 mg/d achieved a significantly greater reduction compared with placebo in average daily number of hot flushes at weeks 4 (P=.013) and 12 (P=.005), reaching a 64% decrease from baseline at week 12, and the 75% responder rate was significantly higher for desvenlafaxine 100 mg (50%) compared with placebo (29%; P=.003; number needed to treat=4.7) at week 12. Average daily severity of hot flushes was significantly lower in the desvenlafaxine 100-mg group compared with placebo at week 12 (P=.020). Desvenlafaxine-treated women reported significantly more treatment-emergent adverse events than placebo-treated women during the first week of therapy only.

CONCLUSION

Desvenlafaxine is an effective nonhormonal treatment for vasomotor symptoms in postmenopausal women. Its tolerability profile is consistent with that of other serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00421031

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Missed symptoms of menopause

OBJECTIVE

This review examines the available data on the efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for treating the commonly missed climacteric symptoms of menopause.

DISCUSSION

Although some women may pass through the menopausal transition phase with few or no symptoms, the majority experience one or more symptoms serious enough to be disruptive to their lives. The most common are vasomotor symptoms (VMS; hot flushes and night sweats), but they are not the only climacteric symptoms that can negatively affect quality of life. The 'missed symptoms' of menopause -- symptoms with high prevalence and an impact on quality of life that nonetheless receive less attention than do VMS -- include mood changes, sleep disturbances and somatic complaints. These symptoms are reported by approximately half of menopausal women, with numbers varying by region and ethnic background. As with VMS, the effects of declining oestrogen levels on serotonin/noradrenaline pathways could play a role in their development.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from pilot studies of several SSRIs and SNRIs suggest that they may improve menopausal mood and sleep symptoms, but few studies have demonstrated significant improvement compared with placebo. One SNRI (venlafaxine) improved menopausal mood symptoms and two SSRIs (citalopram and paroxetine) improved sleep, each in a single placebo-controlled trial of women with VMS. Additional placebo-controlled trials are needed to determine whether SSRIs or SNRIs are effective treatment options for women who cannot or choose not to use hormone therapy.

Clinical management of adverse events in adjuvant therapy for hormone-responsive early breast cancer

Systemic adjuvant therapy has proven highly effective at reducing recurrences and deaths in patients who have received primary therapy for early breast cancer. However, as with all treatments, adjuvant therapy can cause unwanted side effects, and effective management of these events is essential to ensure that patients comply with, and continue, treatment. Adjuvant endocrine therapy is not associated with the more severe, acute toxicities of chemotherapy, and can therefore be taken for many years. At present, the standard duration of postoperative adjuvant endocrine therapy is 5 years. Prevention and treatment of adverse events associated with long-term endocrine therapy is particularly important in the adjuvant setting, where patients are clinically cancer free. In this situation, the efficacy benefits are not, therefore, obvious to the patient, but side effects may have a negative impact on daily life. Tamoxifen has been the gold standard endocrine therapy for hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer for many years, and the long-term side effects of this agent are well documented. In recent years, the aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have begun to displace tamoxifen as the adjuvant therapy of choice, owing to greater efficacy and good tolerability. Predictably, the AIs and tamoxifen have partially overlapping side-effect profiles. Both therapies are associated with typical symptoms of estrogen deprivation; however, tamoxifen also has estrogenic activity in some tissues, which can cause either detrimental (genital tract) or beneficial (bone, cardiovascular system, lipids) effects that are not associated with AI use. To reduce treatment discontinuations, it is important that patients are made aware of the possible side effects of adjuvant therapy and the management strategies available to them, prior to starting therapy. The role of physical, alternative and pharmaceutical therapies in the management of adverse events associated with endocrine therapy has been investigated, and strategies are now available to alleviate symptoms and enable patients to benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy without a significant adverse impact on quality of life.

Vasomotor symptoms in menopause: physiologic condition and central nervous system approaches to treatment

OBJECTIVE

The decline in concentrations of gonadal hormones during menopause gives rise to a range of physiologic and psychologic changes that may impact a woman's health and quality of life significantly. Most notable among these are vasomotor symptoms (hot flashes and night sweats) and mood and sleep disturbances.

