Treatment patterns in major depressive disorder after an inadequate response to first-line antidepressant treatment

Peer-led intervention for individuals with major depression: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (SUPEERMood)

BACKGROUND

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is one of the most disabling mental health problems worldwide. The Recovery Model emphasizes peer support to empower individuals with MDD, improve self-management, and patients' quality of life. Despite the demonstrated efficacy of peer-led interventions, further research is needed due to methodological limitations and variability in interventions across studies. Therefore, the objective of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of an adjuvant peer-led intervention for the reduction of depressive symptoms in individuals diagnosed with MDD attended in primary care mental health units.

METHODS

A controlled, parallel, randomized clinical trial will be conducted. The intervention group (n = 35) will receive 6 weeks of peer-led sessions based on a peer support program drive whilst supervised by nurses, while the control group (n = 35) will use a mobile Health (mHealth) application for emotional wellness based on CBT for 6 weeks. Measurements will be collected at baseline, at 6 weeks, at 6 and 12 months after the intervention to evaluate post-intervention effects. The primary outcome is the reduction of depressive symptoms through the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) after the intervention. Secondary outcomes will involve measures such as adherence to psychiatric treatment, quality of life, adherence to mediterranean diet, alcohol consumption and physical activity.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize that this peer-led intervention, in contrast to the mHealth, will show improvement in BDI-II score reduction of 6 points after six weeks, 6 and 12 months. Standardized peer-led programs can benefit patients and professionals in terms of efficacy and feasibility of clinical treatment of depression, healthy habits, self-care and quality of life. In addition, they can provide recovery and relapse reduction, improved psychosocial support, minimization of intensive care use, and support for patient autonomy through self-management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial protocol is prospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under protocol registration number NCT06398561. Date of registration: May 01, 2024. Recruitment is ongoing.

Structural and functional features of treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review and exploratory coordinate-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies

OBJECTIVES

A third of people suffering from major depressive disorder do not experience a significant improvement in their symptoms even after adequate treatment with two different antidepressant medications. This common condition, termed treatment-resistant depression (TRD), severely affects the quality of life of millions of people worldwide, causing long-lasting interpersonal problems and social costs. Given its epidemiological and clinical relevance and the little consensus on whether the neurobiological underpinnings of TRD differ from treatment-sensitive depression (TSD), we sought to highlight the convergent morphometric and functional neuroimaging correlates of TRD.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the published literature on structural and resting-state functional neuroimaging of TRD compared to TSD and healthy controls (HC) and performed exploratory coordinate-based meta-analyses (CBMA) of significant results separately for each modality and multimodally ("all-effects"). CBMAs were also performed for each direction and combining both directions of group contrasts.

RESULTS

Out of the initial 1929 studies, only eight involving 555 participants (189 patients with TRD, 156 with TSD, and 210 HC) were included. In all-effects CBMA, precentral/superior frontal gyrus showed a significant difference between TRD and HC. Functional and structural imaging meta-analyses did not yield statistically significant results. A marginally significant cluster of altered intrinsic activity was found between TRD and HC in the cerebellum/pons.

CONCLUSIONS

Frontal, cerebellar, and brainstem functions can be involved in the pathophysiology of TRD. However, the design and heterogeneity of the (scarce) published literature hinder the generalizability of the findings.

Sex-dependent effects of early life stress on reinforcement learning and limbic cortico-striatal functional connectivity

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a stress-related condition hypothesized to involve aberrant reinforcement learning (RL) with positive and negative stimuli. The present study investigated whether repeated early maternal separation (REMS) stress, a procedure widely recognized to cause depression-like behaviour, affects how subjects learn from positive and negative feedback. The REMS procedure was implemented by separating male and female rats from their dam for 6 h each day from post-natal day 5-19. Control rat offspring were left undisturbed during this period. Rats were tested as adults for behavioral flexibility and feedback sensitivity on a probabilistic reversal learning task. A computational approach based on RL theory was used to derive latent behavioral variables related to reward learning and flexibility. To assess underlying brain substrates, a seed-based functional MRI connectivity analysis was applied both before and after an additional adulthood stressor in control and REMS rats. Female but not male rats exposed to REMS stress showed increased response 'stickiness' (repeated responses regardless of reward outcome). Following repeated adulthood stress, reduced functional connectivity from the basolateral amygdala (BLA) to the dorsolateral striatum (DLS), cingulate cortex (Cg), and anterior insula (AI) cortex was observed in females. By contrast, control male rats exposed to the second stressor showed impaired learning from negative feedback (i.e., non-reward) and reduced functional connectivity from the BLA to the DLS and AI compared to maternally separated males. RL in male rats exposed to REMS was unaffected. The fMRI data further revealed that connectivity between the mOFC and other prefrontal cortical and subcortical structures was positively correlated with response 'stickiness'. These findings reveal differences in how females and males respond to early life adversity and subsequent stress. These effects may be mediated by functional divergence in resting-state connectivity between the basolateral amygdala and fronto-striatal brain regions.

