Meta-analysis of major depressive disorder relapse and recurrence with second-generation antidepressants

Optimizing Antidepressant Efficacy: Generalizable Multimodal Neuroimaging Biomarkers for Prediction of Treatment Response

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common and often severe condition that profoundly diminishes quality of life for individuals across ages and demographic groups. Unfortunately, current antidepressant and psychotherapeutic treatments exhibit limited efficacy and unsatisfactory response rates in a substantial number of patients. The development of effective therapies for MDD is hindered by the insufficiently understood heterogeneity within the disorder and its elusive underlying mechanisms. To address these challenges, we present a target-oriented multimodal fusion framework that robustly predicts antidepressant response by integrating structural and functional connectivity data (sertraline: R2 = 0.31; placebo: R2 = 0.22). Remarkably, the sertraline response biomarker is further tested on an independent escitalopram-medicated cohort of MDD patients, validating its generalizability (p = 0.01) and suggesting an overlap of psychopharmacological mechanisms across selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Through the model, we identify multimodal neuroimaging biomarkers of antidepressant response and observe that sertraline and placebo show distinct predictive patterns. We further decompose the overall predictive patterns into constitutive network constellations with generalizable structural-functional co-variation, which exhibit treatment-specific association with personality traits and behavioral/cognitive task performance. Our innovative and interpretable multimodal framework provides novel and reliable insights into the intricate neuropsychopharmacology of antidepressant treatment, paving the way for advances in precision medicine and development of more targeted antidepressant therapeutics.

Central Neuromodulators in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Why, How, and When

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is responsive to treatments using central neuromodulators. Central neuromodulators work by enhancing the synaptic transmission of 5-hydroxytryptamine, noradrenalin, and dopamine, achieving a slower regulation or desensitization of their postsynaptic receptors. Central neuromodulators act on receptors along the brain-gut axis, so they are useful in treating psychiatric comorbidities, modifying gut motility, improving central downregulation of visceral signals, and enhancing neurogenesis in patients with IBS. Choosing a central neuromodulator for treating IBS should be according to the pharmacological properties and predominant symptoms. The first-line treatment for pain management in IBS is using tricyclic antidepressants. An alternative for pain management is the serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are useful when symptoms of anxiety and hypervigilance are dominant but are not helpful for treating abdominal pain. The predominant bowel habit is helpful when choosing a neuromodulator to treat IBS; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors help constipation, not pain, but may cause diarrhea; tricyclic antidepressants help diarrhea but may cause constipation. A clinical response may occur in 6-8 weeks, but long-term treatment (usually 6-12 months) is required after the initial response to prevent relapse. Augmentation therapy may be beneficial when the therapeutic effect of the first agent is incomplete or associated with side effects. It is recommended to reduce the dose of the first agent and add a second complementary treatment. This may include an atypical antipsychotic or brain-gut behavioral treatment. When tapering central neuromodulators, the dose should be reduced slowly over 4 weeks but may take longer when discontinuation effects occur.

Toward a Deeper Understanding of Gut Microbiome in Depression: The Promise of Clinical Applicability

The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has dramatically increased the global prevalence of depression. Unfortunately, antidepressant drugs benefit only a small minority of patients. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop new interventions. Accumulating evidence supports a causal relationship between gut microbiota dysbiosis and depression. To advance microbiota-based diagnostics and therapeutics of depression, a comprehensive overview of microbial alterations in depression is presented to identify effector microbial biomarkers. This procedure generated 215 bacterial taxa from humans and 312 from animal models. Compared to controls, depression shows significant differences in β-diversity, but no changes in microbial richness and diversity. Additionally, species-specific microbial changes are identified like increased Eggerthella in humans and decreased Acetatifactor in rodent models. Moreover, a disrupted microbiome balance and functional changes, characterized by an enrichment of pro-inflammatory bacteria (e.g., Desulfovibrio and Escherichia/Shigella) and depletion of anti-inflammatory butyrate-producing bacteria (e.g., Bifidobacterium and Faecalibacterium) are consistently shared across species. Confounding effects of geographical region, depression type, and intestinal segments are also investigated. Ultimately, a total of 178 species and subspecies probiotics are identified to alleviate the depressive phenotypes. Current findings provide a foundation for developing microbiota-based diagnostics and therapeutics and advancing microbiota-oriented precision medicine for depression.

Discontinuation of antidepressants after remission with antidepressant medication in major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A significant clinical issue encountered after a successful acute major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment is the relapse of depressive symptoms. Although continuing maintenance therapy with antidepressants is generally recommended, there is no established protocol on whether or not it is necessary to prescribe the antidepressant used to achieve remission. In this meta-analysis, the risk of relapse and treatment failure when either continuing with the same drug used to achieved remission or switching to a placebo was assessed in several clinically significant subgroups. The pooled odds ratio (OR) (±95% confidence intervals (CI)) was calculated using a random effects model. Across 40 studies (n = 8890), the relapse rate was significantly lower in the antidepressant group than the placebo group by about 20% (OR = 0.38, CI: 0.33-0.43, p < 0.00001; 20.9% vs 39.7%). The difference in the relapse rate between the antidepressant and placebo groups was greater for tricyclics (25.3%; OR = 0.30, CI: 0.17-0.50, p < 0.00001), SSRIs (21.8%; OR = 0.33, CI: 0.28-0.38, p < 0.00001), and other newer agents (16.0%; OR = 0.44, CI: 0.36-0.54, p < 0.00001) in that order, while the effect size of acceptability was greater for SSRIs than for other antidepressants. A flexible dose schedule (OR = 0.30, CI: 0.23-0.48, p < 0.00001) had a greater effect size than a fixed dose (OR = 0.41, CI: 0.36-0.48, p < 0.00001) in comparison to placebo. Even in studies assigned after continuous treatment for more than 6 months after remission, the continued use of antidepressants had a lower relapse rate than the use of a placebo (OR = 0.40, CI: 0.29-0.55, p < 0.00001; 20.2% vs 37.2%). The difference in relapse rate was similar from a maintenance period of 6 months (OR = 0.41, CI: 0.35-0.48, p < 0.00001; 19.6% vs 37.6%) to over 1 year (OR = 0.35, CI: 0.29-0.41, p < 0.00001; 19.9% vs 39.8%). The all-cause dropout of antidepressant and placebo groups was 43% and 58%, respectively, (OR = 0.47, CI: 0.40-0.55, p < 0.00001). The tolerability rate was ~4% for both groups. The rate of relapse (OR = 0.32, CI: 0.18-0.64, p = 0.0010, 41.0% vs 66.7%) and all-cause dropout among adolescents was higher than in adults. To prevent relapse and treatment failure, maintenance therapy, and careful attention for at least 6 months after remission is recommended. SSRIs are well-balanced agents, and flexible dose adjustments are more effective for relapse prevention.

