Hybrid Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Depressive Symptoms in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

Depression screening in patients with coronary heart disease : A narrative review of the current evidence

In view of the large and sometimes conflicting body of research, this narrative review summarizes the current evidence on depression screening in patients with coronary heart disease. Depression is a risk factor for development and progression of coronary heart disease. Consequently, many international cardiac guidelines recommend screening for depression in patients with coronary heart disease. However, the efficacy and implementation of these guidelines are debated due to the lack of empirical evidence supporting the benefits of routine depression screening. Studies conducted in cardiac routine care support this assumption: Patients with positive depression screens do not receive adequate follow-up care, which highlights gaps in the detection-to-treatment pathway. Barriers to effective screening and treatment include system-level factors, such as insufficient integration of mental health resources in cardiology, and patient-related factors like stigma and low acceptance of mental health treatment. Innovative interventions that address these barriers and involve patients as active partners in depression care should be developed through a theory-driven, transparent, multistage process involving key stakeholders such as patients, nurses, and cardiologists. A sound methodological evaluation of such multilevel interventions could answer the question of whether early detection of depression in patients with coronary heart disease would lead to health benefits.

Knowledge domain and emerging trends in anxiety and depression after myocardial infarction research during 2002-2022: Bibliometric and visualized analysis

Purpose

This study aimed to analyze developmental trends in anxiety and depression after myocardial infarction (ADMI) research in the past 20 years through bibliometrics analysis and predict future research directions.

Methods

ADMI-related publications were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Bibliometric, VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Bibliometrix software packages were used for bibliometric analysis and visualization.

Results

Overall, 3220 ADMI-related publications were identified. The United States, China, and the Netherlands were the countries with the most publications. Carney RM, De Jonge P, and Blumenthal JA were the most influential researchers. In 2004, Van Melle JP, from the University of Groningen, published in Psychosomatic Medicine the most cited article. "Cardiac rehabilitation" was the primary focus area. "Cardiac rehabilitation," "management," "acute coronary syndrome," and "outcome" were the top four keywords in emerging research hotspots. Notably, the effect of traditional Chinese medicine on ADMI is an area of potential research value.

Conclusion

Numerous studies have underscored the significance of cardiac rehabilitation. Present research focuses on managing anxiety and depression post-acute coronary syndrome and enhancing clinical outcomes through cardiac rehabilitation technology. Additionally, the therapeutic potential of traditional Chinese medicine for ADMI is expected to attract increased attention from researchers in the future.

Psychological interventions for depression and anxiety in patients with coronary heart disease, heart failure or atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Depression and anxiety occur frequently (with reported prevalence rates of around 40%) in individuals with coronary heart disease (CHD), heart failure (HF) or atrial fibrillation (AF) and are associated with a poor prognosis, such as decreased health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and increased morbidity and mortality. Psychological interventions are developed and delivered by psychologists or specifically trained healthcare workers and commonly include cognitive behavioural therapies and mindfulness-based stress reduction. They have been shown to reduce depression and anxiety in the general population, though the exact mechanism of action is not well understood. Further, their effects on psychological and clinical outcomes in patients with CHD, HF or AF are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychological interventions (alone, or with cardiac rehabilitation or pharmacotherapy, or both) in adults who have a diagnosis of CHD, HF or AF, compared to no psychological intervention, on psychological and clinical outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases from 2009 to July 2022. We also searched three clinical trials registers in September 2020, and checked the reference lists of included studies. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological interventions with no psychological intervention for a minimum of six months follow-up in adults aged over 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of CHD, HF or AF, with or without depression or anxiety. Studies had to report on either depression or anxiety or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were depression and anxiety, and our secondary outcomes of interest were HRQoL mental and physical components, all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (2591 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies included people with CHD, five with HF and none with AF. Study sample sizes ranged from 29 to 430. Twenty and 17 studies reported the primary outcomes of depression and anxiety, respectively. Despite the high heterogeneity and variation, we decided to pool the studies using a random-effects model, recognising that the model does not eliminate heterogeneity and findings should be interpreted cautiously. We found that psychological interventions probably have a moderate effect on reducing depression (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.65 to -0.06; 20 studies, 2531 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and anxiety (SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.18; 17 studies, 2235 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), compared to no psychological intervention. Psychological interventions may have little to no effect on HRQoL physical component summary scores (PCS) (SMD 0.48, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.98; 12 studies, 1454 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may have a moderate effect on improving HRQoL mental component summary scores (MCS) (SMD 0.63, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.26; 12 studies, 1454 participants; low-certainty evidence), compared to no psychological intervention. Psychological interventions probably have little to no effect on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.69; 3 studies, 615 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may have little to no effect on MACE (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.92; 4 studies, 450 participants; low-certainty evidence), compared to no psychological intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that psychological interventions for depression and anxiety probably result in a moderate reduction in depression and anxiety and may result in a moderate improvement in HRQoL MCS, compared to no intervention. However, they may have little to no effect on HRQoL PCS and MACE, and probably do not reduce mortality (all-cause) in adults who have a diagnosis of CHD or HF, compared with no psychological intervention. There was moderate to substantial heterogeneity identified across studies. Thus, evidence of treatment effects on these outcomes warrants careful interpretation. As there were no studies of psychological interventions for patients with AF included in our review, this is a gap that needs to be addressed in future studies, particularly in view of the rapid growth of research on management of AF. Studies investigating cost-effectiveness, return to work and cardiovascular morbidity (revascularisation) are also needed to better understand the benefits of psychological interventions in populations with heart disease.