STUDY DESIGN

This article reviews the physiologic condition underlying menopausal vasomotor symptoms and centrally active, nonhormonal therapies that have demonstrated efficacy for their treatment.

RESULTS

Despite the emergence of a range of nonhormonal treatments for vasomotor symptoms, a need still exists for safe and effective therapeutic options that directly target the underlying thermoregulatory mechanisms for women who want treatment but prefer to avoid hormone therapy or for whom hormone therapy is contraindicated.

CONCLUSION

The availability of centrally active therapies for menopausal vasomotor symptoms with risks and benefits clearly defined by results from well-designed clinical trials has the potential to allay safety concerns that are associated with the treatment of these common symptoms.

Endocrine Effects of Breast Cancer Treatment

OBJECTIVES

To discuss long-term physical effects of treatment for breast cancer including effects on reproductive, bone, sexual health, and related women's issues.

DATA SOURCES

Research articles, abstracts, literature reviews.

CONCLUSION

Long-term effects of treatment have become increasingly prevalent in breast cancer survivors. The most common are effects on reproductive, bone, and sexual health.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Long-term effects of treatment can have a significant negative impact on the long-term health and QOL of women with breast cancer. Oncology nurses are well-positioned to anticipate and address the reproductive and endocrine consequences of breast cancer treatment.

Menopause: evidence-based practice

Menopause is a physiologic transition and is assuming an increasing importance as the demographic bulge moves through this phase. The transition takes place over several years. It is characterized by depletion of the ovarian follicles, decreasing inhibin leading to increases in follicle-stimulating hormone and loss of the menstrual cycle, accompanied by decreased estradiol production and typical symptoms. The role of hormone therapy in menopause has shifted from preventive use to a limited role in symptom management, for which it remains the most effective intervention. There is good evidence from observational and randomized trials of an increased risk of breast cancer in women on estrogen plus a progestin, compared with those on estrogen alone. There are insufficient data to be able to determine if there are clinically important differences between various progestins and progesterone with respect to breast cancer risk, nor between different regimens. Even relatively short-term exposure to unopposed estrogen will increase the risk of atypical endometrial hyperplasia or cancer; women who have their uterus should be using a progestational agent. Lifestyle changes at menopause are important and effective for preventive health. Recent evidence suggests that the discordance between epidemiologic studies with respect to cardiovascular outcomes and the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial (WHI RCT) data might be attributable in large part to the older age of women enrolled in the WHI.

A Review of Non-Hormonal Options for the Relief of Menopausal Symptoms

The climacteric syndrome involves a variety of symptoms such as profuse sweating, insomnia, memory loss, decreased sexual drives, joint aches, and anxiety. However, amongst these symptoms, hot flashes and sweats are generally considered the hallmark and result in the majority of the medical consultations for this condition. Hot flashes are known to respond readily to placebo, which alone decreases their frequency by 20-40%. In the ideal setting of clinical trials, with optimal patient selection and compliance, estrogen therapy reduces hot flashes by about 70-80%; this is twice as effective as placebo. However, estrogen is unable to be universally used, either because of contraindications or because of an unwillingness of women to take it. Furthermore, hot flashes may persist in spite of adequate estrogen replacement, and physicians are often faced with the dilemma of finding something to administer in place of, or in addition to, estrogen to improve symptoms. The most commonly used non-hormonal alternatives for climacteric symptoms are neurotransmitter modulators such as serotonin reuptake inhibitors and gabapentin. These are, at best, approximately half as effective as estrogen for the relief of menopausal symptoms, and are only marginally better than placebo.Complementary treatment, particularly over-the-counter phytotherapeutic extracts, are very popular and women often try a variety of such products before resorting to conventional medicine. Preparations containing isoflavones, such as soy extract and red clover or extracts from evening primrose or cimicifuga (black cohosh, Actaea racemosa, syn. Cimicifuga racemosa), in variable doses are very popular for the treatment of hot flashes. The scientific support for their efficacy certainly does not equal their popularity.Non-hormonal treatments for menopause are not as effective as estrogens in relieving hot flashes, but may have a role in therapy for women who have contraindications to gonadal steroid use.