Validation of the geriatric anxiety inventory in a duloxetine clinical trial for elderly adults with generalized anxiety disorder

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of agomelatine for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder in adult patients

This systematic literature review aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of agomelatine versus approved medications for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in adult patients. We selected randomized controlled trials on various medications used to treat GAD in adult patients. An existing systematic literature review (Kong et al., 2020) was used to identify relevant studies published before 2020. Outcomes of remission and discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) were analyzed, following a random-effects network meta-analysis approach. Of 25 identified studies, 20 and 22 studies were included in the network meta-analysis for studying the remission and discontinuation (due to AEs) outcomes, respectively. A statistically significant difference in the remission rate was observed between agomelatine and pregabalin [odds ratio (OR), 2.22; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-4.21]. For the other comparators, the results were nonsignificant; however, all the point estimates were in favor of agomelatine. Similarly, for discontinuation because of AEs, the point estimates leaned consistently toward agomelatine suggesting its higher tolerability. The probabilities of agomelatine having the highest remission rate and lowest discontinuation (due to AEs) rate were 67% and 68%, respectively. Based on its demonstrated effectiveness and tolerability, agomelatine can be considered as a drug of choice for the treatment of GAD.

Comparative Remission Rates and Tolerability of Drugs for Generalised Anxiety Disorder: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common psychiatric disorders associated with substantial dysfunction and socioeconomic burden. Pharmacotherapy is the first choice for GAD. Remission [Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) score ≤7] is regarded as a crucial treatment goal for patients with GAD. There is no up-to-date evidence to compare remission rate and tolerability of all available drugs by using network meta-analysis. Therefore, the goal of our study is to update evidence and determine the best advantageous drugs for GAD in remission rate and tolerability profiles.

Method: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, wanfang data, China Biology Medicine and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to March 2020 to identify eligible double-blind, RCTs reporting the outcome of remission in adult patients who received any pharmacological treatment for GAD. Two reviewers independently assessed quality of included studies utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool as described in Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and extracted data from all manuscripts. Our outcomes were remission rate (proportion of participants with a final score of seven or less on HAM-A) and tolerability (treatments discontinuations due to adverse events). We calculated summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of each outcome via pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

Results: Overall, 30 studies were included, comprising 32 double-blind RCTs, involving 13,338 participants diagnosed as GAD by DSM-IV criteria. Twenty-eight trials were rated as moderate risk of bias, four trials as low. For remission rate, agomelatine (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.74–4.19), duloxetine (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.47–2.40), escitalopram (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48–2.78), paroxetine (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.25–2.42), quetiapine (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.39–2.55), and venlafaxine (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.69–3.07) were superior to placebo. For tolerability, sertraline, agomelatine, vortioxetine, and pregabalin were found to be comparable to placebo. However, the others were worse than placebo in terms of tolerability, with ORs ranging between 1.86 (95% CI 1.25–2.75) for tiagabine and 5.98 (95% CI 2.41–14.87) for lorazepam. In head-to-head comparisons, agomelatine, duloxetine, escitalopram, quetiapine, and venlafaxine were more efficacious than tiagabine in terms of remission rate, ORs from 1.66 (95% CI 1.04–2.65) for duloxetine to 2.38 (95% CI 1.32–4.31) for agomelatine. We also found that agomelatine (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.15–3.75) and venlafaxine (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.08–2.86) were superior to vortioxetine. Lorazepam and quetiapine were poorly tolerated when compared with other drugs.

Conclusions: Of these interventions, only agomelatine manifested better remission with relatively good tolerability but these results were limited by small sample sizes. Duloxetine, escitalopram, venlafaxine, paroxetine, and quetiapine showed better remission but were poorly tolerated.

A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory

The Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI) and its short form (GAI-SF) are self-reported scales used internationally to assess anxiety symptoms in older adults. In this study, we conducted the first critical comprehensive review of these scales' psychometric properties. We rated the quality of 31 relevant studies with the COSMIN checklist. Both the GAI and GAI-SF showed adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Convergent validity indices were highest with generalized anxiety measures; lowest with instruments relating to somatic symptoms. We detected substantial overlap with depression measures. While there was no consensus on the GAI's factorial structure, we found the short version to be unidimensional. Although we found good sensitivity and specificity for detecting anxiety, cut-off scores varied. The GAI and GAI-SF are relevant instruments showing satisfactory psychometric properties; to broaden their use, however, some psychometric properties warrant closer examination. This review calls attention to weaknesses in the methodological quality of the studies.