Exploration of therapeutic models for psycho-cardiology: From cardiac to psychological rehabilitation

The prevalence and mortality of cardiovascular disease are relatively high. Currently, depression has been proven to be an independent risk factor for the occurrence and poor prognosis of cardiovascular disease. Psycho-cardiovascular comorbidity, as a reciprocal cause and effect, affects each other, leading to the deterioration of clinical prognosis and forming a vicious circle. Coronary artery disease comorbidity with depression is a common disease in psycho-cardiology medicine. This paper expounds on the exploration of the treatment model of psycho-cardiology from the aspects of epidemiological characteristics, comorbidity mechanism, screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Antidepressants in Patients With Comorbid Depression and Medical Diseases: An Umbrella Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Every third to sixth patient with medical diseases receives antidepressants, but regulatory trials typically exclude comorbid medical diseases. Meta-analyses of antidepressants have shown small to medium effect sizes, but generalizability to clinical settings is unclear, where medical comorbidity is highly prevalent.

Objective

To perform an umbrella systematic review of the meta-analytic evidence and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of antidepressant use in populations with medical diseases and comorbid depression.

Data Sources

PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception until March 31, 2023, for systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for treatment or prevention of comorbid depression in any medical disease.

Study Selection

Meta-analyses of placebo- or active-controlled RCTs studying antidepressants for depression in individuals with medical diseases.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data extraction and quality assessment using A Measurement Tool for the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2 and AMSTAR-Content) were performed by pairs of independent reviewers following PRISMA guidelines. When several meta-analyses studied the same medical disease, the largest meta-analysis was included. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled data on the primary outcome (efficacy), key secondary outcomes (acceptability and tolerability), and additional secondary outcomes (response and remission).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Antidepressant efficacy presented as standardized mean differences (SMDs) and tolerability (discontinuation for adverse effects) and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) presented as risk ratios (RRs).

Results

Of 6587 references, 176 systematic reviews were identified in 43 medical diseases. Altogether, 52 meta-analyses in 27 medical diseases were included in the evidence synthesis (mean [SD] AMSTAR-2 quality score, 9.3 [3.1], with a maximum possible of 16; mean [SD] AMSTAR-Content score, 2.4 [1.9], with a maximum possible of 9). Across medical diseases (23 meta-analyses), antidepressants improved depression vs placebo (SMD, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.30-0.54]; I2 = 76.5%), with the largest SMDs for myocardial infarction (SMD, 1.38 [95% CI, 0.82-1.93]), functional chest pain (SMD, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.08-1.67]), and coronary artery disease (SMD, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.32-1.33]) and the smallest for low back pain (SMD, 0.06 [95% CI, 0.17-0.39]) and traumatic brain injury (SMD, 0.08 [95% CI, -0.28 to 0.45]). Antidepressants showed worse acceptability (24 meta-analyses; RR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.02-1.32]) and tolerability (18 meta-analyses; RR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.13-1.64]) compared with placebo. Antidepressants led to higher rates of response (8 meta-analyses; RR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.14-1.94]) and remission (6 meta-analyses; RR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.25-1.61]) than placebo. Antidepressants more likely prevented depression than placebo (7 meta-analyses; RR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.33-0.53]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this umbrella systematic review of meta-analyses found that antidepressants are effective and safe in treating and preventing depression in patients with comorbid medical disease. However, few large, high-quality RCTs exist in most medical diseases.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

The effects of advanced factor analysis approaches on outcomes in randomised trials for depression: protocol for secondary analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Modern psychometric methods make it possible to eliminate nonperforming items and reduce measurement error. Application of these methods to existing outcome measures can reduce variability in scores, and may increase treatment effect sizes in depression treatment trials.