Depressive Disorders and Sleeping Disturbances-Surveys Study of 923 Participants on the Pol'and'Rock Festival, Kostrzyn, Poland 2019

Depressive disorders are common among young people and can decrease social competences and thus the quality of life. There is a relationship between the occurrence of depressive disorders and insomnia. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of insomnia and depressive behavior and assess the relationship between these among participants of the Pol’and’Rock Festival, Kostrzyn, Poland 2019. The study used the Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS) and the Beck Inventory II Scale (BDI-II). The study group consisted of 923 people, with the majority of women (n = 500; 54.2%). A total of 297 persons (32.2%) reported varying severity of depressive symptoms. Insomnia was observed in 261 (28.28%) respondents. Sleeping disturbances were observed more frequently in females. Persons with insomnia had a significantly higher BDI-II score. A strong positive correlation (r = 0.65) between the number of points obtained on the Beck and AIS scales was observed. Insomnia and depressive behavior are prevalent in the Polish population. Due to long-term social and economic consequences, special attention should be paid to the prevention, early detection and treatment of both disorders.

Fecal Microbiota Changes in Patients With Postpartum Depressive Disorder

Postpartum depressive disorder (PPD) is a unique subtype of major depressive disorder and a substantial contributor to maternal morbidity and mortality. However, the pathogenesis of PPD has still remained elusive, and it may associate with genetic and environmental factors. Gut microbiota has already been proved to be associated with depression; however, a limited number of studies have concentrated on PPD. The present study aimed to explore the potential correlations between gut microbiota and PPD. In this study, 57 participants were enrolled, in which fecal samples of 28 patients with PPD and 16 healthy controls (HCs) were collected and then analyzed by high-throughput sequencing of the 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene. The results showed that diversity and composition of gut microbial communities were partly different between PPD patients and HCs. The relative abundance of Firmicutes phyla was lower in PPD patients. The levels of several predominant genera were significantly different between PPD patients and HCs. More importantly, the PPD patients experienced reduced levels of Faecalibacterium, Phascolarctobacterium, Butyricicoccus, and Lachnospiraceae, as well as increased levels of Enterobacteriaceae family. In addition, a correlation was observed between levels of Phascolarctobacterium, Lachnospiraceae, Faecalibacterium, and Tyzzerella.3 and the severity of depressive symptoms. Various kinds of bacteria, such as Lachnospiraceae and Faecalibacterium, were found to be associated with levels of sex hormones. This study indicated the correlation between gut microbiota and PPD, and gut microbiota-based biomarkers may be helpful for the diagnosis and treatment of PPD patients. However, further studies need to be conducted to clarify the cause–effect relationship between PPD patients and gut microbiota and to highlight the suitability of gut microbiome as a biomarker.

Antidepressant use in patients with heart failure

OBJECTIVE

There is little evidence that antidepressants are efficacious for depression in patients with heart failure (HF), and equivocal evidence that they are safe. This study identified characteristics that are associated with antidepressant use in hospitalized patients with HF.

METHOD

Logistic regression models were used to identify independent correlates of antidepressant use in 400 patients hospitalized with HF between 2014 and 2016. The measure of depression in the primary analysis was a DSM-5 diagnosis based on a structured interview; this was replaced by a PHQ-9 depression score in a secondary analysis.

RESULTS

In the primary analysis, there were positive associations between antidepressant use and white race, younger age, unemployment, non-ischemic HF, number of other prescribed medications, current minor depression, history of major depression, and functional impairment. In the secondary analysis, there were positive associations with white race, unemployment, number of other prescribed medications, and functional impairment; the effect of current severity of depression differed between patients with vs. without a history of major depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Current depression is only one of several factors that influence the use of antidepressant medications in patients with HF. Further research is needed to ensure that these agents are being used appropriately in this patient population.

Analysis of depressive episodes, their recurrence and pharmacologic treatment in primary care patients: A retrospective descriptive study

Background

Depression is one of the most prevalent health problems, frequently being a medium- and long-term condition, with a high comorbidity rate and with frequent relapses and recurrences. Although numerous studies have compared the effectiveness of specific antidepressant therapy drugs and have assessed relapses, scientific evidence on the relationship between pharmacologic treatments and recurrence is scarce. The objective of this study is to describe depressive episodes in a primary care patient cohort, the percentage of depression recurrences and the administered pharmacologic treatment, from a naturalistic perspective.

Methods

Retrospective descriptive study. 957 subjects were included. The dependent variable was a depression diagnosis and independent variables were: gender, age at time of data collection; age of onset, first-episode treatment, number of recurrences, age at recurrences, treatment prescribed for recurrences using therapeutic groups categorization.

Results

Recurrences are frequent, affecting more than 40% of the population. In the first episode, 13.69% of the patients were not prescribed pharmacological treatment, but this percentage decreased over the following depression episodes. 80.9% of the patients who did not receive drug treatment in the first depression episode did not experience subsequent episodes. Monotherapy, and specifically, SSRIs were the most frequently prescribed treatment option for all depressive episodes. Regards the combined pharmacologic treatment, the most frequent drug combinations were SSRIs and benzodiazepines.

Limitations

In order to increase the power of results, the statistical analysis was performed using therapeutic groups categorization, not individually analyzing each drug and dose.

Conclusions

Depressive episode recurrence is frequent in primary care patients. Further studies having a prospective design are needed in order to expand on this issue.

How effective are antidepressants for depression over the long term? A critical review of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding

The aim of this article is to discuss the validity of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding in these trials. Recommendations for long-term antidepressant treatment are based almost exclusively on discontinuation trials. In these relapse prevention trials, participants with remitted depression are randomised either to have the antidepressant abruptly discontinued and replaced by inert placebo or to continue active treatment. The drug-placebo difference in relapse rates at the end of the maintenance phase is then interpreted as a prophylactic drug effect. These trials consistently produce remarkable benefits for maintenance treatment. However, the internal validity of this trial protocol is compromised, as research has shown that abruptly stopping antidepressants can cause severe withdrawal reactions that lead to (or manifest as) depression relapses. That is, there is substantial withdrawal confounding in discontinuation trials, which renders their findings uninterpretable. It is not clear to what degree the drug-placebo separation in relapse prevention (discontinuation) trials is due to withdrawal reactions, but various estimations suggest that it is presumably the majority. A review of findings based on other methodologies, including real-world long-term effectiveness trials like STAR*D and various naturalistic cohort studies, do not indicate that antidepressants have considerable prophylactic effects. As absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence, no definitive conclusions can be drawn from the literature. To enable a thorough risk-benefit evaluation, real-world effectiveness trials should not only focus on relapse prevention, but also assess antidepressants' long-term effects on social functioning and quality of life. Thus far, reliable long-term data on these outcome domains are lacking.

