Managing inadequate antidepressant response in depressive illness

Personalized Approach in the Management of Difficult-to-Treat and Treatment-Resistant Depression With Second-Generation Antipsychotics: A Delphi Statement

Background Major depressive disorder (MDD) has many facets including mixed or atypical depression that requires personalized care to improve treatment-related outcomes. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) offer complementary mechanisms for clinical roles in difficult-to-treat depression and treatment-resistant depression cases. Aim/objective To further delineate a consensus on the clinical positioning of SGAs for MDD, mixed, or atypical depression, a Knowledge Attitude Perception (KAP)-mediated Delphi Statement was planned. Material/methods A literature review for the definition, diagnosis, and management of MDD, mixed, and atypical depression as treatment-resistant depression (TRD) or difficult-to-treat depression (DTD) was conducted by a steering committee of academic and clinical experts (n=6) while developing a validated KAP questionnaire. Scientific statements as clinical recommendations were evolved using the Delphi methodology before building a clinical expert consensus with an online survey (n=24). Results Twenty-four psychiatrists highlighted DTD to offer a multidimensional approach to assess treatment strategies involving selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or SGAs, while ensuring symptom, functional, and quality of life (QoL) domain improvement for improved outcomes and remission rates. MDD cases with anxiety, anhedonia, comorbidities, and risk traits require personalized care with early induction of SGAs for severe cases or symptom persisters with functional impairment. Early augmentation with SGAs including aripiprazole or cariprazine can provide a favorable risk-benefit profile for clinical cases of MDD with or without the antecedent of mixed depression or personality disorder.  Conclusion The literature review and KAP responses emphasize the importance of early identification for personalized care strategies with SGAs for DTD. Large-scale real-world evidence needs to evolve with due recognition of different phenotypes as TRD or DTD with partial or functional impairment to understand the impact of appropriate treatment pathways with SGAs.

Polygenic risk scores of lithium response and treatment resistance in major depressive disorder

Treatment response and resistance in major depressive disorder (MDD) are suggested to be heritable. Due to significant challenges in defining treatment-related phenotypes, our understanding of their genetic bases is limited. This study aimed to derive a stringent definition of treatment resistance and to investigate the genetic overlap between treatment response and resistance in MDD. Using electronic medical records on the use of antidepressants and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) from Swedish registers, we derived the phenotype of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and non-TRD within ~4500 individuals with MDD in three Swedish cohorts. Considering antidepressants and lithium are first-line treatment and augmentation used for MDD, respectively, we generated polygenic risk scores (PRS) of antidepressants and lithium response for individuals with MDD and evaluated their associations with treatment resistance by comparing TRD with non-TRD. Among 1778 ECT-treated MDD cases, nearly all (94%) used antidepressants before their first ECT and the vast majority had at least one (84%) or two (61%) antidepressants of adequate duration, suggesting these MDD cases receiving ECT were resistant to antidepressants. We did not observe a significant difference in the mean PRS of antidepressant response between TRD and non-TRD; however, we found that TRD cases had a significantly higher PRS of lithium response compared to non-TRD cases (OR = 1.10-1.12 under various definitions). The results support the evidence of heritable components in treatment-related phenotypes and highlight the overall genetic profile of lithium-sensitivity in TRD. This finding further provides a genetic explanation for lithium efficacy in treating TRD.

