Predictors of functional improvement in employed adults with major depressive disorder treated with desvenlafaxine

Measuring, Analyzing, and Presenting Work Productivity Loss in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to conduct a scoping review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and investigate which work productivity loss outcomes were measured in these RCTs, how each outcome was measured and analyzed, and how the results for each outcome were presented.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted from January 2010 to April 2020 from 2 databases: PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Data on country, study population, disease focus, sample size, work productivity loss outcomes measured (absenteeism, presenteeism, employment status changes), and methods used to measure, report, and analyze each work productivity loss outcome were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

We found 435 studies measuring absenteeism or presenteeism, of which 155 studies (35.6%) measured both absenteeism and presenteeism and were included in our final review. Only 9 studies also measured employment status changes. The most used questionnaire was the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire. The analysis of absenteeism and presenteeism data was mostly done using regression models (n = 98, n = 98, respectively) for which a normal distribution was assumed (n = 77, n = 89, respectively). Absenteeism results were most often presented in time whereas presenteeism was commonly presented using a percent scale or score.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of consensus on how to measure, analyze, and present work productivity loss outcomes in RCTs published in the past 10 years. The diversity of measurement, analysis, and presentation methods used in RCTs may make comparability challenging. There is a need for guidelines providing recommendations to standardize the comprehensiveness and the appropriateness of methods used to measure, analyze, and report work productivity loss in RCTs.

Effectiveness and Predictors of Outcomes in a Psychiatric Day Treatment Program for Elementary-Age

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to (1) assess the effectiveness of an intensive multimodal day treatment program in improving externalizing problems and function in elementary-age children and (2) examine 3 predictors of the treatment outcome (i.e., family functioning, baseline severity, and comorbid disorders).

METHODS

The sample included 261 children (80.9% boys) between ages of 5 and 12. A retrospective chart review, from 2013 to 2018, and a prospective chart review, from 2018 to 2019, were conducted to extract all relevant data for the present study. Parents and teachers provided reports on children's externalizing problems (i.e., aggressive behavior, attention problems, and rule-breaking behavior) and their level of function across different domains. The level of family functioning was also reported by parents, while clinicians assessed children's severity of disturbance and their diagnoses at intake.

RESULTS

Based on both parents' and teachers' reports, children showed significant improvement in their externalizing problems. Moreover, children showed functional improvement at home, at school, with peers, and in hobbies by the end of the program. Based on teacher's reports, children with lower level of severity showed less improvement in their attention problems, and those with comorbid developmental problems showed less improvement in their aggressive and rule-breaking behaviors. Family functioning did not predict any treatment outcome.

CONCLUSION

An intensive multimodal day treatment program was effective in reducing the symptoms of externalizing problems in elementary-age children. However, children with less severe difficulties and comorbid developmental problems showed less improvement in their externalizing problems.

Predictors of functional response and remission with desvenlafaxine 50 mg and 100 mg: a pooled analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled studies in patients with major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

The value of early functional improvement at week 2 for predicting subsequent functional outcomes at week 8 was assessed in a pooled analysis of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with desvenlafaxine (50 or 100 mg/d) or placebo.

METHODS

Data were pooled from eight double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or 100 mg/d for the treatment of MDD. Optimal week-2 improvement thresholds in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score, which best predicted week-8 treatment success, were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Four definitions of treatment success were established: (1) functional response, (2) functional/depression response, (3) functional remission, and (4) functional/depression remission. Odds ratios (ORs) of early improvement for prediction (based on thresholds determined in the ROC analysis) of week-8 treatment success were computed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Functional early improvement thresholds of 17%-32% were predictive of week-8 treatment success across treatment groups and definitions of treatment success. Optimal thresholds were higher for more stringent definitions. Negative predictive value exceeded positive predictive value, indicating that failure to achieve early functional improvement was more informative about later treatment success than was the achievement of early functional improvement. Early change in SDS was a highly significant predictor of functional response/remission (ORs, 4.981-8.737; all p < 0.0001); the interaction between treatment and early functional improvement was not significant.

CONCLUSION

Early improvement in SDS total score was predictive of functional outcomes for patients treated with desvenlafaxine 50 mg, desvenlafaxine 100 mg, or placebo.