Evidence on sociodemographic and clinical correlates of antidepressant combination or augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics in major depressive disorder

About two thirds of the patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) do not sufficiently respond to monotherapy with antidepressants (ADs) which makes them reliant on further treatment approaches. Hereby, combination of different ADs and augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are widely used and recommended psychopharmacotherapeutic strategies. The present secondary analyses are based on an international, naturalistic, cross-sectional multicenter study conducted by the European Group for the Study of Resistant Depression. Comparing socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of 436 adult MDD patients receiving either SGAs (N = 191, 43.8%) or ADs (N = 245, 56.2%), that were additionally administered to their first-line AD psychopharmacotherapy, we aimed to identify possible trajectories of decision-making for clinicians regarding which treatment option to prefer in individual patients. Our most robust findings represent an association of SGA augmentation with the presence of psychotic symptoms, longer mean duration of lifetime psychiatric hospitalizations, employment of further augmentation strategies with mood-stabilizers and benzodiazepines, and a trend towards higher mean daily dosages of their first-line ADs and current suicidal risk. Treatment outcome was not significantly different between patients receiving either SGA augmentation or AD combination. Being aware of limitations inherent to the cross-sectional study design and the lack of randomization, more severe and rather chronic conditions in MDD seemed to encourage clinicians to choose SGA augmentation over AD combination. The fact that mood-stabilizers and/or benzodiazepines were more frequently co-administered with SGAs may represent a requirement of an overall refined psychopharmacotherapy including additional fast-acting agents with potent AD, tranquilizing and anti-suicidal effects in MDD patients experiencing challenging clinical manifestations. New glutamatergic substances seem to be promising in this regard.

Vortioxetine in major depressive disorder: from mechanisms of action to clinical studies. An updated review

INTRODUCTION

Vortioxetine is a multimodal-acting antidepressant that provides improvements on cognitive function aside from antidepressants and anxiolytic effects. Vortioxetine has been found to be one of the most effective and best tolerated options for major depressive disorder (MDD) in head-to-head trials.

AREAS COVERED

The present review intends to gather the most relevant and pragmatic data of vortioxetine in MDD, specially focusing on new studies that emerged between 2015 and 2020.

EXPERT OPINION

Vortioxetine is the first antidepressant that has shown improvements both in depression and cognitive symptoms, due to the unique multimodal mechanism of action that combine the 5-HT reuptake inhibition with modulations of other key pre- and post-synaptic 5-HT receptors (agonism of 5-HT_1A receptor, partial agonism of 5-HT_1B receptor, and antagonism of 5-HT₃, 5-HT_1D and 5-HT₇ receptors). This new mechanism of action can explain the dose-dependent effect and can be responsible for its effects on cognitive functioning and improved tolerability profile. Potential analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties observed in preclinical studies as well as interesting efficacy and tolerability results of clinical studies with specific target groups render it a promising therapeutic option for patients with MDD and concomitant conditions (as menopause symptoms, pain, inflammation, apathy, sleep and/or metabolic abnormalities).

Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study of the phosphodiesterase-3 inhibitor cilostazol as an adjunctive to antidepressants in patients with major depressive disorder

AIMS

Cilostazol (CLS) has shown antidepressant effect in cardiovascular patients, post-stroke depression, and animal models through its neurotrophic and antiinflammatory activities. Consequently, we aimed to investigate its safety and efficacy in patients with MDD by conducting double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study.

METHODS

80 participants with MDD (DSM-IV criteria) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score >20 were treated with CLS 50 mg or placebo twice daily plus escitalopram (ESC) 20 mg once daily for six weeks. Patients were evaluated by HDRS scores (weeks 0, 2, 4, and 6). Serum levels of CREB1, BDNF, 5-HT, TNF-α, NF- κB, and FAM19A5 were assessed pre- and post-treatment.