Could Treatment Matching Patients' Beliefs About Depression Improve Outcomes?

Patients' beliefs about depression and expectations for treatment can influence outcomes of major depressive disorder (MDD) treatments. We hypothesized that patients with weaker biological beliefs (less endorsement of [a] biochemical causes and [b] need for medication) and more optimistic treatment expectations (greater improvement and shorter time to improvement), have better outcomes in cognitive therapy (CT). Outpatients with recurrent MDD who received acute-phase CT (N = 152), and a subset of partial or unstable responders (N = 51) randomized to 8 months of continuation CT or fluoxetine with clinical management, completed repeated measures of beliefs, expectations, and depression. As hypothesized, patients with weaker biological beliefs about depression, and patients who expected a shorter time to improvement, experienced greater change in depressive symptoms and more frequent response to acute-phase CT. Moreover, responders who received continuation treatment better matched to their biological beliefs (i.e., responders with weaker biological beliefs about depression who received continuation CT, or responders with stronger biological beliefs about depression who received continuation fluoxetine) had fewer depressive symptoms and less relapse/recurrence by 32 months after acute-phase CT than did responders who received mismatched continuation treatment. Specific screening and/or intervention targeting patients' biological beliefs about depression could increase CT efficacy.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antidepressants in the long-term treatment of major depression: protocol for a systematic review and networkmeta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of major depression. At the initiation of antidepressant treatment, both improvement of symptoms in the short term and relapse prevention in the long term should be taken into account. However, there is insufficient evidence regarding the efficacy and the acceptability of continuation/maintenance treatments and the relative efficacy/acceptability of antidepressants.

OBJECTIVE

We will conduct a pairwise meta-analysis and a network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine the relative efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in the long-term treatment of major depression.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will include double-blind randomised controlled trials comparing any of the following antidepressants, which we included in our previous NMA of the acute treatment for major depression, with placebo or with another active drug for long-term treatment of major depression: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. Our primary outcomes will be sustained response and all-cause dropouts. We will include four types of designs that are used to investigate long-term treatment. We will conduct two main analyses. First, we will conduct a pairwise meta-analysis comparing all antidepressants versus placebo to investigate whether continuing antidepressants after achieving a positive response in the acute-phase treatment is beneficial and/or safe. Second, we will conduct an NMA to examine the comparative efficacy and acceptability of the drugs. We will use a novel approach that will combine the results of acute-phase treatment NMA with long-term treatment studies to include all related designs in the NMA. We will ensure the validity of combining different designs and our new approach by checking the distribution of important effect modifiers and consistency of network.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study did not require ethical approval. We will disseminate our findings by publishing results in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018114561; Pre-results.

Antidepressants affect gut microbiota and Ruminococcus flavefaciens is able to abolish their effects on depressive-like behavior

Accumulating evidence demonstrates that the gut microbiota affects brain function and behavior, including depressive behavior. Antidepressants are the main drugs used for treatment of depression. We hypothesized that antidepressant treatment could modify gut microbiota which can partially mediate their antidepressant effects. Mice were chronically treated with one of five antidepressants (fluoxetine, escitalopram, venlafaxine, duloxetine or desipramine), and gut microbiota was analyzed, using 16s rRNA gene sequencing. After characterization of differences in the microbiota, chosen bacterial species were supplemented to vehicle and antidepressant-treated mice, and depressive-like behavior was assessed to determine bacterial effects. RNA-seq analysis was performed to determine effects of bacterial treatment in the brain. Antidepressants reduced richness and increased beta diversity of gut bacteria, compared to controls. At the genus level, antidepressants reduced abundances of Ruminococcus, Adlercreutzia, and an unclassified Alphaproteobacteria. To examine implications of the dysregulated bacteria, we chose one of antidepressants (duloxetine) and investigated if its antidepressive effects can be attenuated by simultaneous treatment with Ruminococcus flavefaciens or Adlercreutzia equolifaciens. Supplementation with R. flavefaciens diminished duloxetine-induced decrease in depressive-like behavior, while A. equolifaciens had no such effect. R. flavefaciens treatment induced changes in cortical gene expression, up-regulating genes involved in mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, while down-regulating genes involved in neuronal plasticity. Our results demonstrate that various types of antidepressants alter gut microbiota composition, and further implicate a role for R. flavefaciens in alleviating depressive-like behavior. Moreover, R. flavefaciens affects gene networks in the brain, suggesting a mechanism for microbial regulation of antidepressant treatment efficiency.

A prognostic index for long-term outcome after successful acute phase cognitive therapy and interpersonal psychotherapy for major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) has a highly recurrent nature. After successful treatment, it is important to identify individuals who are at risk of an unfavorable long-term course. Despite extensive research, there is no consensus yet on the clinically relevant predictors of long-term outcome in MDD, and no prediction models are implemented in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to create a prognostic index (PI) to estimate long-term depression severity after successful and high quality acute treatment for MDD.

METHODS

Data come from responders to cognitive therapy (CT) and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) in a randomized clinical trial (n = 85; CT = 45, IPT = 40). Primary outcome was depression severity, assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory II, measured throughout a 17-month follow-up phase. We examined 29 variables as potential predictors, using a model-based recursive partitioning method and bootstrap resampling in conjunction with backwards elimination. The selected predictors were combined into a PI. Individual PI scores were estimated using a cross-validation approach.

RESULTS

A total of three post-treatment predictors were identified: depression severity, hopelessness, and self-esteem. Cross-validated PI scores evidenced a strong correlation (r = 0.60) with follow-up depression severity.

CONCLUSION

Long-term predictions of MDD are multifactorial, involving a combination of variables that each has a small prognostic effect. If replicated and validated, the PI can be implemented to predict follow-up depression severity for each individual after acute treatment response, and to personalize long-term treatment strategies.

Effectiveness of Supported Self-Help in Recurrent Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

The burden and economic consequences of depression are high, mostly due to its recurrent nature. Due to current budget and time restraints, a preventive, low- cost, accessible minimal intervention is much needed. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of a supported self-help preventive cognitive therapy (S-PCT) added to treatment as usual (TAU) in primary care, compared to TAU alone.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial among 248 patients with a history of depression, currently in full or partial remission or recovery. Participants were randomized to TAU augmented with S-PCT (n = 124) or TAU alone (n = 124). S-PCT consisted of an 8-week self-help intervention, supported by weekly telephone guidance by a counselor. The intervention included a self-help book that could be read at home. The primary outcome was the incidence of relapse or recurrence and was assessed over the telephone by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV axis 1 disorders. Participants were observed for 12 months. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, quality of life (EQ-5D and SF-12), comorbid psychopathology, and self-efficacy. These secondary outcomes were assessed by digital questionnaires.