Prognosis and Improved Outcomes in Major Depression: A Review

(Reprinted from Transl Psychiatry. 2019 Apr 3; 9(1):127. Open access; is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License).

Effects of antidepressants on QT interval in people with mental disorders

INTRODUCTION

Drug-induced QT prolongation is associated with higher cardiovascular mortality.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a protocol-based comprehensive review of antidepressant-induced QT prolongation in people with mental disorders.

RESULTS

Based on findings from 47 published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 unpublished RCTs, 14 observational studies, 662 case reports of torsades de pointes, and 168 cases of QT prolongation, we conclude that all antidepressants should be used only with licensed doses, and that all patients receiving antidepressants require monitoring of QT prolongation and clinical symptoms of cardiac arrhythmias. Large observational studies suggest increased mortality associated with all antidepressants (RR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.60-1.63, number of adults: 1,716,552), high doses of tricyclic antidepressants (OR = 2.11, 85% CI 1.10-4.22), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (OR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.24-6.24), venlafaxine (OR = 3.73, 95% CI: 1.33-10.45, number of adults: 4,040), and nortriptyline (OR = 4.60, 95% CI: 1.20-18.40, number of adults: 5,298).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence regarding the risk of QT prolongation in children is sparse.

Categorical improvement in functional impairment in depressed patients treated with desvenlafaxine

OBJECTIVE

This post-hoc pooled analysis evaluated categorical change in functional impairment in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with desvenlafaxine versus placebo and examined whether early improvement in functioning predicted functional outcomes at study endpoint.

METHODS

Data were pooled from eight randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of MDD, including adults who were randomly assigned to receive desvenlafaxine 50 or 100 mg/d or placebo (N=3,384). Shift tables were generated for categorical changes in functional impairment from baseline based on Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) subscale scores. The categories were none/mild (0-3), moderate (4-6), and marked/extreme (7-10). Treatment comparisons for prespecified shifts of interest and predictive value of week 2 or 4 improvement in SDS subscale scores for functional outcome at week 8 were assessed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Greater proportions of patients receiving desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg achieved improvement from baseline to week 8 for each prespecified shift endpoint versus placebo (all p ≤ 0.02). Early improvement in SDS subscale scores was a statistically significant predictor of functional outcome at week 8, both overall and for each treatment group (all p&lt;0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with desvenlafaxine 50 or 100 mg/d led to significantly greater categorical improvement in functional impairment versus placebo, and improvement in SDS subscale scores significantly predicted functional outcome. Monitoring patient progress early in the course of antidepressant treatment using a functional assessment such as the SDS may help clinicians determine whether or not treatment adjustments are needed.

Prediction of Acute-Phase Treatment Outcomes by Adding a Single-Item Measure of Activity Impairment to Symptom Measurement: Development and Validation of an Interactive Calculator from the STAR*D and CO-MED Trials

BACKGROUND

Day-to-day functioning is impaired in major depressive disorder. Yet there are no guidelines to systematically assess these functional changes. This report evaluates prognostic utility of changes in activity impairment to inform clinical decision-making at an individual level.

METHODS

Mixed model analyses tested changes in activity impairment (sixth item of Work and Activity Impairment scale, rated 0-10) at mid-point (week 6) and end of step 1 (weeks 12-14) in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial (n = 2697) after controlling for depression severity [Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR)]. Interactive calculators for end of step 1 remission (QIDS-SR ≤5) and no meaningful benefit (<30% QIDS-SR reduction from baseline) were developed for participants with complete data (n = 1476) and independently replicated in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes trial (n = 399).

RESULTS

Activity impairment improved independently with acute-phase treatment in STAR*D (F = 7.27; df = 2,2625; P < .001). Baseline to mid-point activity impairment change significantly predicted remission (P < .001, model area under the curve = 0.823) and no meaningful benefit (P < .001, area under the curve = 0.821) in the STAR*D trial. Adding activity impairment variables to depression severity measures correctly reclassified 28.4% and 15.8% remitters and nonremitters (net reclassification improvement analysis, P < .001), and 11.4% and 16.8% of those with no meaningful benefit and meaningful benefit (net reclassification improvement analysis, P < .001). The STAR*D trial model estimates accurately predicted remission (area under the curve = 0.80) and no meaningful benefit (area under the curve = 0.82) in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes trial and was used to develop an interactive calculator.

