STAR*D: a summary and UK perspective

Interleukin-1 Beta in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell Lysates as a Longitudinal Biomarker of Response to Antidepressants: A Pilot Study

Interleukin-1 beta (IL1β) is primarily produced by monocytes in the periphery and the brain. Yet, IL1β protein levels have to date been investigated in major depressive disorder (MDD) and antidepressant response using either plasma or serum assays although with contradictory results, while mononuclear cell assays are lacking despite their extensive use in other contexts. In this pilot study, we comparatively assessed IL1β in mononuclear lysates and plasma in depressed MDD patients over treatment and healthy controls (HC). We recruited 31 consecutive adult MDD inpatients and 25 HC matched on age, sex, and BMI. Twenty-six patients completed an 8-week follow-up under treatment. IL1β was measured in both lysates and plasma in patients at baseline (T0) and at study end (T1) as well as in HC. We calculated ΔIL1β(%) for both lysates and plasma as IL1β percent changes from T0 to T1. Seventeen patients (65.4% of completers) were responders at T1 and had lower baseline BMI than non-responders (p = 0.029). Baseline IL1β from either plasma or lysates could not efficiently discriminate between depressed patients and HC, or between responders and non-responders. However, the two response groups displayed contrasting IL1β trajectories in lysates but not in plasma assays (response group by time interactions, p = 0.005 and 0.96, respectively). ΔIL1β(%) in lysates predicted response (p = 0.025, AUC = 0.81; accuracy = 84.6%) outperforming ΔIL1β(%) in plasma (p = 0.77, AUC=0.52) and was robust to adjusting for BMI. In conclusion, ΔIL1β(%) in mononuclear lysates may be a longitudinal biomarker of antidepressant response, potentially helpful in avoiding untimely switching of antidepressants, thereby warranting further investigation.

Treating depression after initial treatment failure: directly comparing switch and augmenting strategies in STAR*D

OBJECTIVE

Augmenting and switching antidepressant medications are the 2 most common next-step strategies for depressed patients failing initial medication treatment. These approaches have not been directly compared; thus, our objectives are to compare outcomes for medication augmentation versus switching for patients with major depressive disorder in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) clinical trial.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of participants aged 18 to 75 years with DSM-IV nonpsychotic depression who failed to remit with initial treatment in the STAR*D clinical trial (N = 1292). We compared depressive symptom remission, response, and quality of life among participants in each study arm using propensity score matching to minimize selection bias.

RESULTS

The propensity-score-matched augment (N = 269) and switch (N = 269) groups were well balanced on measured characteristics. Neither the likelihood of remission (risk ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence level, 0.82-1.58) or response (risk ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence level, 0.82-1.58), nor the time to remission (log-rank test, P = 0.946) or response (log-rank test, P = 0.243) differed by treatment strategy. Similarly, quality of life did not differ. Post hoc analyses suggested that augmentation improved outcomes for patients tolerating 12 or more weeks of initial treatment and those with partial initial treatment response.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients receiving and tolerating aggressive initial antidepressant trials, there is no clear preference for next-step augmentation versus switching. Findings tentatively suggest that those who complete an initial treatment of 12 weeks or more and have a partial response with residual mild depressive severity may benefit more from augmentation relative to switching.

Commentary on STAR*D: a summary and UK perspective

The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) program attempted to determine whether some treatment sequences are better than others in the management of depression. Application of the findings to UK treatment settings is difficult because depression is an inhomogeneous condition and to regard it as a unitary entity, to which a unitary stratagem can be applied, is possibly misguided.