RESULTS

In the S-PCT group, 44 participants (35.5%) experienced a relapse or recurrence, compared to 62 participants (50.0%) in the TAU group (incidence rate ratio = 0.71, 95% CI 0.52-0.97; risk difference = 14, 95% CI 2-24, number needed to treat = 7). Compared to the TAU group, the S-PCT group showed a significant reduction in depressive symptoms over 12 months (mean difference -2.18; 95% CI -3.09 to -1.27) and a significant increase in quality of life (EQ-5D) (mean difference 0.04; 95% CI 0.004-0.08). S-PCT had no effect on comorbid psychopathology, self-efficacy, and quality of life based on the SF-12.

CONCLUSIONS

A supported self-help preventive cognitive therapy, guided by a counselor in primary care, proved to be effective in reducing the burden of recurrent depression.

Evidence on the longitudinal construct validity of major generic and utility measures of health-related quality of life in teens with depression

PURPOSE

To examine the longitudinal construct validity in the assessment of changes in depressive symptoms of widely used utility and generic HRQL instruments in teens.

METHODS

392 teens enrolled in the study and completed HRQL and diagnostic measures as part of the baseline interview. HRQL measures included EuroQol (EQ-5D-3L), Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2) and Mark 3 (HUI3), Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB), Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PEDS-QL), RAND-36 (SF-6D), and Quality of Life in Depression Scale (QLDS). Youth completed follow-up interviews 12 weeks after baseline. Sixteen youth (4.1%) were lost to follow-up. We examined correlations between changes in HRQL instruments and the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) and assessed clinically meaningful change in multi-attribute utility HRQL measures using mean change (MC) and standardized response mean (SRM) among youth showing at least moderate (20%) improvement in depression symptomology.

RESULTS

Spearman's correlation coefficients demonstrated moderate correlation between changes in CDRS-R and the HUI2 (r = 0.38), HUI3 (r = 0.42), EQ-5D-3L (r = 0.36), SF-6D (r = 0.39), and PEDS-QL (r = 0.39) and strong correlation between changes in CDRS-R and QWB (r = 0.52) and QLDS (r = - 0.71). Effect size results are also reported. Among multi-attribute utility measures, all showed clinically meaningful improvements in the sample of youth with depression improvement (HUI2, MC = 0.20, SRM = 0.97; HUI3, MC = 0.32, SRM = 1.17; EQ-5D-3L, MC = 0.08, SRM = 0.51; QWB, MC = 0.11, SRM = 0.86; and SF-6D, MC = 0.12, SRM = 1.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support the longitudinal construct validity of included HRQL instruments for the assessment of change in depression outcomes in teens. Results of this study can help inform researchers about viable instruments to include in economic evaluations for this population.

Neural and Behavioral Predictors of Treatment Efficacy on Mood Symptoms and Cognition in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review

Background: The clinical and etiological heterogeneity of mood disorders impede identification of effective treatments for the individual patient. This highlights a need for early neuronal and behavioral biomarkers for treatment efficacy, which can provide a basis for more personalized treatments. The present systematic review aimed to identify the most consistent neuronal and behavioral predictors of treatment efficacy on mood symptoms and cognitive impairment in mood disorders. Methods: We identified and included 60 original peer-reviewed studies investigating neuroimaging and behavioral predictors of treatment efficacy within the domains of emotional and non-emotional cognition, structural neuroimaging, and resting state functional connectivity in patients with unipolar or bipolar disorder. Results: Lower baseline responsivity in limbic regions coupled with heightened medial and dorsal prefrontal responses to emotional stimuli were the most consistent predictors of response to pharmacotherapy for depression. In contrast, heightened limbic and ventral prefrontal reactivity to emotional stimuli seemed to predict efficacy of psychological interventions. Early modulation of fronto-limbic activity and reduction in negative bias were also associated with treatment response. Better performance on non-emotional tests at baseline was relatively consistently associated with efficacy on mood symptoms, whereas the association between neural activity during non-emotional tests and treatment response was less clear. Other baseline factors associated with treatment response were greater white matter integrity, resting state functional connectivity, more prefrontal gray matter volume as well as an early increase following short administered treatment. Finally, emerging evidence indicates that baseline cognitive deficits are associated with greater chances of achieving treatment efficacy on cognition. Conclusions: Patients' profile of emotional and non-emotional cognition and neural activity-and the early treatment-associated changes in neural and cognitive function-may be useful for guiding treatments for depression. While cognitive deficits at baseline seem to improve chances of treatment efficacy on cognition, more studies of this association are urgently needed.

Imagine your mood: Study design and protocol of a randomized controlled micro-trial using app-based experience sampling methodology to explore processes of change during relapse prevention interventions for recurrent depression

Background

Relapse prevention strategies include continuation of antidepressant medication and preventive psychological interventions. This study aims to gain understanding that may inform tailoring of relapse prevention to individual differences, to improve their effects. Such treatment personalization may be based on repeated assessments within one individual, using experience sampling methodology. As a first step towards informing decisions based on this methodology, insight is needed in individual differences in risk of relapse and response to treatment, and how relapse prevention strategies may differentially target vulnerability for relapse.

Methods

The smartphone application ‘Imagine your mood’ has been developed specifically for this study to assess emotions, imagery, cognitions, and behaviors in daily life. Parallel to the randomized controlled trial ‘Disrupting the rhythm of depression’, 45 remitted recurrently depressed individuals taking continuation antidepressant medication will be randomly assigned to either continuing antidepressant medication (n = 15), continuing antidepressant medication combined with an eight-session preventive cognitive therapy (n = 15), or tapering of antidepressant medication in combination with preventive cognitive therapy (n = 15). Relapse and return of depressive symptomatology over a 24-month follow-up will be assessed. Additionally, matched never depressed individuals (n = 15) will be recruited as controls.

Discussion

This innovative study combines the strengths of a randomized controlled trial and experience sampling methodology in a micro-trial to explore individual differences in risk of relapse and what works for whom to prevent relapse. Results may ultimately pave the way for therapists to tailor relapse prevention strategies to individual (affective) vulnerability.

Trial registration

ISRCTN15472145, retrospectively registered.

