Depressive disorder in children and adolescents

Newer generation antidepressants for depressive disorders in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are common in young people and are associated with significant negative impacts. Newer generation antidepressants, particularly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), are often used, however evidence of their effectiveness in children and adolescents is not clear. Furthermore, there have been warnings against their use in this population due to concerns about increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and adverse outcomes, including definitive suicidal behaviour and suicidal ideation, of newer generation antidepressants compared with placebo in the treatment of depressive disorders in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the review, we searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to October 2011. The CCDANCTR includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: CENTRAL (the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) (all years), EMBASE (1974 -), MEDLINE (1950 -) and PsycINFO (1967 -). We searched clinical trial registries and pharmaceutical company websites. We checked reference lists of included trials and other reviews, and sent letters to key researchers and the pharmaceutical companies of included trials from January to August 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cross-over trials and cluster trials comparing a newer generation antidepressant with a placebo in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 years old and diagnosed with a depressive disorder were eligible for inclusion. In this update, we amended the selection criteria to include newer generation antidepressants rather than SSRIs only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or three review authors selected the trials, assessed their quality, and extracted trial and outcome data. We used a random-effects meta-analysis. We used risk ratio (RR) to summarise dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) to summarise continuous measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials of a range of newer antidepressants compared with placebo, containing 3335 participants, were included. The trials excluded young people at high risk of suicide and many co-morbid conditions and the participants are likely to be less unwell than those seen in clinical practice. We judged none of these trials to be at low risk of bias, with limited information about many aspects of risk of bias, high drop out rates and issues regarding measurement instruments and the clinical usefulness of outcomes, which were often variously defined across trials. Overall, there was evidence that those treated with an antidepressant had lower depression severity scores and higher rates of response/remission than those on placebo. However, the size of these effects was small with a reduction in depression symptoms of 3.51 on a scale from 17 to 113 (14 trials; N = 2490; MD -3.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.55 to -2.47). Remission rates increased from 380 per 1000 to 448 per 1000 for those treated with an antidepressant. There was evidence of an increased risk (58%) of suicide-related outcome for those on antidepressants compared with a placebo (17 trials; N = 3229; RR 1.58; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.45). This equates to an increased risk in a group with a median baseline risk from 25 in 1000 to 40 in 1000. Where rates of adverse events were reported, this was higher for those prescribed an antidepressant. There was no evidence that the magnitude of intervention effects (compared with placebo) were modified by individual drug class.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Caution is required in interpreting the results given the methodological limitations of the included trials in terms of internal and external validity. Further, the size and clinical meaningfulness of statistically significant results are uncertain. However, given the risks of untreated depression in terms of completed suicide and impacts on functioning, if a decision to use medication is agreed, then fluoxetine might be the medication of first choice given guideline recommendations. Clinicians need to keep in mind that there is evidence of an increased risk of suicide-related outcomes in those treated with antidepressant medications.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for depressive disorders in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are common in young people and are associated with significant negative impacts. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are often used, however, evidence of their effectiveness in children and adolescents is not clear. Furthermore, there have been warnings against their use in this population due to concerns about increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and adverse outcomes, including definitive suicidal behaviour and suicidal ideation, of SSRIs compared to placebo in the treatment of depressive disorders in children and adolescents.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the CCDAN Trials Register, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO and CENTRAL. Reference lists were checked, letters were sent to key researchers and internet databases searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or three review authors selected the trials, assessed the quality and extracted trial and outcome data. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis. The relative risk was used to summarise dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference to summarise continuous measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials were eligible for inclusion, with ten providing usable data. At 8-12 weeks, there was evidence that children and adolescents 'responded' to treatment with SSRIs (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41). There was also evidence of an increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour for those prescribed SSRIs (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.72). Fluoxetine was the only SSRI where there was consistent evidence from three trials that it was effective in reducing depression symptoms in both children and adolescents (CDRS-R treatment effect -5.63, 95% CI -7.38 to -3.88), and 'response' to treatment (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.32). Where rates of adverse events were reported, this was higher for those prescribed SSRIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Caution is required to interpret the results. First, there were methodological issues, including high attrition, issues regarding measurement instruments and clinical usefulness of outcomes, often variously defined across trials. Second, patients seen in clinical practice are likely to be more unwell, and at greater risk of suicide, compared to those in the trials, and it is unclear how this group would respond to SSRIs. This needs to be considered, along with the evidence of an increased risk of suicide related outcomes in those treated with SSRIs. It is unclear what the effect of SSRIs is on suicide completion. While untreated depression is associated with the risk of completed suicide and impacts on functioning, it is unclear whether SSRIs would modify this risk in a clinically meaningful way.

Dysthymic disorder in adolescents with intellectual disability

The present report examines the clinical features of dysthymic disorder in a sample of adolescents with mild intellectual disability (ID). Frequency of symptoms, comorbidity, agreement between reports of subjects and parents, comparison between the frequency of depressive symptoms in subjects with ID and in two different groups of normal IQ dysthymic subjects (aged 7-11, 11 and 12-18 years) are described. The sample consisted of 12 subjects (age range = 12-25.6 years; mean age = 16.3 years) screened from unselected consecutively referred patients with mild ID. All the subjects were comprehensively diagnosed with a structured diagnostic interview, the Kiddie-Schedule for Affective Disorder and Schizophrenia (K-SADS), according to DSM-IV criteria. A symptomatic profile in the group with ID showed that intrapsychic and cognitive symptoms, such as depressed mood, irritability, pathological guilt and low self-image, were frequently reported in people with ID. Parents were less aware of depressed mood, but they reported high rates of low self-esteem; the agreement between the depressive reports of ID subjects and their parents was higher than in previous findings in normal IQ children. The symptomatic profile of subjects with ID was more comparable to that of prepubertal dysthymic children than that of dysthymic adolescents, but more significant are the analogies between dysthymic disorder in ID and normal IQ subjects. High rates of comorbidity with generalized anxiety disorder were evident in the group with ID. According to the present data, dysthymic disorder can be diagnosed in adolescents with mild ID. The K-SADS clinical interview seems to be a reliable instrument for the diagnosis and clinical definition of depressive symptomatology in this special population.