AIMS

We aim to determine whether using confirmatory factor analysis techniques can provide better estimates of the true effects of treatments, by conducting secondary analyses of individual patient data from randomised trials of antidepressant therapies.

METHOD

We will access individual patient data from antidepressant treatment trials through Clinicalstudydatarequest.com and Vivli.org, specifically targeting studies that used the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) as the outcome measure. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic approaches will be used to determine pre-treatment (baseline) and post-treatment models of depression, in terms of the number of factors and weighted scores of each item. Differences in the derived factor scores between baseline and outcome measurements will yield an effect size for factor-informed depression change. The difference between the factor-informed effect size and each original trial effect size, calculated with total HRSD-17 scores, will be determined, and the differences modelled with meta-analytic approaches. Risk differences for proportions of patients who achieved remission will also be evaluated. Furthermore, measurement invariance methods will be used to assess potential gender differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Our approach will determine whether adopting advanced psychometric analyses can improve precision and better estimate effect sizes in antidepressant treatment trials. The proposed methods could have implications for future trials and other types of studies that use patient-reported outcome measures.

Effective maNagement of depression among patients witH cANCEr (ENHANCE): a protocol for a hybrid systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of interventions for depressive symptoms

BACKGROUND

Depression is common among patients with cancer and is associated with lower treatment participation, lower satisfaction with care, poorer quality of life, greater symptom burden and higher healthcare costs. Various types of interventions (e.g. pharmacological, psychotherapy) are used for the treatment of depression. However, evidence for these among patients with cancer is limited. Furthermore, the relative effectiveness and acceptability of different approaches are unknown because a direct comparison between all available treatments has not been carried out. We will address this by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA) of interventions for depression among people with cancer using a hybrid overview of reviews and systematic review methodology.

METHODS

We will search for and extract data from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of depression interventions for patients with cancer from inception, before performing a supplemental search for more recent RCTs. We will include RCTs comparing pharmacological, psychotherapy, exercise, combination therapy, collaborative care or complementary and alternative medicine interventions with pill placebo, no treatment, waitlist, treatment as usual or minimal treatment control groups, or directly in head-to-head trials, among adults who currently have cancer or have a history of any cancer and elevated depressive symptoms (scores above a cut-off on validated scales or meeting diagnostic criteria). Our primary outcomes will be change in depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference) and intervention acceptability (% who withdrew). Our secondary outcomes will be 6-month change in depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, adverse events and mortality. We will independently screen for eligibility, extract data and assess risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool. We will use frequentist random-effects multivariate NMA in Stata, rankograms and surface under the cumulative ranking curves to synthesise evidence and obtain a ranking of intervention groups. We will explore heterogeneity and inconsistency using local and global measures and evaluate the credibility of results using the Confidence in NEtwork Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework.

DISCUSSION

Our findings will provide the best available evidence for managing depression among patients with cancer. Such information will help to inform clinical guidelines, evidence-based treatment decisions and future research by identifying gaps in the current literature.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Submitted to PROSPERO (record number: 290145), awaiting registration.

Depression interventions for individuals with coronary artery disease - Cost-effectiveness calculations from an Irish perspective

BACKGROUND

A substantial proportion of individuals with coronary artery disease experience moderate or severe acute depression that requires treatment. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of four interventions for depression in individuals with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

We assessed effectiveness of pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, collaborative care and exercise as remission rate after 8 and 26 weeks using estimates from a recent network meta-analysis. The cost assessment included standard doses of antidepressants, contact frequency, and staff time per contact. Unit costs were calculated as health services' purchase price for pharmaceuticals and mid-point staff salaries obtained from the Irish Health Service Executive and validated by clinical staff. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as the incremental costs over incremental remissions compared to usual care. High- and low-cost scenarios and sensitivity analysis were performed with changed contact frequencies, and assuming individual vs. group psychotherapy or exercise.