Initial Steps to inform selection of continuation cognitive therapy or fluoxetine for higher risk responders to cognitive therapy for recurrent major depressive disorder

Responders to acute-phase cognitive therapy (A-CT) for major depressive disorder (MDD) often relapse or recur, but continuation-phase cognitive therapy (C-CT) or fluoxetine reduces risks for some patients. We tested composite moderators of C-CT versus fluoxetine's preventive effects to inform continuation treatment selection. Responders to A-CT for MDD judged to be at higher risk for relapse due to unstable or partial remission (N=172) were randomized to 8 months of C-CT or fluoxetine with clinical management and assessed, free from protocol treatment, for 24 additional months. Pre-continuation-treatment characteristics that in survival analyses moderated treatments' effects on relapse over 8 months of continuation-phase treatment (residual symptoms and negative temperament) and on relapse/recurrence over the full observation period's 32 months (residual symptoms and age) were combined to estimate the potential advantage of C-CT versus fluoxetine for individual patients. Assigning patients to optimal continuation treatment (i.e., to C-CT or fluoxetine, depending on patients' pre-continuation-treatment characteristics) resulted in absolute reduction of relapse or recurrence risk by 16-21% compared to the other non-optimal treatment. Although these novel results require replication before clinical application, selecting optimal continuation treatment (i.e., personalizing treatment) for higher risk A-CT responders may decrease risks of MDD relapse and recurrence substantively.

The unfulfilled promise of the antidepressant medications

Australia has one of the highest rates of antidepressant use in the world; it has more than doubled since 2000, despite evidence showing that the effectiveness of these medications is lower than previously thought. An increasing placebo response rate is a key reason for falling effectiveness, with the gap between response to medications and placebo narrowing. Psychotherapies are effective treatments, but recent evidence from high-quality studies suggests that their effectiveness is also modest. Combined treatment with medication and psychotherapy provides greater effectiveness than either alone. The number of patients receiving psychotherapy had been declining, although this trend is probably reversing with the Medicare Better Access to Mental Health Care initiative. Antidepressant medications still have an important role in the treatment of moderate to severe depression; they should be provided as part of an overall treatment plan that includes psychotherapy and lifestyle strategies to improve diet and increase exercise. When medications are prescribed, they should be used in a way that maximises their chance of effectiveness.

[Impact of pharmaceutical intervention in preventing relapses in depression in Primary Care]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term impact of a brief pharmacist intervention (PI) compared with usual care (UC) on prevention of depression relapse.

DESIGN

randomised controlled clinical trial

SETTING

Primary Care

PARTICIPANTS

Of the 179 depressed patients initiating antidepressants, the 113 whose clinical symptoms had remitted (main definition) at 6 months assessment were selected for this secondary study (PI=58; UC=55).

INTERVENTION

PI was an interview to promote medication adherence when patients get antidepressants from pharmacy.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Baseline, 3 months, and six-months follow-up assessments were made. The severity of depressive symptoms was evaluated with PHQ9. Patients presenting a remission of symptoms were selected. The patient medical records were reviewed to identify a relapse in the following 12 months by using 4 indicators.

RESULTS

There was a lower proportion of patients that relapsed in the PI group than in the UC group 18 months after initiation of treatment, but the difference was not statistically significant either in the intent-to-treat analysis (OR=0.734 [95%CI; 0.273-1.975]) or the per-protocol analysis (OR=0.615 [95%CI; 0.183 -2.060]). All the sensitivity analyses showed consistent results. The sample size and adherence to the protocol in the intervention group were low.

CONCLUSION

PI group showed a non-statistically significant tendency towards presenting fewer relapses. This could be related to the improvement in adherence among patients that received the intervention.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Measures of Brain Structure to Predict Antidepressant Treatment Outcome in Major Depressive Disorder

BACKGROUND

Less than 50% of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) reach symptomatic remission with their initial antidepressant medication (ADM). There are currently no objective measures with which to reliably predict which individuals will achieve remission to ADMs.

METHODS

157 participants with MDD from the International Study to Predict Optimized Treatment in Depression (iSPOT-D) underwent baseline MRIs and completed eight weeks of treatment with escitalopram, sertraline or venlafaxine-ER. A score at week 8 of 7 or less on the 17 item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression defined remission. Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) analysis using the first 50% participants was performed to define decision trees of baseline MRI volumetric and connectivity (fractional anisotropy) measures that differentiated non-remitters from remitters with maximal sensitivity and specificity. These decision trees were tested for replication in the remaining participants.

FINDINGS

Overall, 35% of all participants achieved remission. ROC analyses identified two decision trees that predicted a high probability of non-remission and that were replicated: 1. Left middle frontal volume < 14 · 8 mL & right angular gyrus volume > 6 · 3 mL identified 55% of non-remitters with 85% accuracy; and 2. Fractional anisotropy values in the left cingulum bundle < 0 · 63, right superior fronto-occipital fasciculus < 0 · 54 and right superior longitudinal fasciculus < 0 · 50 identified 15% of the non-remitters with 84% accuracy. All participants who met criteria for both decision trees were correctly identified as non-remitters.

INTERPRETATION

Pretreatment MRI measures seem to reliably identify a subset of patients who do not remit with a first step medication that includes one of these commonly used medications. Findings are consistent with a neuroanatomical basis for non-remission in depressed patients.

FUNDING

Brain Resource Ltd is the sponsor for the iSPOT-D study (NCT00693849).

A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Levomilnacipran ER 40-120mg/day for Prevention of Relapse in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Major depressive disorder is often chronic, with relapse and recurrence common. Levomilnacipran extended-release is a potent and selective serotonin and reuptake inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment of major depressive disorder in adults. The objective of this study (NCT01085812) was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of levomilnacipran extended-release in the prevention of relapse in patients with major depressive disorder.

DESIGN

A 24-week Phase III randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing levomilnacipran extended-release 40-120mg/day with placebo for relapse prevention in patients with major depressive disorder who had responded to 12-week, open-label treatment with levomilnacipran extended-release. Statistical power was calculated on the assumption that 38 percent of placebo and 20 percent of levomilnacipran extended-release patients would relapse.

SETTING

Thirty-six outpatient study centers throughout the United States and Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Of 348 patients who met randomization criteria and entered double-blind treatment, three discontinued prior to treatment, 112 were randomized to placebo, and 233 to levomilnacipran extended-release.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Time to relapse was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazard-regression model with treatment group and baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score as explanatory variables. Safety was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Time to relapse was longer for levomilnacipran extended-release versus placebo (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.68 [0.40][1.17]), but the treatment difference was not statistically significant (P=0.165). A relatively low percentage of patients from either group relapsed (placebo=20.5%, levomilnacipran extended-release=13.9%).

CONCLUSION

This study did not detect between-treatment group differences, potentially due to lower than expected relapse rates in the placebo group. Levomilnacipran extended-release was generally well tolerated.