RESULTS

Co-administration of CLS had markedly decreased HDRS score at all-time points compared to the placebo group (p < 0.001). Early improvement, response, and remission rates after 6 weeks were significantly higher in the CLS group (90%, 90%, 80%, respectively) than in the placebo group (25%, 65%, 50% respectively) (p < 0.001). Moreover, the CLS group was superior to the placebo group in modulation of the measured neurotrophic and inflammatory biomarkers.

CONCLUSION

CLS is safe and effective short-term adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD with no other comorbid conditions. Trial registration ID:NCT04069819.

The use of sequential pharmacotherapy for the treatment of acute major depression: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a chronic, relapsing, and remitting disorder affecting over 250 million persons each year worldwide. More than 50% of the patients do not respond to their initial antidepressant treatment and may benefit from sequential pharmacotherapy for the acute treatment of their MDD. Although guidelines outline options for next-step treatments, there is a paucity of evidence to select specific second- or third-step treatments.

AREAS COVERED

This scoping review synthesizes and discusses available evidence for sequential pharmacotherapy for MDD. MEDLINE was searched from inception to 7 July 2020; 4490 studies were identified. We selected meta-analyses and reports on clinical trials that were judged to inform the sequential selection of pharmacotherapy for MDD.

EXPERT OPINION

Most relevant published trials are focused on, and support, the use of augmentation pharmacotherapy. There is also some support for other strategies such as combining or switching antidepressants. In the future, more studies need to directly compare these sequential options. To provide more personalized treatment within the framework of precision psychiatry, these studies should include an assessment of moderators and mediators ('mechanism') of antidepressant response.

The Increasing Economic Burden with Additional Steps of Pharmacotherapy in Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVES

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common and serious disorder with significant impact on patients and families. The goal of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the economic burden among patients with MDD stratified by number of treatment lines needed for episode resolution.

METHODS

Truven Health Analytics MarketScan^® claims data were used to identify US patients (≥ 18 years) who were diagnosed with MDD and started on an antidepressant between 2013 and 2017. A generalized linear model estimated direct and employment-related costs for the first 12 months following initiation of treatment across cohorts with increasing number of lines of MDD pharmacotherapy. Analyses were adjusted for demographics and clinical factors.

RESULTS

A total of 73,597 patients with MDD comprising the commercial (n = 66,459) and Medicare (n = 7138) populations met selection criteria. Patients who completed treatment for their episode with a single line of antidepressant had the lowest total adjusted direct costs (commercial $9975; Medicare $14,628) followed by those who completed with two lines (commercial $11,723; Medicare $15,526) and those treated with three or more lines of antidepressant regimens (commercial $21,259; Medicare $20,964). Patients who completed treatment with two lines as opposed to one incurred significantly higher direct costs (commercial +$1748, p < 0.0001; Medicare +$898, p = 0.0092). Patients who completed treatment with one line had the lowest employment-related costs compared to other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an increased economic burden associated with delay of episode resolution as early as the second line compared to the first line in MDD.

A retrospective chart review study to quantify the monthly medical resource use and costs of treating patients with treatment resistant depression in the United Kingdom

INTRODUCTION

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a globally prevalent chronic psychiatric illness with a significant disease impact. As many as 30% of patients with MDD do not adequately respond to two therapies and are considered to be treatment resistant. This study aimed to quantify healthcare costs associated with treatment resistant depression (TRD) in the UK.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients with TRD was conducted in primary and secondary care settings over a 2 year period. Data abstracted from medical records of patients included demographics, clinical characteristics and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU; number of consultations, use of Crisis Resolution and Home Treatment Teams [CRHTTs], non-drug and drug interventions, and hospitalizations). HCRU per patient per month (28 days) was calculated for three health states: major depressive episode (MDE), remission and recovery. Unit costs were from the British National Formulary (BNF) and the Personal Social Services Research Unit (PSSRU).