CONCLUSION

A single-item self-report measure of activity impairment changes independently with antidepressant treatment. Baseline to week 6 changes in activity impairment and depression severity can be combined to predict acute-phase remission and no meaningful benefit at an individual level.

CA, Kasper S. Prognosis and improved outcomes in major depression: a review

Treatment outcomes for major depressive disorder (MDD) need to be improved. Presently, no clinically relevant tools have been established for stratifying subgroups or predicting outcomes. This literature review sought to investigate factors closely linked to outcome and summarize existing and novel strategies for improvement. The results show that early recognition and treatment are crucial, as duration of untreated depression correlates with worse outcomes. Early improvement is associated with response and remission, while comorbidities prolong course of illness. Potential biomarkers have been explored, including hippocampal volumes, neuronal activity of the anterior cingulate cortex, and levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and central and peripheral inflammatory markers (e.g., translocator protein (TSPO), interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα)). However, their integration into routine clinical care has not yet been fully elucidated, and more research is needed in this regard. Genetic findings suggest that testing for CYP450 isoenzyme activity may improve treatment outcomes. Strategies such as managing risk factors, improving clinical trial methodology, and designing structured step-by-step treatments are also beneficial. Finally, drawing on existing guidelines, we outline a sequential treatment optimization paradigm for selecting first-, second-, and third-line treatments for acute and chronically ill patients. Well-established treatments such as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) are clinically relevant for treatment-resistant populations, and novel transcranial stimulation methods such as theta-burst stimulation (TBS) and magnetic seizure therapy (MST) have shown promising results. Novel rapid-acting antidepressants, such as ketamine, may also constitute a paradigm shift in treatment optimization for MDD.

Effect of agomelatine 25-50 mg on functional outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work is to investigate the effect of agomelatine on functioning compared with placebo in patients suffering from Major Depressive Disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Data from two randomized, parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled short-term agomelatine trials conducted by the manufacturer, one in adult and one in older patients, that evaluated the effect on social functioning, were pooled. The short term effect of agomelatine on social functioning was assessed using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), according to SDS total and sub-item scores, as well as on functional response and remission rates. The Hamilton Depression rating scale was used to quantify severity of depression symptoms. A meta-analytic method using a random effect model was used to assess differences in treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 633 patients (422 on agomelatine; 211 on placebo) were included in the analyses. At endpoint, there was a significant difference in favor of agomelatine vs placebo of 3.47 (0.62) (95% confidence interval: [2.26; 4.67]; P < 0.001) on the SDS total score. Rates of symptomatic response and remission according to HAM-D₁₇ total score were significantly higher in patients taking agomelatine (54.3% and 18.3% respectively) than in those taking placebo (29.4% and 9.5% respectively) with respective differences of 24.9%, p < 0.001 and 9.3%, p < 0.001. The functional response rates were 52.9% on agomelatine and 34.5% on placebo, with a significant placebo-agomelatine difference in favor of agomelatine of 18.30 ± 4.39% (95% CI: [9.69; 26.91], p < 0.001). The functional remission rates were 22.3% with agomelatine and 10.2% with placebo, with a significant difference in favor of agomelatine of 11.7 ± 3.11% (95% CI: [5.61; 17.79], p < 0.001). Combined symptomatic and functional response rates were 42.1% on agomelatine and 23.2% on placebo (p < 0.001), and the combined symptomatic and functional remission rates were 13.9% on agomelatine and 6.8% on placebo (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the efficacy of agomelatine in improving social functioning in MDD patients.

Fatigue in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: Prevalence, Burden and Pharmacological Approaches to Management

Fatigue is a frequently reported symptom in major depressive disorder, occurring in over 90% of patients. Clinical presentations of fatigue within major depressive disorder encompass overlapping physical, cognitive and emotional aspects. While this review addresses the epidemiology, burden, functional impact and management of fatigue in major depressive disorder, the main focus is on available pharmacotherapy options and their comparative efficacies. Our review of the effects of pharmacological treatments on fatigue in major depressive disorder found that medications with dopaminergic and/or noradrenergic action such as modafinil, flupenthixol and atomoxetine were most effective in improving symptoms of fatigue and low energy. However, significant variation across studies in assessment tools and study inclusion/exclusion criteria may have contributed to inconsistent findings. The efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions is also discussed, including light therapy and exercise.