Considerations when selecting an antidepressant: a narrative review for primary care providers treating adults with depression

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a debilitating mental disorder that can be treated with a number of different antidepressant therapies, each with its own unique prescribing considerations. Complicating the selection of an appropriate antidepressant for adults with MDD is the heterogeneity of clinical profiles and depression subtypes. Additionally, patient comorbidities, preferences, and likelihood of adhering to treatment must all be considered when selecting an appropriate therapy. With the majority of prescriptions being written by primary care practitioners, it is appropriate to review the unique characteristics of all available antidepressants, including safety considerations. Prior to initiating antidepressant treatment and when patients do not respond adequately to initial therapy and/or exhibit any hypomanic or manic symptoms, bipolar disorder must be ruled out, and evaluation for psychiatric comorbidities must be considered as well. Patients with an inadequate response may then require a treatment switch to another drug with a different mechanism of action, combination, or augmentation strategy. In this narrative review, we propose that careful selection of the most appropriate antidepressant for adult patients with MDD based on their clinical profile and comorbidities is vital for initial treatment selection.Strategies must be considered for addressing partial and inadequate responses as well to help patients achieve full remission and sustained functional recovery. This review also highlights data for MDD clinical outcomes for which gaps in the literature have been identified, including the effects of antidepressants on functional outcomes, sleep disturbances, emotional and cognitive blunting, anxiety, and residual symptoms of depression.

Investigating genetic overlap between antidepressant and lithium response and treatment resistance in major depressive disorder

Treatment response and resistance in major depressive disorder (MDD) are suggested to be heritable. Due to significant challenges in defining treatment-related phenotypes, our understanding of their genetic bases is limited. This study aimed to derive a stringent definition of treatment resistance and to investigate genetic overlap between treatment response and resistance in MDD. Using electronic medical records on the use of antidepressants and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) from Swedish registers, we derived the phenotype of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) within ~ 4 500 individuals with MDD in three Swedish cohorts. Considering antidepressants and lithium are first-line treatment and augmentation used for MDD, respectively, we generated polygenic risk scores of antidepressant and lithium response for individuals with MDD, and evaluated their associations with treatment resistance by comparing TRD with non-TRD. Among 1 778 ECT-treated MDD cases, nearly all (94%) used antidepressants before first ECT, and the vast majority had at least one (84%) or two (61%) antidepressants of adequate duration, suggesting these MDD cases receiving ECT were resistant to antidepressants. We found that TRD cases tend to have lower genetic load of antidepressant response than non-TRD, although the difference was not significant; furthermore, TRD cases had significantly higher genetic load of lithium response (OR = 1.10-1.12 under different definitions). The results support evidence of heritable components in treatment-related phenotypes and highlight the overall genetic profile of lithium-sensitivity in TRD. This finding further provides a genetic explanation for lithium efficacy in treating TRD.

Interpersonal Psychotherapy for Depression in Parkinson's Disease: A Feasibility Study

Individuals living with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience interpersonal stressors that contribute to depressive risk. Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) emphasizes the bidirectional relationship between interpersonal stressors and mood may therefore be a suitable treatment for PD-depression. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of delivering 12 sessions of IPT to depressed PD patients and explore the need for modifications. A secondary aim was to obtain descriptive information about efficacy outcomes. The study used a pre-post design without a comparison group. Participants were 12 PD patients with a major depressive disorder. IPT was well accepted and tolerated by patients and required minimal modifications. Compliance with session attendance and completion of study questionnaires were excellent and treatment satisfaction was high. Depression scores declined from baseline to endpoint, with 7 patients meeting criteria for remission at endpoint. Findings are encouraging and a larger randomized controlled trial is currently underway to ascertain if IPT is an efficacious treatment for PD-depression.

Safety and effectiveness of vortioxetine for major depressive disorder: Real-world evidence from a population-based study in South Korea

Background

A post-marketing surveillance study was conducted to assess the real-world safety and effectiveness of vortioxetine for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in South Korea.

Methods

Adult patients aged 19-94 years receiving vortioxetine for MDD at 72 hospitals and clinics in South Korea between 19^th August 2014 and 18^th August 2020 were included. Patients were followed for up to 24±2 weeks, at up to three visits. Adverse events (AEs) and effectiveness, assessed by both clinician and patient-reported measures, were analyzed.