RESULTS

A total of 295 patients with TRD were recruited between January 2016 and May 2018. The mean age of the total sample was 43.3 years; 60.3% were female. Costs per patient, per 28 days, were highest in the MDE state, with the average cost (£992) mainly driven by consultations, non-drug treatment, hospitalizations and CRHTT, with a considerable fall in costs as patients moved into remission and subsequent recovery.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that antidepressant treatments for TRD that are more effective in reducing the time spent in an MDE health state, and helping patients achieve remission and recovery, are essential for reducing the overall HCRU and costs in patients with TRD. Cost of TRD in the UK Strengths and limitations of this study This observational study of TRD is the first to assess the HCRU impact associated with different predefined health states. Using retrospective data from both primary and secondary care physicians from regions across the UK ensures a representative real-world patient population. One limitation is that the selection of patients is based on criteria that define TRD that rely on physician judgement. Although the study captures direct HCRU costs, the indirect costs of lost productivity and care are not included in the overall burden. This study has defined the current clinical management of patients with TRD in the UK and provides an estimate of the associated HCRU and associated costs.

Identifying response and predictive biomarkers for Transcranial magnetic stimulation outcomes: protocol and rationale for a mechanistic study of functional neuroimaging and behavioral biomarkers in veterans with Pharmacoresistant depression

BACKGROUND

Although repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation ('TMS') is becoming a gold standard treatment for pharmacoresistant depression, we lack neural target biomarkers for identifying who is most likely to respond to TMS and why. To address this gap in knowledge we evaluate neural targets defined by activation and functional connectivity of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex-anchored cognitive control circuit, regions of the default mode network and attention circuit, and interactions with the subgenual anterior cingulate. We evaluate whether these targets and interactions between them change in a dose-dependent manner, whether changes in these neural targets correspond to changes in cognitive behavioral performance, and whether baseline and early change in neural target and cognitive behavioral performance predict subsequent symptom severity, suicidality, and quality of life outcomes. This study is designed as a pragmatic, mechanistic trial partnering with the National Clinical TMS Program of the Veteran's Health Administration.

METHODS

Target enrollment consists of 100 veterans with pharmacoresistant Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). All veterans will receive a clinical course of TMS and will be assessed at 'baseline' pre-TMS commencement, 'first week' after initiation of TMS (targeting five sessions) and 'post-treatment' at the completion of TMS (targeting 30 sessions). Veterans will be assessed using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), a cognitive behavioral performance battery, and established questionnaires. Multivariate linear mixed models will be used to assess whether neural targets change with TMS as a function of dose (Aim 1), whether extent and change of neural target relates to and predicts extent of behavioral performance (Aim 3), and whether extent of neural target change predicts improvement in symptom severity, suicidality, and quality of life (Aim 3). For all three aims, we will also assess the contribution of baseline moderators such as biological sex and age.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, our study will be the first pragmatic, mechanistic observational trial to use fMRI imaging and cognitive-behavioral performance as biomarkers of TMS treatment response in pharmacoresistant MDD. The results of this trial will allow providers to select suitable candidates for TMS treatment and better predict treatment response by assessing circuit connectivity and cognitive-behavioral performance at baseline and during early treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04663481 , December 5th, 2020, retrospectively registered. The first veteran was enrolled October 30th, 2020.

The Antidiabetic Metformin as an Adjunct to Antidepressants in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: A Proof-of-Concept, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Metformin (MET) has been reported to have antidepressant effects in animal models and in diabetic patients with depression, owing to its anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and neuroprotective activity. Accordingly, we proposed that MET would show antidepressant effects in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) without other comorbidities. In this double-blind placebo-controlled study, 80 adult outpatients with MDD (DSM-IV criteria) and a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score >18 were randomized to receive fluoxetine 20 mg once daily plus placebo (n = 40) or fluoxetine 20 mg once daily plus MET 1000 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Patients were assessed by HAM-D score (weeks 0, 4, 8, and 12). The serum levels of TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, IGF-1, MDA, CRP, BDNF, and serotonin were measured before and after therapy. Mixed-effects model repeated-measures analysis of covariance was used to compare the HAM-D scores and the biological markers between the two groups. After 4, 8 and 12 weeks, patients in the MET group showed a statistically significant decline in HAM-D score relative to the placebo group (least squares mean difference [LSMD] -2.347, p = 0.000, LSMD -3.369, p = 0.000, and LSMD -3.454, p = 0.000, respectively). Response and remission rates were significantly higher in the MET group (89% and 81%, respectively) than in the placebo group (59% and 46%, respectively). Moreover, the MET group was superior in conserving the measured biological markers compared with the placebo group. Our findings suggest MET as a promising, effective, and safe short-term adjunctive approach in nondiabetic MDD patients. Trial registration ID: NCT04088448.