Pharmacological management of unipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

To be used in conjunction with 'Psychological management of unipolar depression' [Lampe et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013;127(Suppl. 443):24-37] and 'Lifestyle management of unipolar depression' [Berk et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013;127(Suppl. 443):38-54]. To provide clinically relevant recommendations for the use of pharmacological treatments in depression derived from a literature review.

METHOD

Using our previous Clinical Practice Guidelines [Malhi et al. Clinical practice recommendations for bipolar disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2009;119(Suppl. 439):27-46] as a foundation, these clinician guidelines target key practical considerations when prescribing pharmacotherapy. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted using electronic database searches (PubMed, MEDLINE), and the findings have been synthesized and integrated alongside clinical experience.

RESULTS

The pharmacotherapy of depression is an iterative process that often results in partial and non-response. Beyond the initiation of antidepressants, the options within widely used strategies, such as combining agents and switching between agents, are difficult to prescribe because of the paucity of pertinent research. However, there is some evidence for second-line strategies, and a non-prescriptive algorithm can be derived that is based broadly on principles rather than specific steps.

CONCLUSION

Depression is by its very nature a heterogeneous illness that is consequently difficult to treat. Invariably, situation-specific factors often play a significant role and must be considered, especially in the case of partial and non-response. Consulting with colleagues and trialling alternate treatment paradigms are essential strategies in the management of depression.

Efficacy and safety of duloxetine 60 mg once daily in major depressive disorder: a review with expert commentary

OBJECTIVE

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a significant public health concern and challenges health care providers to intervene with appropriate treatment. This article provides an overview of efficacy and safety information for duloxetine 60 mg/day in the treatment of MDD, including its effect on painful physical symptoms (PPS).

DESIGN

A literature search was conducted for articles and pooled analyses reporting information regarding the use of duloxetine 60 mg/day in placebo-controlled trials.

SETTING

Placebo-controlled, active-comparator, short- and long-term studies were reviewed.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult (≥18 years) patients with MDD.

MEASUREMENTS

Effect sizes for continuous outcome (change from baseline to endpoint) and categorical outcome (response and remission rates) were calculated using the primary measures of 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17) or Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. The Brief Pain Inventory and Visual Analogue Scales were used to assess improvements in PPS. Glass estimation method was used to calculate effect sizes, and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated based on HAMD-17 and MADRS total scores for remission and response rates. Safety data were examined via the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and by mean changes in vital-sign measures.

RESULTS

Treatment with duloxetine was associated with small-to-moderate effect sizes in the range of 0.12 to 0.72 for response rate and 0.07 to 0.65 for remission rate. NNTs were in the range of 3 to 16 for response and 3 to 29 for remission. Statistically significant improvements (p≤0.05) were observed in duloxetine-treated patients compared to placebo-treated patients in PPS and quality of life. The safety profile of the 60-mg dose was consistent with duloxetine labeling, with the most commonly observed significant adverse events being nausea, dry mouth, diarrhea, dizziness, constipation, fatigue, and decreased appetite.

CONCLUSION

These results reinforce the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine 60 mg/day as an effective short- and long-term treatment for adults with MDD. The evidence of the independent analgesic effect of duloxetine 60 mg/day supports its use as a treatment for patients with PPS associated with depression. This review is limited by the fact that it included randomized clinical trials with different study designs. Furthermore, data from randomized controlled trials may not generalize well to real clinical practice.

Treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults: focus on once-daily medications

OBJECTIVE

To review the efficacy, safety, and abuse liability of approved treatments in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with a focus on once-daily medications.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed was searched for relevant studies/reviews in English from 2002 to 2011 on adult ADHD treatments.

STUDY SELECTION

Keywords used in the search were ADHD, adults, and treatment. Limits included only clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and reviews including adults (aged ≥ 19 years).

DATA EXTRACTION

Selection criteria returned 471 publications. Retrieved studies were excluded if they primarily focused on children, treatments not indicated for ADHD, or ADHD and comorbid conditions.

DATA SYNTHESIS

An epidemiologic survey revealed that 10.9% of adults identified with ADHD had received treatment during the prior 12 months. Treatments for ADHD in adults include pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options. US Food and Drug Administration-approved long-acting stimulants and a nonstimulant with proven efficacy and safety profiles have been developed and include osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate hydrochloride (OROS-methylphenidate), extended-release dexmethylphenidate hydrochloride, mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS-XR), the nonstimulant atomoxetine hydrochloride, and the prodrug lisdexamfetamine dimesylate. Long-acting stimulants differ in formulation characteristics used to achieve extended release, with OROS-methylphenidate employing an osmotic-release technology, extended-release dexmethylphenidate hydrochloride and MAS-XR using pH-dependent beads, and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate using prodrug technology. These features variably affect pharmacokinetic characteristics, duration of action, and abuse liability. While all long-acting medications have varied pharmacokinetic features, mechanism of action, and duration of effect, all are generally efficacious and safety profiles are similar.

CONCLUSION

Approved long-acting treatments in adults with ADHD were effective in improving symptoms and were generally well tolerated.

How should primary care doctors select which antidepressants to administer?

Clinicians can choose among various second-generation antidepressants for treating depressive disorders, such as major depressive disorder, subsyndromal depression, or dysthymia. Systematic reviews indicate that available drugs differ in frequency of administration, costs, and the risks of some adverse events but have similar efficacy for treating major depressive disorder. Furthermore, evidence does not support the choice of one antidepressant over another based on accompanying symptoms, such anxiety, insomnia, or pain. Available studies provide little guidance for clinicians about the benefits of second-generation antidepressants for treating dysthymia and subsyndromal depression. Evidence is also unclear about the comparative risks of serious adverse events, such as suicidality, seizures, fractures, increased bleeding, or serotonin syndrome. This article summarizes the best available evidence regarding comparative benefits and harms of second-generation antidepressants for treating depressive disorders.

Recovery and subsequent recurrence in patients with recurrent major depressive disorder

In contrast to "remission" from an episode of major depressive disorder (MDD), for which there is general agreement in the literature, the optimal definition of "recovery" from MDD is uncertain. Previous definitions of recovery have used inconsistent thresholds for symptom severity and duration of wellness. To address the effects of duration and degree of recovery from an episode of MDD on recurrence risk, and the impact of maintenance antidepressant treatment on recurrence, we analyzed 258 patients from a randomized, double-blind study of outpatients with recurrent MDD. All patients had responded to 8½ months of venlafaxine extended release and were subsequently randomized to receive venlafaxine ER or placebo during 2 consecutive 12-month maintenance phases. Four definitions of recovery were used to evaluate recovery rates and time to recurrence: (1) 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D(17)) total score ≤3 with duration ≥120 days; (2) HAM-D(17) ≤3 with duration ≥56 days; (3) HAM-D(17) ≤7 with duration ≥120 days; and (4) HAM-D(17) ≤7 with duration ≥56 days. Recovery definitions using lower symptom severity and longer duration thresholds produced lower rates of recurrence. Patients on placebo were more likely to have a recurrence than patients on venlafaxine ER, with hazard ratio (HR) ranging from 2.5 among patients who recovered by the most relaxed criteria (definition 4), to 5.3 among patients who recovered by the most stringent criteria (definition 1). We conclude that protection against recurrence derives from the degree and duration of recovery, particularly for patients maintained on antidepressant medication.