Functional Recovery in Major Depressive Disorder: Providing Early Optimal Treatment for the Individual Patient

Major depressive disorder is an often chronic and recurring illness. Left untreated, major depressive disorder may result in progressive alterations in brain morphometry and circuit function. Recent findings, however, suggest that pharmacotherapy may halt and possibly reverse those effects. These findings, together with evidence that a delay in treatment is associated with poorer clinical outcomes, underscore the urgency of rapidly treating depression to full recovery. Early optimized treatment, using measurement-based care and customizing treatment to the individual patient, may afford the best possible outcomes for each patient. The aim of this article is to present recommendations for using a patient-centered approach to rapidly provide optimal pharmacological treatment to patients with major depressive disorder. Offering major depressive disorder treatment determined by individual patient characteristics (e.g., predominant symptoms, medical history, comorbidities), patient preferences and expectations, and, critically, their own definition of wellness provides the best opportunity for full functional recovery.

Effect of desvenlafaxine 50 mg and 100 mg on energy and lassitude in patients with major depressive disorder: A pooled analysis

Nine randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of major depressive disorder were pooled to evaluate the effects of desvenlafaxine 50- and 100-mg/d on energy and lassitude in adults with major depressive disorder ( n=4279). Changes from baseline to endpoint in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D₁₇) Work and Activities, Retardation, and Somatic Symptoms General items, HAM-D₁₇ psychomotor retardation factor, and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale Lassitude item were analyzed with a mixed model for repeated measures analysis of variance. Associations between residual energy measures and functional impairment, based on the Sheehan Disability Scale, were modeled using stepwise multiple linear regression. Improvement from baseline was significantly greater for both desvenlafaxine doses versus placebo on all energy symptom outcomes at week 8 (all p⩽0.005). Both early improvement in HAM-D₁₇ psychomotor retardation at week 2 and residual energy symptoms at week 8 were associated with Sheehan Disability Scale total score at week 8 (all p⩽0.001). Among Sheehan Disability Scale remitters and responders, the HAM-D₁₇ psychomotor retardation score at week 8 was significantly lower with desvenlafaxine (both doses) than placebo. Desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/d significantly improved energy and lassitude symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder. Both early improvement in energy and fewer residual energy symptoms were associated with functional improvement.

Restoring function in major depressive disorder: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Functional impairment contributes to significant disability and economic burden in major depressive disorder (MDD). Treatment response is measured by improvement in depressive symptoms, but functional improvement often lags behind symptomatic improvement. Residual deficits are associated with relapse of depressive symptoms.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the following terms: "major depressive disorder," "functional impairment," "functional outcomes," "recovery of function," "treatment outcome," "outcome assessment," "social functioning," "presenteeism," "absenteeism," "psychiatric status rating scales," and "quality of life." Search limits included publication date (January 1, 1995 to August 31, 2016), English language, and human clinical trials. Controlled, acute-phase, nonrecurrent MDD treatment studies in adults were included if a functional outcome was measured at baseline and endpoint.

RESULTS

The qualitative analysis included 35 controlled studies. The Sheehan Disability Scale was the most commonly used functional assessment. Antidepressant treatments significantly improved functional outcomes. Early treatment response predicted functional improvement, while baseline disease severity did not.

LIMITATIONS

Clinical studies utilized various methodologies and assessments for functional impairment, and were not standardized or adequately powered.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of synchronicity between symptomatic and functional improvement highlights an unmet need for MDD. Treatment guided by routine monitoring of symptoms and functionality may minimize residual functional impairments.

Daily activity level improvement with antidepressant medications predicts long-term clinical outcomes in outpatients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) significantly impacts performance of both work- and nonwork-related routine daily activities. We have shown that work productivity is significantly impaired in employed MDD patients, but the extent of impairments in nonwork-related routine activities and its association with antidepressant treatment outcomes has not been established.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Activity impairment was measured using the sixth item of Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Scale in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial (n=665). Published norms were used to define activity impairment levels. The relationship between activity impairment and baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics was evaluated along with changes in activity impairment and its relationship with other clinical outcomes such as symptom severity, function, and side effect burden. Remission status at 3 and 7 months was predicted based on week 6 activity impairment level.