Psychological and pharmacological treatments for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD): a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to provide updated pooled effect sizes of evidence-based psychotherapies and medications for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and to investigate potential moderators of outcomes. Seventy-nine randomized controlled trials (RCT) including 11,002 participants with a diagnosis of GAD were included in a meta-analysis that tested the efficacy of psychotherapies or medications for GAD. Psychotherapy showed a medium to large effect size (g = 0.76) and medication showed a small effect size (g = 0.38) on GAD outcomes. Psychotherapy also showed a medium effect on depression outcomes (g = 0.64) as did medications (g = 0.59). Younger age was associated with a larger effect size for psychotherapy (p < 0.05). There was evidence of publication bias in psychotherapy studies. This analysis found a medium to large effect for empirically supported psychotherapy interventions on GAD outcomes and a small effect for medications on GAD outcomes. Both groups showed a medium effect on depression outcomes. Because medication studies had more placebo control conditions than inactive conditions compared to psychotherapy studies, effect sizes between the domains should not be compared directly. Patient age should be further investigated as a potential moderator in psychotherapy outcomes in GAD.

Efficacy and tolerability of short-term duloxetine treatment in adults with generalized anxiety disorder: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine during short-term treatment in adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials databases for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) comparing duloxetine or duloxetine plus other antipsychotics with placebo for the treatment of GAD in adults. Outcome measures were (1) efficacy, assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale(HADS) anxiety subscale score, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety(HAM-A) psychic and somatic anxiety factor scores, and response and remission rates based on total scores of HAM-A; (2) tolerability, assessed by discontinuation rate due to adverse events, the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events(TEAEs) and serious adverse events(SAEs). Review Manager 5.3 and Stata Version 12.0 software were used for all statistical analyses.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 8 RCTs. Mean changes in the HADS anxiety subscale score [mean difference(MD) = 2.32, 95% confidence interval(CI) 1.77-2.88, P<0.00001] and HAM-A psychic anxiety factor score were significantly greater in patients with GAD that received duloxetine compared to those that received placebo (MD = 2.15, 95%CI 1.61-2.68, P<0.00001). However, there was no difference in mean change in the HAM-A somatic anxiety factor score (MD = 1.13, 95%CI 0.67-1.58, P<0.00001). Discontinuation rate due to AEs in the duloxetine group was significantly higher than the placebo group [odds ratio(OR) = 2.62, 95%CI 1.35-5.06, P = 0.004]. The incidence of any TEAE was significantly increased in patients that received duloxetine (OR = 1.76, 95%CI 1.36-2.28, P<0.0001), but there was no significant difference in the incidence of SAEs (OR = 1.13, 95%CI 0.52-2.47, P = 0.75).

CONCLUSION

Duloxetine resulted in a greater improvement in symptoms of psychic anxiety and similar changes in symptoms of somatic anxiety compared to placebo during short-term treatment in adults with GAD and its tolerability was acceptable.

Factor structure of the Chinese version of the geriatric anxiety inventory

BACKGROUND

As China's population ages, the mental health of older people has been increasingly focused on by academic circles.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to identify the factor structure of the Chinese version of the geriatric anxiety inventory (GAI-CV).

METHODS

This study used data collected from Investigation on the anxiety symptoms of the elderly in the city of Beijing supported by scientific research fund project of Renmin University of China. Cronbach's α was used to test internal consistency reliability. Both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were performed separately for factor analysis.

RESULTS

1318 subjects with mean age 71.35 ± 7.44 years (male 40.6 %) were involved. Principal components analysis revealed a three-factor structure of the GAI-CV. GAI-CV scales exhibited good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.937) and a three-factor model fit the data well [comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.891, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.084].

CONCLUSIONS

The Chinese version of the GAI appears to be reliable and valid to measure anxiety for elderly people in China.