Results

A total of 3,263 patients (mean age: 51.28 years) were included in the safety set; 1,095 were aged ≥65 years. The majority of the safety set (61.97%) were female. The overall rate of any AEs and serious AEs were 17.13 and 1.56%, respectively. The majority of AEs were mild (88.32%). The rates of AEs did not differ statistically by age (≥65 years: 16.89% [185/1,095] versus <65 years: 17.25% [374/2,168)], p=0.7989), sex (male: 15.95% [198/1,241] versus female: 17.85% [361/2,022], p=0.1623), or liver impairment (with liver impairment: 20.90% [14/67] versus without liver impairment: 17.05% [545/3,196], p=0.4087). Effectiveness was assessed in 1,918 patients. By 24±2 weeks, there were significant clinical improvements from baseline, assessed by change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score (mean±standard deviation [SD]: -10.49±9.42 points, p <0.0001), the proportion of patients with improved symptoms using the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scores (79.29%), and in both patient-reported measures, with a significant improvement in the Korean Version of the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-Depression (mean±SD: -6.06±13.23, p <0.0001) and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (mean±SD: 4.83±9.81, p <0.0001) total scores from baseline. Similar to the safety profiles, the proportions of patients with improved symptoms compared with baseline using the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scores did not differ by age (≥65 years: 82.09% versus <65 years: 78.32%, p=0.0511), sex (male: 77.45% versus female: 81.01%, p=0.0587), or liver impairment (with liver impairment: 67.57% versus without liver impairment: 79.85%, p=0.0663).

Conclusion

Vortioxetine appears to be well-tolerated and effective for treating MDD patients in the real-world setting in South Korea, irrespective of age, sex, and liver impairment, reflecting the known profile of vortioxetine based on studies worldwide.

Can we check serum lithium levels less often without compromising patient safety?

BACKGROUND

Lithium is viewed as the first-line long-term treatment for prevention of relapse in people with bipolar disorder.

AIMS

This study examined factors associated with the likelihood of maintaining serum lithium levels within the recommended range and explored whether the monitoring interval could be extended in some cases.

METHOD

We included 46 555 lithium rest requests in 3371 individuals over 7 years from three UK centres. Using lithium results in four categories (<0.4 mmol/L; 0.40-0.79 mmol/L; 0.80-0.99 mmol/L; ≥1.0 mmol/L), we determined the proportion of instances where lithium results remained stable or switched category on subsequent testing, considering the effects of age, duration of lithium therapy and testing history.

RESULTS

For tests within the recommended range (0.40-0.99 mmol/L categories), 84.5% of subsequent tests remained within this range. Overall, 3 monthly testing was associated with 90% of lithium results remaining within range, compared with 85% at 6 monthly intervals. In cases where the lithium level in the previous 12 months was on target (0.40-0.79 mmol/L; British National Formulary/National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria), 90% remained within the target range at 6 months. Neither age nor duration of lithium therapy had any significant effect on lithium level stability. Levels within the 0.80-0.99 mmol/L category were linked to a higher probability of moving to the ≥1.0 mmol/L category (10%) compared with those in the 0.4-0.79 mmol/L group (2%), irrespective of testing frequency.

CONCLUSION

We propose that for those who achieve 12 months of lithium tests within the 0.40-0.79 mmol/L range, the interval between tests could increase to 6 months, irrespective of age. Where lithium levels are 0.80-0.99 mmol/L, the test interval should remain at 3 months. This could reduce lithium test numbers by 15% and costs by ~$0.4 m p.a.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Combination Treatments for Major Depression: Antidepressants plus Second-Generation Antipsychotics vs. Esketamine vs. Lithium

BACKGROUND

Successful treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) can be challenging, and failures ("treatment-resistant depression" [TRD]) are frequent. Steps to address TRD include increasing antidepressant dose, combining antidepressants, adding adjunctive agents, or using nonpharmacological treatments. Their relative efficacy and tolerability remain inadequately tested. In particular, the value and safety of increasingly employed second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and new esketamine, compared to lithium as antidepressant adjuncts remain unclear.