RESULTS

Higher psychosocial and cognitive impairments and greater number of comorbid medical conditions were associated with greater activity impairment at baseline. Proportion of participants with severe activity impairment declined from 47.6% at baseline to 18.7% at 3 months, while mean activity impairment decreased from 57.1 at baseline to 32.8 at 3 months. During course of treatment, levels of activity impairment correlated most strongly with psychosocial function among measures of symptom severity, function, quality of life, and side effect burden. No or minimal activity impairment at week 6 was associated with two to three times higher rates of remission at 3 and 7 months as compared to moderate or severe activity impairment levels even after controlling for remission status at week 6 and select baseline variables.

CONCLUSION

Depressed patients have high levels of nonwork-related activity impairment at baseline that improves significantly with treatment and independently predicts long-term clinical outcomes. Brief systematic assessment of activity impairment during the course of antidepressant treatment can help inform clinical decision-making.

Early Improvement in Work Productivity Predicts Future Clinical Course in Depressed Outpatients: Findings From the CO-MED Trial

OBJECTIVE

Depression symptom severity, the most commonly studied outcome in antidepressant treatment trials, accounts for only a small portion of burden related to major depression. While lost work productivity is the biggest contributor to depression's economic burden, few studies have systematically evaluated the independent effect of treatment on work productivity and the relationship between changes in work productivity and longer-term clinical course.

METHOD

Work productivity was measured repeatedly by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment self-report questionnaire in 331 employed participants with major depression enrolled in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes trial. Trajectories of change in work productivity during the first 6 weeks of treatment were identified and used to predict remission at 3 and 7 months.

RESULTS

Participants reported reduced absence from work and increased work productivity with antidepressant treatment even after controlling for changes in depression severity. Three distinct trajectories of changes in work productivity were identified: 1) robust early improvement (24%), 2) minimal change (49%), and 3) high-impairment slight reduction (27%). Compared with other participants, those with robust improvement had 3-5 times higher remission rates at 3 months and 2-5 times higher remission rates at 7 months, even after controlling for select baseline variables and remission status at week 6.

CONCLUSIONS

In this secondary analysis, self-reported work productivity improved in depressed patients with antidepressant treatment even after accounting for depressive symptom reduction. Early improvement in work productivity is associated with much higher remission rates after 3 and 7 months of treatment.

The effect of desvenlafaxine on cognitive functioning in employed outpatients with major depressive disorder: a substudy of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

The objective of this substudy was to examine the effect of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day compared with placebo on cognitive function in employed outpatients with major depressive disorder. A total of 11/55 (20%) study sites in a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial administered cognitive assessments in memory, attention, and executive functioning domains using the cognitive drug research system. Changes from baseline were subjected to analysis of covariance with baseline levels as covariates, using last observation carried forward data. A significant improvement with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day (n=52) compared with placebo (n=29) was observed on the quality of working memory composite measure (0.081 units (0.005, 0.156); P=0.0365) at last observation carried forward. Improvement from baseline on the speed of working memory composite was significant for desvenlafaxine (-226.6 msec (-316.7, -136.4); P<0.0001) and for placebo (-133.3 msec (-257.2, -9.4); P=0.0354); however, the treatment effect was not significant. No significant differences between groups were observed on composite measures for attention. Treatment of depression with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day may improve aspects of cognitive functioning, including working memory.Clinical Trial Registry No.: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00824291.

An integrated analysis of the efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine in the treatment of major depressive disorder

The chronic course of major depressive disorder (MDD) often impedes the ability of patients to achieve full remission. Return of full functioning is a critical goal of antidepressant pharmacotherapy as the presence of residual depressive symptoms is associated with an increased risk of relapse. Treatment guidelines recommend selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, or atypical antidepressants as first-line treatment for moderate to severe MDD. Desvenlafaxine, administered as desvenlafaxine succinate, is an serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor approved for the treatment of adults with MDD at the recommended dose of 50 mg/day. The aim of this integrated analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/day compared with placebo in adult outpatients with MDD. The analysis used data from nine fixed-dose, short-term, placebo-controlled studies in adult outpatients diagnosed with MDD who had depressive symptoms for at least 30 days. Data from 4279 and 4317 patients were pooled for the efficacy and safety analyses, respectively. Statistically significant improvements were observed with desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/day versus placebo for all efficacy endpoints assessed, including improvements in depressive symptoms, response and remission rates, as well as functional and cognitive outcomes. Treatment with desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/day was generally safe and well tolerated. The findings of this integrated analysis of data from a large population of patients with MDD confirmed the antidepressant efficacy of both desvenlafaxine doses and add to previous evidence supporting the efficacy of desvenlafaxine.

