The effectiveness and safety of adjunctive aripiprazole in Taiwanese patients with antidepressant-refractory major depressive disorder: a prospective, open-label trial

Augmentative Pharmacological Strategies in Treatment-Resistant Major Depression: A Comprehensive Review

Treatment resistant depression (TRD) is associated with poor outcomes, but a consensus is lacking in the literature regarding which compound represents the best pharmacological augmentation strategy to antidepressants (AD). In the present review, we identify the available literature regarding the pharmacological augmentation to AD in TRD. Research in the main psychiatric databases was performed (PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, PsychInfo). Only original articles in English with the main topic being pharmacological augmentation in TRD and presenting a precise definition of TRD were included. Aripiprazole and lithium were the most investigated molecules, and aripiprazole presented the strongest evidence of efficacy. Moreover, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, risperidone, and ziprasidone showed positive results but to a lesser extent. Brexpiprazole and intranasal esketamine need further study in real-world practice. Intravenous ketamine presented an evincible AD effect in the short-term. The efficacy of adjunctive ADs, antiepileptic drugs, psychostimulants, pramipexole, ropinirole, acetyl-salicylic acid, metyrapone, reserpine, testosterone, T3/T4, naltrexone, SAMe, and zinc cannot be precisely estimated in light of the limited available data. Studies on lamotrigine and pindolol reported negative results. According to our results, aripiprazole and lithium may be considered by clinicians as potential effective augmentative strategies in TRD, although the data regarding lithium are somewhat controversial. Reliable conclusions about the other molecules cannot be drawn. Further controlled comparative studies, standardized in terms of design, doses, and duration of the augmentative treatments, are needed to formulate definitive conclusions.

Definition of treatment-resistant depression - Asia Pacific perspectives

BACKGROUND

The lack of uniformity in the definition of treatment resistant depression (TRD) within the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region may have implications for patient management. We aimed to characterize the most commonly used TRD definition in selected APAC countries.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of TRD definitions in APAC countries was conducted in Medline and Embase (2010-2016) and conference proceedings (2014 and 2016). TRD guidelines (APAC, Europe regional, US, or international) were also searched. An expert-panel explored APAC nuances in TRD definitions to achieve consensus for a regional-level definition.

RESULTS

Ten guidelines and 89 studies qualified for study inclusion. Among the studies, variations were observed in definitions regarding: number of antidepressants failed (range: ≥1 to ≥3), classes of antidepressants (same or different; 59% did not specify class), duration of previous treatments (range: 4-12 weeks), dosage adequacy, and consideration of adherence (yes/no; 88% of studies did not consider adherence). No TRD-specific guidelines were identified. The emerging consensus from the literature review and panel discussion was that TRD is most commonly defined as failure to ≥2 antidepressant therapies given at adequate doses, for 6-8 weeks during a major depressive episode.

LIMITATIONS

Few studies provided definitions of TRD used in daily clinical practice, and a limited number of countries were represented in the included studies and expert panel.

CONCLUSION

Attaining consensus on TRD definition may promote accurate, and possibly early detection of patients with TRD to enable appropriate intervention that may impact patient outcomes and quality of life.

Increased Anxiety, Akathisia, and Suicidal Thoughts in Patients with Mood Disorder on Aripiprazole and Lamotrigine

Introduction. Akathisia affects around 18% of patients with bipolar disorder treated with aripiprazole and may worsen when aripiprazole is combined with lamotrigine and antidepressants. Case. This paper reports on two clinical cases involving patients with a diagnosis of mood disorder who developed severe akathisia, anxiety, and suicidal ideation while using a combination of aripiprazole, antidepressants, and lamotrigine. Discussion. We recommend that patients with a mood disorder taking multiple drugs should begin aripiprazole therapy with low doses and be monitored for the development of akathisia, increased anxiety, or suicidal thoughts. The appearance of these limiting side effects requires discontinuation of the drug.