RESULTS

After 8 weeks, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was lowest for group exercise (€526 per remission), followed by pharmacotherapy (€589), individual psychotherapy (€3117) and collaborative care (€4964). After 26 weeks, pharmacotherapy was more cost-effective (€591) than collaborative care (€7203) and individual psychotherapy (€9387); no 26-week assessment for exercise was possible. Sensitivity analysis showed that group psychotherapy could be most cost-effective after 8 weeks (€519) and cost-effective after 26 weeks (€1565); however no group psychotherapy trials were available investigating its effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

Large variation in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was seen. With the current assumptions, the most cost-effective depression intervention for individuals with coronary artery disease after 8 weeks was group exercise.

Psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Depression occurs frequently in individuals with coronary artery disease (CAD) and is associated with a poor prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in CAD patients with comorbid depression.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases up to August 2020. We also searched three clinical trials registers in September 2021. We examined reference lists of included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and contacted primary authors. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs investigating psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in adults with CAD and comorbid depression. Our primary outcomes included depression, mortality, and cardiac events. Secondary outcomes were healthcare costs and utilisation, health-related quality of life, cardiovascular vital signs, biomarkers of platelet activation, electrocardiogram wave parameters, non-cardiac adverse events, and pharmacological side effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently examined the identified papers for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. We performed random-effects model meta-analyses to compute overall estimates of treatment outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Psychological interventions may result in a reduction in end-of-treatment depression symptoms compared to controls (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to -0.19, I² = 88%; low certainty evidence; 10 trials; n = 1226). No effect was evident on medium-term depression symptoms one to six months after the end of treatment (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.01, I² = 69%; 7 trials; n = 2654). The evidence for long-term depression symptoms and depression response was sparse for this comparison. There is low certainty evidence that psychological interventions may result in little to no difference in end-of-treatment depression remission (odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% CI 0.78 to 5.19, I² = 87%; low certainty evidence; 3 trials; n = 862). Based on one to two trials per outcome, no beneficial effects on mortality and cardiac events of psychological interventions versus control were consistently found. The evidence was very uncertain for end-of-treatment effects on all-cause mortality, and data were not reported for end-of-treatment cardiovascular mortality and occurrence of myocardial infarction for this comparison. In the trials examining a head-to-head comparison of varying psychological interventions or clinical management, the evidence regarding the effect on end-of-treatment depression symptoms is very uncertain for: cognitive behavioural therapy compared to supportive stress management; behaviour therapy compared to person-centred therapy; cognitive behavioural therapy and well-being therapy compared to clinical management. There is low certainty evidence from one trial that cognitive behavioural therapy may result in little to no difference in end-of-treatment depression remission compared to supportive stress management (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.50; low certainty evidence; n = 83). Based on one to two trials per outcome, no beneficial effects on depression remission, depression response, mortality rates, and cardiac events were consistently found in head-to-head comparisons between psychological interventions or clinical management. The review suggests that pharmacological intervention may have a large effect on end-of-treatment depression symptoms (SMD -0.83, 95% CI -1.33 to -0.32, I² = 90%; low certainty evidence; 8 trials; n = 750). Pharmacological interventions probably result in a moderate to large increase in depression remission (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.89, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence; 4 trials; n = 646). We found an effect favouring pharmacological intervention versus placebo on depression response at the end of treatment, though strength of evidence was not rated (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.54, I² = 62%; 5 trials; n = 891). Based on one to four trials per outcome, no beneficial effects regarding mortality and cardiac events were consistently found for pharmacological versus placebo trials, and the evidence was very uncertain for end-of-treatment effects on all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. In the trials examining a head-to-head comparison of varying pharmacological agents, the evidence was very uncertain for end-of-treatment effects on depression symptoms. The evidence regarding the effects of different pharmacological agents on depression symptoms at end of treatment is very uncertain for: simvastatin versus atorvastatin; paroxetine versus fluoxetine; and escitalopram versus Bu Xin Qi. No trials were eligible for the comparison of a psychological intervention with a pharmacological intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In individuals with CAD and depression, there is low certainty evidence that psychological intervention may result in a reduction in depression symptoms at the end of treatment. There was also low certainty evidence that pharmacological interventions may result in a large reduction of depression symptoms at the end of treatment. Moderate certainty evidence suggests that pharmacological intervention probably results in a moderate to large increase in depression remission at the end of treatment. Evidence on maintenance effects and the durability of these short-term findings is still missing. The evidence for our primary and secondary outcomes, apart from depression symptoms at end of treatment, is still sparse due to the low number of trials per outcome and the heterogeneity of examined populations and interventions. As psychological and pharmacological interventions can seemingly have a large to only a small or no effect on depression, there is a need for research focusing on extracting those approaches able to substantially improve depression in individuals with CAD and depression.