Sustained efficacy of agomelatine 10 mg, 25 mg, and 25-50 mg on depressive symptoms and functional outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder. A placebo-controlled study over 6 months

This randomized placebo-controlled "dose relation study" was conducted in patients who met criteria for major depressive disorder, to evaluate the efficacy and safety of agomelatine during 24 weeks at 3 doses (i) low fixed dosage (10 mg/day, n=100 patients entered the extension period), (ii) fixed dosage (25 mg/day, n=111) and (iii) a flexible dosage with up-titration in case of insufficient improvement at week 2 (25-50 mg/day, n=115) versus placebo (n=85). Mood was evaluated using the Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAM-D17) and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale. The functional status was examined with the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). At last post-baseline assessment, there were significant placebo-agomelatine differences on mean HAM-D17 total scores in favour of each agomelatine dose regimen (4.51±1.06 points, p<0.0001 at 10 mg; 7.74±1.05 points, p<0.0001 at 25 mg and 7.72±1.05 points, p<0.0001 at 25-50 mg). The response rate according to HAM-D17 was significantly higher in patients taking agomelatine than those taking placebo (difference of 21.8% at 10mg p<0.001; 36.4% and 35.4% respectively at 25 mg and 25-50 mg, p<0.0001). The remitter rate was significantly higher in patients taking agomelatine than those taking placebo (difference of 16.7% at 10 mg p=0.003; 33.8% and 35.4% respectively at 25 mg and 25-50 mg, p<0.0001). The effects of agomelatine were corroborated by CGI scores. Agomelatine improved symptom-related functional impairment on all domains of the SDS scale for the fixed dose 25 mg, and the one step titration 25-50 mg dose regimen. Similar findings were obtained for all measures in the subgroup of severely depressed patients. All dose regimens of agomelatine were well tolerated and no unexpected adverse event was reported. Long term agomelatine treatment improves both mood symptoms and social and occupational functioning of moderately to severely depressed patients. There is a dose effect between 10 mg and higher dose regimens of agomelatine. The threshold dose of 25 mg for initiating treatment can be maintained over 6 months in depressed patients.

Functioning in patients with major depression treated with duloxetine or a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in East Asia

PURPOSE

To assess and compare the levels of functioning in patients with major depressive disorder treated with either duloxetine with a daily dose of ≤60 mg or a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) as monotherapy for up to 6 months in a naturalistic setting in East Asia. In addition, this study examined the impact of painful physical symptoms (PPS) on the effects of these treatments.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data for this post hoc analysis were taken from a 6-month prospective observational study involving 1,549 patients with major depressive disorder without sexual dysfunction. The present analysis focused on a subgroup of patients from East Asia (n=587). Functioning was measured using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Depression severity was assessed using the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report. PPS were rated using the modified Somatic Symptom Inventory. A mixed model with repeated measures was fitted to compare the levels of functioning between duloxetine-treated (n=227) and SSRI-treated (n=225) patients, adjusting for baseline patient characteristics.

RESULTS

The mean SDS total score was similar between the two treatment cohorts (15.46 [standard deviation =6.11] in the duloxetine cohort and 16.36 [standard deviation =6.53] in the SSRI cohort, P=0.077) at baseline. Both descriptive and regression analyses confirmed improvement in functioning in both groups during follow-up, but duloxetine-treated patients achieved better functioning. At 24 weeks, the estimated mean SDS total score was 4.48 (standard error =0.80) in the duloxetine cohort, which was statistically significantly lower (ie, better functioning) than that of 6.76 (standard error =0.77) in the SSRI cohort (P<0.001). This treatment difference was more apparent in the subgroup of patients with PPS at baseline. Similar patterns were also observed for SDS subscores (work, social life, and family life).

CONCLUSION

Depressed patients treated with duloxetine achieved better functioning compared to those treated with SSRIs. This treatment difference was mostly driven by patients with PPS at baseline.