Optimizing the Use of Aripiprazole Augmentation in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: From Clinical Trials to Clinical Practice

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a recurrent, chronic, and devastating disorder leading to serious impairment in functional capacity as well as increasing public health care costs. In the previous decade, switching therapy and dose adjustment of ongoing antidepressants was the most frequently chosen subsequent treatment option for MDD. However, such recommendations were not based on firmly proven efficacy data from well-designed, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) but on practical grounds and clinical reasoning. Aripiprazole augmentation has been dramatically increasing in clinical practice owing to its unique action mechanisms as well as proven efficacy and safety from adequately powered and well-controlled RCTs. Despite the increased use of aripiprazole in depression, limited clinical information and knowledge interfere with proper and efficient use of aripiprazole augmentation for MDD. The objective of the present review was to enhance clinicians' current understanding of aripiprazole augmentation and how to optimize the use of this therapy in the treatment of MDD.

Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder: A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, prospective study

No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥ 14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n = 52) or SW (n = 49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of -8.7 (p < 0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p = 0.0086) and remitters (p = 0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60% and 54%, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6% and 19.6%, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.

A Meta-Analysis Comparing Open-Label versus Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials for Aripiprazole Augmentation in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: Lessons and Promises

OBJECTIVE

The present study is to provide whether open-label studies (OLS) may properly foresee the efficacy of randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) using OLSs and RCTs data for aripiprazole in the treatment of MDD, with the use of meta-analysis approach.

METHODS

A search of the studies used the key terms "depression and aripiprazole" from the databases of PubMed/PsychInfo from Jan 2005 through July 2013. The data were selected and verified for publication in English-based peer-reviewed journals based on rigorous inclusion criteria. Extracted data were delivered into and run by the Comprehensive Meta Analysis program v2.

RESULTS

The pooled SMDs for the primary efficacy measure was statistically significant, pointing out the significant reduction of depressive symptoms after aripiprazole augmentation (AA) to current antidepressant treatment in OLSs (pooled SMD=-2.114, z=-9.625, p<0.001); similar results were also found in RCTs (pooled SMD=-2.202, z=-6.862, p<0.001). The meta-regression analysis revealed no influence of the study design for treatment outcome.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the treatment effects of aripiprazole as an augmentation therapy in both OLSs and RCTs, indicating that open-label design may be a potentially useful predictor for treatment outcomes of controlled-clinical trials. The proper conduction of OLSs may provide informative, useful and preliminary clinical data and factors to be involved in controlled-clinical trials, by which we may have better understanding on the role of AA (e.g., dosing issues, proper duration of treatment, specific population for AA) implicated in the treatment of MDD in clinical practice.

Aripiprazole augmentation, antidepressant combination or switching therapy in patients with major depressive disorder who are partial- or non-responsive to current antidepressants: a multi-center, naturalistic study

There has been no studies comparing the clinical benefits of aripiprazole augmentation (AT), antidepressant combination (AC), and switching to a different antidepressant (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) patients partially or not responding to an initial antidepressant. AT, AC, or SW was chosen by patients. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients showing an improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB) score at week 8. Secondary efficacy measures included changes in CGI-CB, CGI-Severity (S) and subjective satisfaction scores. Remission and responder analysis were also employed. A total of 295 patients were enrolled. The most preferred strategy was AT (n = 156, 52.9%), followed by AC (n = 93, 31.5%) and SW (n = 46, 15.6%). The improver was significantly higher in AT (74.1%) compared with AC (48.1%; p < 0.001) and similar to SW (73.5%, p = 0.948), whereas no significant difference was found between AC and SW. Similar results were also found in the most secondary endpoint measures proving a superiority of AT over AC without differences between AT and SW. Tolerability profiles were similar across the three groups; however, the mean weight gain for SW (-0.1 kg) was significantly less than that for AC (1.3 kg, p < 0.05). Patients preferred AT to AC or SW when an antidepressant was ineffective in treating their depression. Among the three treatment strategies, overall AT yielded greater clinical benefit than did AC and SW. Adequately powered, well-controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm our findings due to methodological shortcomings.