METHODS

We reviewed randomized, placebo-controlled trials and used random-effects meta-analysis to compare odds ratio (OR) versus placebo, as well as numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) and to-harm (NNH), for adding SGAs, esketamine, or lithium to antidepressants for major depressive episodes.

RESULTS

Analyses involved 49 drug-placebo pairs. By NNT, SGAs were more effective than placebo (NNT = 11 [CI: 9-15]); esketamine (7 [5-10]) and lithium (5 [4-10]) were even more effective. Individually, aripiprazole, olanzapine+fluoxetine, risperidone, and ziprasidone all were more effective (all NNT < 10) than quetiapine (NNT = 13), brexpiprazole (16), or cariprazine (16), with overlapping NNT CIs. Risk of adverse effects, as NNH for most-frequently reported effects, among SGAs versus placebo was 5 [4-6] overall, and highest with quetiapine (NNH = 3), lowest with brexpiprazole (19), 5 (4-6) for esketamine, and 9 (5-106) with lithium. The risk/benefit ratio (NNH/NNT) was 1.80 (1.25-10.60) for lithium and much less favorable for esketamine (0.71 [0.60-0.80]) or SGAs (0.45 [0.17-0.77]).

CONCLUSIONS

Several modern antipsychotics and esketamine appeared to be useful adjuncts to antidepressants for acute major depressive episodes, but lithium was somewhat more effective and better tolerated.

LIMITATIONS

Most trials of adding lithium involved older, mainly tricyclic, antidepressants, and the dosing of adjunctive treatments were not optimized.

Personality traits and escitalopram treatment outcome in major depression

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRI) have proven to be effective in treatment of depression. Still, treatment efficacy varies significantly from patient to patient and about 40% of patients do not respond to initial treatment. Personality traits have been considered one source of variability in treatment outcome.

AIM

Current study aimed at identifying specific personality traits that could be predictive of treatment response and/or the dynamics of symptom change in depressive patients.

METHOD

In a sample of 132 outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with an SSRI-group antidepressant escitalopram, the Swedish universities Scales of Personality (SSP) were used in order to find predictive personality traits. For the assessment of the severity of depressive symptoms and the improvement rates, the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) were used.

RESULTS

Escitalopram-treated MDD patients with higher social desirability achieved more rapid decrease in symptom severity. None of the studied traits predicted the end result of the treatment.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that specific personality traits may predict the trajectory of symptom change rather than the overall improvement rate.

Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in Pediatric Populations

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a severe illness that afflicts about 16.6% of people over their lifetime. MDD is highly correlated with suicidality, and often first presents in adolescence. Unfortunately, many pediatric patients suffering from MDD go undiagnosed, and current evidence-based treatment options in the U.S. are limited to psychotherapy and two selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. Molecular mechanisms have been shown to play a role in MDD pathogenesis, progression, and response to medication, yet few studies have explored the role of these pathways in pediatric MDD. In this review, we outline the gravity and importance of MDD in pediatric patients, some challenges in diagnosis and treatment, current treatments available for pediatric patients, and research to investigate differences between pediatric and adult MDD. We hope that this review will provide an outline of the current understanding and treatment of MDD in pediatric patients, and provide thoughtful insights for future work that could advance our understanding of MDD in pediatric populations, and also identify new therapeutic strategies.