[Considerations about the efficacy of psychopharmacological drugs]

Current systematic reviews yielded relatively small efficacy effect sizes of different psychopharmacological agents compared to placebo. It seems that these effect sizes have decreased compared to earlier meta-analyses. We speculate about factors explaining the decrease of effect size such as lower methodological requirements for earlier randomised controlled trials, but in particular enormous methodological problems of current trials such as chronic patient populations, exclusion of severely ill patients by the protocols, sponsoring by the pharmaceutical industry and so-called professional patients. A few examples from general medicine are used to illustrate that the effect sizes of other medications are often also surprisingly small. Psychotropic drugs are efficacious, but they need to be prudently applied according to evidence-based criteria.

A critical review of pharmacotherapy for major depressive disorder

Newer generation antidepressant drugs, with improvements in safety and tolerability, have replaced tricyclic antidepressants as first-line treatment of depressive illness. However, no single antidepressant drug from any class has distinguished itself as the obvious first-line treatment of major depression. The choice of therapy is driven primarily by patient choice, with informed consent for the risks of adverse effects. Cost has become an additional factor in this decision as several of the newer antidepressant drugs are now available in generic form. Several augmentation and drug-switching strategies have demonstrated benefit in refractory illness. While no single strategy distinguished itself as superior to the others, some have been more rigorously tested. Ongoing efforts at improving effectiveness, time to response, and tolerability have led to novel drug therapies. Efforts at characterizing predictors of treatment outcomes now include pharmacogenetic studies.

[Therapeutic strategy of depressive episodes. Prevention of relapse risk]

Prevention of the risk of recurrence of depressive episodes is a dynamic process that begins early in the management. Although complete remission is obtained for almost half of the treated depressive episodes, a heuristic conceptual thinking apprehends depression as a potentially chronic disorder when considering relapse and recurrence prevention. Multiple actions of care have to be initiated. They are formalised, but also adjustable to the needs of a critical management period throughout the follow-up. These actions include the prescription of an antidepressant at an effective dosage. They also consider the preventative and therapeutic impact of psychotherapy. The search for residual symptoms of depression is the rule, and addition of other medication should be considered if needed. These recommendations are evidence-based in the context of recurrence prevention. Nevertheless, many other initiatives are equally important recommendations in terms of therapeutic impact. Thus, rigorous evaluation of the initial symptomatology, promotion of information on disease, health-care advices, as well as implementation of family and other networks are good-practices. Such actions should be conducted in a relationship based on a therapeutic alliance. These elements need to be adjusted and contextualised in line with the Health System, mode of medical practice and unique style of the therapist. Proactive and sustainable implementations of these guidelines are required in the context of a unique and open therapeutic relationship for both therapist and patient.

New frontiers in cardiovascular behavioral medicine: comparative effectiveness of exercise and medication in treating depression

Exercise, considered a mainstay of cardiac rehabilitation, has been shown to reduce cardiac risk factors such as hyperlipidemia and hypertension. Growing evidence also suggests that exercise has beneficial effects on mental health, which is relevant for cardiac patients because of the prognostic significance of depression in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Depression has been associated with increased mortality and nonfatal cardiac events in patients with CHD; it is also associated with worse outcomes in patients who undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery and those who have heart failure. The standard therapy for depression is pharmacologic treatment, often with second-generation antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Despite their widespread use, antidepressants have only modest effects on depression for many patients compared with placebo controls. Exercise therapy, already an established component of cardiac rehabilitation, has potential efficacy as a treatment for depression in cardiac disease patients. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the clinical effects of exercise in this population and to compare the effects of exercise with those of antidepressants.

Depression in adults: drug and physical treatments

INTRODUCTION

Depression may affect up to 10% of the population, with half of affected people having recurrence of their symptoms. In mild to moderate depression, there is no reliable evidence that any one treatment is superior in improving symptoms of depression, but the strength of evidence supporting different treatments varies. In severe depression, only prescription antidepressants and electroconvulsive therapy are known to improve symptoms.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in mild to moderate and severe depression, and in treatment-resistant depression? Which interventions reduce relapse rates? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 88 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antidepressant drugs (tricyclic antidepressants [including low-dose tricyclic antidepressants], selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, or venlafaxine), continuing prescription antidepressant drugs, electroconvulsive therapy, exercise, lithium augmentation, pindolol augmentation, and St John's wort.

Should we treat depression with drugs or psychological interventions? A reply to Ioannidis

We reply to the Ioannidis's paper "Effectiveness of antidepressants; an evidence based myth constructed from a thousand controlled trials." We disagree that antidepressants have no greater efficacy than placebo. We present the efficacy from hundreds of trials in terms of the percentage of patients with a substantial clinical response (a 50% improvement or more symptomatic reduction). This meta-analysis finds that 42-70% of depressed patients improve with drug and 21%-39% improve with placebo. The response benefit of antidepressant treatment is 33%-11% greater than placebo. Ioannidis argues that it would be vanishingly smaller because systematic biasing in these clinical trials would reduce the drug-placebo difference to zero. Ioannidis' argument that antidepressants have no benefit is eroded by his failures of logic because he does not present any evidence that there are a large number of studies where placebo is substantially more effective than drug. (To reduce to zero, one would also have to show that some of the unpublished studies find placebo better than drug and have substantial systematic or methodological bias). We also present the empirical evidence showing that these methodological concerns generally have the opposite effect of what Ioannidis argues, supporting our contention that the measured efficacy of antidepressants likely underestimates true efficacy. Our most important criticism is Ioannidis' basic underlying argument about antidepressants that if the existing evidence is imperfect and methods can be criticized, then this proves that antidepressant are not efficacious. He presents no credible evidence that antidepressants have zero effect size. Valid arguments can point out difficulties with the data but do not prove that a given drug had no efficacy. Indeed better evidence might prove it was more efficacious that originally found. We find no empirical or ethical reason why psychiatrists should not try to help depressed patients with drugs and/or with psychotherapeutic/behavioral treatments given evidence of efficacy even though our treatment knowledge has limitations. The immense suffering of patients with major depression leads to ethical, moral, professional and legal obligations to treat patients with the best available tools at our disposal, while diligently and actively monitoring for adverse effects and actively revising treatment components as necessary.