Effect of fecal microbiota transplant on symptoms of psychiatric disorders: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The Gut-Brain-Axis is a bidirectional signaling pathway between the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and the brain. The hundreds of trillions of microorganisms populating the gastrointestinal tract are thought to modulate this connection, and have far reaching effects on the immune system, central and autonomic nervous systems, and GI functioning. These interactions Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders have also been linked to various psychiatric illnesses such as depression, anxiety, substance abuse, autism spectrum disorder, and eating disorders. It is hypothesized that techniques aimed at strengthening and repopulating the gut microbiome, such as Fecal Microbiota Transplant (FMT), may be useful in the prevention and treatment of psychiatric illnesses.

METHODS

A systematic search of five databases was conducted using key terms related to FMT and psychiatric illnesses. All results were then evaluated based on specific eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies met the eligibility criteria and were analysed for reported changes in mood and behavioural measures indicative of psychiatric wellbeing. The studies included were either entirely clinical (n = 8), preclinical with human donors (n = 9), or entirely preclinical (n = 11). All studies found a decrease in depressive and anxiety-like symptoms and behaviours resulting from the transplantation of healthy microbiota. The inverse was also found, with the transmission of depressive and anxiety-like symptoms and behaviours resulting from the transplantation of microbiota from psychiatrically ill donors to healthy recipients.

CONCLUSION

There appears to be strong evidence for the treatment and transmission of psychiatric illnesses through FMT. Further research with larger sample sizes and stronger scientific design is warranted in order to fully determine the efficacy and safety of this potential treatment. Registered on PROSPERO, IRD: CRD42019126795.

Efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine versus agomelatine, categorized by previous treatment, in patients with major depressive disorder switched after an inadequate response

This study aimed to evaluate if efficacy and tolerability of switching to vortioxetine is independent of previous SSRI or SNRI treatment in patients who had been inadequately treated for their current major depressive episode. Patients from a double-blind, 12-week comparator study were randomized (1:1) to vortioxetine (10-20 mg/day) or agomelatine (25-50 mg/day). The pre-defined primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 8 in MADRS total score analyzed by MMRM. An ANCOVA-LOCF was conducted as a sensitivity analysis. These analyses were repeated in subgroups according to previous antidepressant treatment. In the overall population, vortioxetine (n = 252) was significantly superior to agomelatine (n = 241) by -2.2 MADRS points (p < 0.01) at week 8. ∼77% (n = 189/vortioxetine, n = 188/agomelatine) were previously treated with an SSRI (citalopram, escitalopram, paroxetine, sertraline) and ∼23% (n = 62/vortioxetine, n = 52/agomelatine) with an SNRI (duloxetine, venlafaxine). Baseline characteristics were similar in all subgroups. Treatment differences (MMRM) in MADRS total score were -2.6 and -2.3 (n = 164/vortioxetine, n = 150/agomelatine) (p < 0.01) for patients switching from an SSRI and -1.8 and -1.5 (n = 56/vortioxetine, n = 40/agomelatine) (p > 0.05) from an SNRI at weeks 8 and 12, respectively; non-significant improvements were seen for each of the 6 previous antidepressants. Improvements in HAM-A, CGI-I, and EQ-5D scales were significant for the SSRI subgroup and non-significant for the SNRI subgroup. Withdrawal and adverse event rates were similar, regardless of previous SSRI or SNRI treatment. These subgroup analyses showed statistical superiority of vortioxetine to agomelatine in inadequate responders to SSRIs and statistically non-significant improvements in the smaller SNRI subgroup, while being equally well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study has the ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01488071.

Characteristics of patients with depression initiating or switching antidepressant treatment: baseline analyses of the PERFORM cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients who require a switch in their antidepressant therapy may have different clinical profiles and treatment needs compared with patients initiating or maintaining a first-line antidepressant therapy.