Multiple-therapy-resistant major depressive disorder: a clinically important concept

Many novel therapeutic options for depression exist that are either not mentioned in clinical guidelines or recommended only for use in highly specialist services. The challenge faced by clinicians is when it might be appropriate to consider such 'non-standard' interventions. This analysis proposes a framework to aid this decision.Declaration of interestIn the past 3 years R.H.M.W. has received support for research, expenses to attend conferences and fees for lecturing and consultancy work (including attending advisory boards) from various pharmaceutical companies including Astra Zeneca, Cyberonics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LivaNova, Lundbeck, MyTomorrows, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, SPIMACO and Sunovion. D.M.B.C. has received fees from LivaNova for attending an advisory board. In the past 3 years A.J.C. has received fees for lecturing from Astra Zeneca and Lundbeck; fees for consulting from LivaNova, Janssen and Allergan; and research grant support from Lundbeck.In the past 3 years A.C. has received fees for lecturing from pharmaceutical companies namely Lundbeck and Sunovion. In the past 3 years A.L.M. has received support for attending seminars and fees for consultancy work (including advisory board) from Medtronic Inc and LivaNova. R.M. holds joint research grants with a number of digital companies that investigate devices for depression including Alpha-stim, Big White Wall, P1vital, Intel, Johnson and Johnson and Lundbeck through his mindTech and CLAHRC EM roles. M.S. is an associate at Blueriver Consulting providing intelligence to NHS organisations, pharmaceutical and devices companies. He has received honoraria for presentations and advisory boards with Lundbeck, Eli Lilly, URGO, AstraZeneca, Phillips and Sanofi and holds shares in Johnson and Johnson. In the past 3 years P.R.A.S. has received support for research, expenses to attend conferences and fees for lecturing and consultancy work (including attending an advisory board) from life sciences companies including Corcept Therapeutics, Indivior and LivaNova. In the past 3 years P.S.T. has received consultancy fees as an advisory board member from the following companies: Galen Limited, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd, myTomorrows and LivaNova. A.H.Y. has undertaken paid lectures and advisory boards for all major pharmaceutical companies with drugs used in affective and related disorders and LivaNova. He has received funding for investigator initiated studies from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck and Wyeth.

British Association for Psychopharmacology consensus guidance on the use of psychotropic medication preconception, in pregnancy and postpartum 2017

Decisions about the use of psychotropic medication in pregnancy are an ongoing challenge for clinicians and women with mental health problems, owing to the uncertainties around risks of the illness itself to mother and fetus/infant, effectiveness of medications in pregnancy and risks to the fetus/infant from in utero exposure or via breast milk. These consensus guidelines aim to provide pragmatic advice regarding these issues. They are divided into sections on risks of untreated illness in pregnancy; general principles of using drugs in the perinatal period; benefits and harms associated with individual drugs; and recommendations for the management of specific disorders.

Blood-based immune-endocrine biomarkers of treatment response in depression

Antidepressant treatment for major depressive disorder remains suboptimal with response rates of just over 50%. Although treatment guidelines, algorithms and clinical keys are available to assist the clinician, the process of finding an effective pharmacotherapy to maximise benefit for the individual patient is largely by "trial and error" and remains challenging. This highlights a clear need to identify biomarkers of treatment response to help guide personalised treatment strategies. We have carried out the largest multiplex immunoassay based longitudinal study to date, examining up to 258 serum markers involved in immune, endocrine and metabolic processes as potential biomarkers associated with treatment response in 332 depression patients recruited from four independent clinical centres. We demonstrated for the first time that circulating Apolipoprotein A-IV, Endoglin, Intercellular Adhesion Molecule 1, Tissue Inhibitor of Metalloproteinases 1, Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1, Thrombopoietin, Complement C3, Hepatocyte Growth Factor and Insulin-like Growth Factor-Binding Protein 2 were associated with response to different antidepressants. In addition, we showed that specific sets of immune-endocrine proteins were associated with response to Venlafaxine (serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor), Imipramine (tricyclic antidepressant) and other antidepressant drugs. However, we were not able to reproduce the literature findings on BDNF and TNF-α, two of the most commonly reported candidate treatment response markers. Despite the need for extensive validation studies, our preliminary findings suggest that a pre-treatment immune-endocrine profile may help to determine a patient's likelihood to respond to specific antidepressant and/or alternative treatments such as anti-inflammatory drugs, providing hope for future personalised treatment approaches.