Continuing treatment of depression in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blinded randomized controlled trials with antidepressants

OBJECTIVE

To establish the efficacy and tolerability of continuing treatment with antidepressants in preventing relapses and recurrences in elderly depressed patients and to analyze differences between tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

DESIGN

The authors conducted a systematic literature search to identify all randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trials(RCTs) in elderly patients. Data were pooled from eight double-blinded RCTs of continuation and maintenance treatment in the elderly with 925 participating patients.

RESULTS

The number of patients needed to treat (NNT) for antidepressants to prevent one additional relapse or recurrence was 3 6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8-4.8).The NNT for TCAs was 2.9 (95% CI: 2.2-4.6), compared with a NNT for SSRIs of 4.2(95% CI: 3.2-5.9). In the five studies that provide drop out data, 14 of 330 patients(4.2%) using an antidepressant dropped out due to side effects compared with 17 of 330 patients (5.2%) using a placebo (χ² = 0.305, df = 1, p = 0.581). Tolerability did not differ between TCAs and SSRIs.

CONCLUSION

Continuing treatment with antidepressants in elderly patients is efficacious compared with placebo in preventing relapses and recurrences. Efficacy and tolerability during long-term treatment does not differ between TCAs and SSRIs.

Aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy for patients with major depressive disorder: overview and implications of clinical trial data

Aripiprazole was initially approved to treat schizophrenia and later approved for bipolar mania, as a monotherapy and an adjunctive therapy (manic or mixed episodes), and for irritability associated with autism. Aripiprazole is a partial agonist at dopamine D(2) and D(3) and serotonin 5-HT(1A) receptors, and is an antagonist at 5-HT(2A) receptors. This profile, and convincing preliminary data from small-scale studies, provided the rationale for the large-scale exploration of aripiprazole for unipolar depression. Recently, three 6-week, large-scale, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy for aripiprazole as an adjunctive therapy to antidepressants for treating major depressive disorder (MDD). In November 2007, aripiprazole was approved by the US FDA as an adjunctive therapy to antidepressants for treating MDD, with support from two of the above-mentioned trials. In the trials, aripiprazole was demonstrated to be safe and well tolerated, and showed a minimal trend for weight gain over the course of a 6-week treatment. The incidence of akathisia was higher than that reported in studies of patients with schizophrenia; however, most cases were mild to moderate and infrequently lead to discontinuation (5/1090 from all three trials). This comprehensive review provides an overview of the data from all three 6-week studies (including a pooled analysis) and from an unpublished 52-week, open-label extension study, to inform physicians and facilitate reasonable treatment decisions. In addition, specific issues associated with the use of aripiprazole as an adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD, including possible early treatment effect, appropriate timing of therapy initiation, appropriate dosing and duration of treatment, possible differential effect on depressive subgroups and long-term tolerability, are also discussed.

Management of depression in patients with coronary heart disease: association, mechanisms, and treatment implications for depressed cardiac patients

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Coronary heart disease (CHD) and depression are two leading causes of death and disability in the United States and worldwide. Depression is especially common in cardiac patients, and there is growing evidence that depression is a risk factor for fatal and nonfatal events in CHD patients.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

This paper reviews current literature of depression as a risk factor for CHD along with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments for depression in cardiac patients.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Readers will gain knowledge about the importance of depression as a CHD risk factor and learn the results of efforts to treat depressed CHD patients.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Although randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of medication and non-pharmacologic therapies have not demonstrated that treating depression improves survival, there is evidence that treating depressed patients can reduce depressive symptoms and improve quality of life. Additional RCTs are needed, including evaluation of non-pharmacologic therapies such as exercise, to examine the effects of treatment of depression on medical and psychosocial outcomes.

Pharmacological and combined interventions for the acute depressive episode: focus on efficacy and tolerability

BACKGROUND

Use of antidepressants is the gold standard therapy for major depression. However, despite the large number of commercially available antidepressant drugs there are several differences among them in efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness. In addition the optimal augmentation strategy is still not clear when dealing with treatment-resistant depression, a condition that affects 15% to 40% of depressed patients.

METHODS

We therefore reviewed the main characteristics of these drugs regarding their efficacy, tolerability, side effects and cost-effectiveness, by accessing all meta-analyses and systematic reviews published from 2004 to 2009. In addition, we reviewed the augmentation strategy of associated antidepressants with neurostimulation therapies (such as transcranial magnetic stimulation [TMS] and transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]). A search was undertaken in MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scielo databases. We included: 21 meta-analyses of antidepressant trials, 15 neurostimulation clinical trials and 8 studies of pharmacoeconomics. We then performed a comprehensive review on these articles.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Although recent meta-analyses suggest sertraline and escitalopram might have increased efficacy/tolerability, other studies and large pragmatic trials have not found these to be superior to other antidepressant drugs. Also, we did not identify any superior drug in terms of cost-effectiveness due to the different designs observed among pharmacoecomics studies. Side effects such as sexual dysfunction, gastrointestinal problems and weight gain were common causes of discontinuation. Tolerability was an important issue for novel neurostimulation interventions, such as TMS and tDCS. These therapies might be interesting augmentation strategies, considering their benign profile of side effects, if proper safety parameters are adopted.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. III. Pharmacotherapy

BACKGROUND

In 2001, the Canadian Psychiatric Association and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) partnered to produce evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of depressive disorders. A revision of these guidelines was undertaken by CANMAT in 2008-2009 to reflect advances in the field.

METHODS

The CANMAT guidelines are based on a question-answer format to enhance accessibility to clinicians. An evidence-based format was used with updated systematic reviews of the literature and recommendations were graded according to Level of Evidence using pre-defined criteria. Lines of Treatment were identified based on criteria that included Levels of Evidence and expert clinical support. This section on "Pharmacotherapy" is one of 5 guideline articles.

RESULTS

Despite emerging data on efficacy and tolerability differences amongst newer antidepressants, variability in patient response precludes identification of specific first choice medications for all patients. All second-generation antidepressants have Level 1 evidence to support efficacy and tolerability and most are considered first-line treatments for MDD. First-generation tricyclic and monoamine oxidase inhibitor antidepressants are not the focus of these guidelines but generally are considered second- or third-line treatments. For inadequate or incomplete response, there is Level 1 evidence for switching strategies and for add-on strategies including lithium and atypical antipsychotics.

LIMITATIONS

Most of the evidence is based on trials for registration and may not reflect real-world effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-generation antidepressants are safe, effective and well tolerated treatments for MDD in adults. Evidence-based switching and add-on strategies can be used to optimize response in MDD that is inadequately responsive to monotherapy.