METHODS

The Prospective Epidemiological Research on Functioning Outcomes Related to Major depressive disorder (MDD) (PERFORM) study was a 2-year observational cohort study in outpatients with MDD in five European countries. Enrolled patients were either initiating or undergoing the first switch to an antidepressant monotherapy. Baseline data on patients' clinical status, functioning, productivity, quality of life and medical-resource use were compared in a cross-sectional baseline analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1402 patients were enrolled, of whom 1159 (82.7%) provided analysable baseline data. The majority (78.7%) of the analysable population were initiating antidepressant treatment and most (83.6%) were enrolled and followed up by general practitioners. Compared with patients initiating antidepressants, those switching antidepressants (21.3%) tended to have more severe depressive symptoms, greater anxiety, worse health-related quality of life, greater functional impairment, greater medical-resource use and had a different medical history. Limitations included an over-representation of switches due to lack of efficacy among patients who were switching treatment, as patients were selected based on presence of depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MDD who are switching treatment for the first time have a different profile and different depression-associated health needs compared with those initiating treatment. Therapeutic management should therefore be adapted for patients who switch.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01427439 ; Retrospectively registered 26 August 2011.

Adding HRV biofeedback to psychotherapy increases heart rate variability and improves the treatment of major depressive disorder

Heart rate variability (HRV) is a significant marker of health outcomes with decreased HRV predicting increased disease risk. HRV is decreased in major depressive disorder (MDD) but existing treatments for depression do not return heart rate variability to normal levels even with successful treatment of depression. Heart rate variability biofeedback (HRVB) increases heart rate variability but no studies to date have examined whether combining HRVB with psychotherapy improves outcome in MDD treatment. The present study used a randomized controlled design to compare the effects of HRVB combined with psychotherapy on MDD relative to a psychotherapy treatment as usual group and to a non-depressed control group. The HRVB+psychotherapy group showed a larger increase in HRV and a larger decrease in depressive symptoms relative to the other groups over a six-week period, whereas the psychotherapy group only did not improve HRV. Results support the supplementation of psychotherapy with HRVB in the treatment of MDD.

Comparative evaluation of vortioxetine as a switch therapy in patients with major depressive disorder

Switching antidepressant therapy is a recommended strategy for depressed patients who neither respond to nor tolerate an initial pharmacotherapy course. This paper reviews the efficacy and tolerability of switching to vortioxetine. All three published studies of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) switched from SSRI/SNRI therapy to vortioxetine due to lack of efficacy or tolerability were selected. Vortioxetine was evaluated versus agomelatine directly (REVIVE) and versus sertraline, venlafaxine, bupropion, and citalopram in an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) from switch studies retrieved in a literature review. Vortioxetine׳s impact on SSRI-induced treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction (TESD) was assessed directly versus escitalopram (NCT01364649) in stable patients with MDD. Vortioxetine׳s tolerability in the switch population was compared to the overall MDD population. Vortioxetine showed significant benefits over agomelatine on efficacy, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes, with fewer withdrawals due to adverse events (AEs) (REVIVE). Vortioxetine had numerically higher remission rates versus all therapies included (ITC). Withdrawal rates due to AEs were significantly lower for vortioxetine versus sertraline, venlafaxine, and bupropion, and numerically lower versus citalopram. Switching to vortioxetine was statistically superior to escitalopram in improving TESD (NCT01364649). Tolerability was similar in the switch and overall MDD populations. These findings suggest that vortioxetine is an effective switch therapy for patients with MDD whose response to SSRI/SNRI therapy is inadequate. Vortioxetine was well tolerated and, for patients with a history of TESD, showed significant advantages versus escitalopram. Vortioxetine appears to be a valid option for patients with MDD who have not been effectively treated with first-line pharmacotherapies.

Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization, and costs following first-line antidepressant treatment in major depressive disorder: a retrospective US claims database analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) are often manageable with pharmacotherapy, response to first-line antidepressant treatment is often less than optimal. This study describes long-term treatment patterns in MDD patients in the United States and quantifies the economic burden associated with different treatment patterns following first-line antidepressant therapy.

METHODS

MDD patients starting first-line antidepressant monotherapy and having continuous enrollment ≥12 months before and ≥24 months following the index date (i.e., the first documented prescription fill) were selected from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan (2003-2014) database. Based on the type of first treatment change following initiation, six treatment cohorts were defined a priori ("persistence"; "discontinuation"; "switch"; "dose escalation"; "augmentation"; and "combination"). Treatment patterns through the fourth line of therapy within each cohort, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and cost analyses were restricted to patients with adequate treatment duration (defined as ≥42 days) in each line (analysis sub-sample, N = 21,088). HCRU and costs were described at the cohort and pattern levels. Treatment cohorts representing <5% of the analysis sub-sample were decided a priori not to be analyzed due to limited sample size.