Aripiprazole augmentation to antidepressant therapy in Japanese patients with major depressive disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (ADMIRE study)

OBJECTIVE

This randomized, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a fixed dose (3mg/day) and flexible dose (3-15 mg/day) schedule of aripiprazole as augmentation therapy in Japanese patients with inadequate response to antidepressant therapy (ADT).

METHOD

During an 8-week prospective treatment phase, patients experiencing a major depressive episode received clinicians' choice of ADT. Subjects with inadequate response to ADT were randomized to receive adjunctive treatment with placebo (n=195), fixed dose aripiprazole (n=197) or flexible dose aripiprazole (n=194) for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from the end of prospective treatment (baseline) to the end of randomized treatment.

RESULTS

More than 90% of patients in all treatment groups completed the 6-week double-blind treatment phase. Mean MADRS total score was improved to a significantly greater extent with fixed dose aripiprazole and flexible dose aripiprazole (-10.5 and -9.6, respectively) than with placebo (-7.4). Aripiprazole was well tolerated. The incidence of akathisia observed in the flexible dose group may relate to a higher prevalence of the CYP2D6(*)10 allele in Asian populations.

LIMITATIONS

Six weeks of adjunctive treatment is insufficient to draw conclusions about the long-term benefits of aripiprazole. Exclusion of patients with established medical comorbidities does not reflect real-world practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Aripiprazole augmentation at a fixed or flexible dose was superior to ADT alone and was reasonably well tolerated in Japanese patients with inadequate response to ADT.

Clinical issues in use of atypical antipsychotics for depressed patients

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a chronic, recurrent mental disease that causes serious disability. Because currently available antidepressants have limited efficacy with respect to response and remission in patients with MDD, clinicians must choose the best available treatment interventions for patients who do not respond to initial antidepressant treatment. The existing literature demonstrates that augmentation with atypical antipsychotics (AAs) shows higher response and remission rates compared with antidepressant monotherapy, but is associated with more withdrawals due to adverse events. In this paper, specific clinical issues in the use of AA augmentation for patients with MDD are briefly discussed. Given the limited information and clinical knowledge on the proper and effective use of AAs for MDD, future research should focus on practical clinical issues that can be commonly seen in routine practice but have not been addressed yet. This is because the use of AAs is likely to expand as there is good evidence for their effectiveness and tolerability as augmentation therapy for patients with MDD.

Do we need to consider ethno-cultural variation in the use of atypical antipsychotics for Asian patients with major depressive disorder?

Asian and western countries differ in the prevalence, symptom manifestation, diagnostic procedures, patient recognition and treatments of major depressive disorder (MDD), according to a number of studies. Ethnic differences in pharmacological profiles are also important in the prescription of certain antipsychotic medications because they may impact treatment outcomes and adverse events. Differential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of antipsychotics may be practically useful in the control of specific depressive symptoms. Furthermore, patient compliance with prescribed medications has been found to be different across races and ethnicities. Therefore, this article explores practical clinical issues for the use of atypical antipsychotics in patients with MDD, focusing on ethno-cultural differences.

Augmentation treatments with second-generation antipsychotics to antidepressants in treatment-resistant depression

Various classes of antidepressants have been used in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD); however, the efficacy of these treatments remains uncertain. A number of well-controlled clinical trials, meta-analyses and practical clinical studies have found that approximately 30 % of MDD patients remit following antidepressant treatment, leaving approximately 70 % of patients with significant residual symptoms. In these latter patients with what is considered treatment-resistant MDD, typical antipsychotics have sometimes been administered in order to augment the antidepressant effects but safety and tolerability concerns significantly reduce their usage in MDD patients. The advent of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), which have diverse pharmacodynamic profiles relative to antidepressants, has dramatically increased the usage of such drugs for patients with MDD. Recently, SGAs such as aripiprazole, quetiapine and olanzapine in combination with fluoxetine have been approved for the treatment of MDD, especially in the case of treatment resistance. This article reviews the efficacy and tolerability of SGA augmentation when added to antidepressant therapy for treatment-resistant MDD patients in acute phase studies published to date.