RESULTS

39,557 patients were included. Mean age was 42.1 years, 61.1% of patients were female, and mean follow-up was 4.1 years. Among the analysis sub-sample, the discontinuation (49.1%), dose escalation (37.4%), and switch (6.6%) cohorts were the most common of all treatment cohorts. First-line antidepressant discontinuation without subsequent MDD pharmacotherapy (22.9%) and cycling between discontinuation and resumption (11.2%) were the two most common treatment patterns. Median time to discontinuation was 23 weeks. The switch cohort exhibited the highest HCRU (18.9 days with medical visits per-patient-per-year) and greatest healthcare costs ($11,107 per-patient-per-year) following the index date. Treatment patterns representing a cycling on and off treatment in the switch cohort were associated with the greatest healthcare costs overall.

CONCLUSION

A high proportion of patients discontinue first-line antidepressant shortly after initiation. Patterns representing a cycling on and off treatment in the switch cohort were associated with the highest healthcare costs. These findings underscore challenges in effectively treating patients with MDD and a need for personalized patient management.

[Unsatisfactory response: definition and involvement]

In the treatment of unipolar depression, treatment response is a key issue in terms of evolution and prognosis. Within this concept, the inadequate response includes the worsening, the lack of response, partial response and poor tolerance. This lack of response may be related to intrinsic factors to the individual, but also to more extrinsic environmental factors. In this review, we explore this concept through its links with adherence and treatment duration. In this field, the concept of early response can be a powerful indicator of therapeutic response, which conditions the prescription of antidepressants beyond the strict framework of the sufficient period of 4 to 6 weeks. In addition to its impact on prognosis, the literature data show that the insufficient response is a significant burden in terms of medical and economic cost, and somatic comorbidity; and justifies a systematic identification of this dimension. Therefore self-reports (QIDS; BDI) will be preferred to the clinician-rated depression symptom rating scales (MADRS, HAMD) that require a specific training. Identifying predictors of non-response would be an attractive target for prescribers but the results to date are not operative.

[Switching and combining strategies of antidepressant medications]

Switching antidepressant medication may be helpful in depressed patients having no benefit from the initial antidepressant treatment. Before considering switching strategy, the initial antidepressant treatment should produce no therapeutic effect after at least 4 weeks of administration at adequate dosage. Choosing an antidepressant of pharmacologically distinct profile fails to consistently demonstrate a significant superiority in terms of effectiveness over the switching to another antidepressant within the same pharmacological class. Augmenting SSRI/SNRIs with mirtazapine/mianserin has become the most recommended strategy of antidepressant combinations. Augmenting SSRI with tricyclic drugs is now a less recommended strategy of antidepressant combinations given the increased risk for the occurrence of pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions and adverse effects.

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

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

Pharmacotherapeutic strategies for patients treated for depression in UK primary care: a database analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate long-term patterns of antidepressant treatment in patients in primary care in the UK, and to assess their healthcare resource use and disease outcomes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective longitudinal cohort study was conducted using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The study population comprised patients aged ≥18 years with depression receiving a prescription for antidepressant monotherapy between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2011 with no antidepressants within the preceding 6 months. Recovery was defined by timing of antidepressant prescriptions (≥6 months without treatment). Treatment lines and strategies (switching, combining, augmenting and resuming medication) were analyzed. Healthcare resource use for the different treatment strategies and periods of no therapy was assessed.

RESULTS

Data from 123,662 patients (287,564 treatment lines) were analyzed. Switching and resumption of treatment were more frequent than other strategies. Recovery was highest with first-line monotherapy (45% of patients), while as a second-line strategy switching was more successful (43%) than combination or augmentation. In subsequent lines of treatment, switching was associated with successively lower rates of recovery (31% in the third line and 24% from the fourth line onwards). Similar rates were observed for resumption. Healthcare resource use was greater during antidepressant use than treatment-free periods. Augmentation was associated with the highest proportions of patients with a psychiatrist referral, psychologist referral and psychiatric hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides extensive real-world information on the prescribing patterns and treatment outcomes for a large cohort of patients treated for depression with antidepressants in primary care. Switching is more frequently used than augmentation or combination treatment, with decreasing effectiveness across successive lines. Key limitations of the study were: (i) risk of selection bias due to the use of inclusion criteria based on depression diagnoses recorded by the practitioner; and (ii) reliance on prescribing patterns as proxies for clinical outcomes, such as recovery.