Optimising antidepressant use in clinical practice: towards criteria for antidepressant selection

A double-blind, randomized pilot study for comparison of Melissa officinalis L. and Lavandula angustifolia Mill. with Fluoxetine for the treatment of depression

Background

Depression has rapidly progressed worldwide, and the need for an efficient treatment with low side effect has risen. Melissa officinalis L and Lavandula angustifolia Mill have been traditionally used in Asia for the treatment of depression. Many textbooks of traditional Persian medicine refer to these herbs for the treatment of depression while there are no adequate clinical trials to support this claim.

The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of M. officinalis and L. angustifolia compared to fluoxetine for the treatment of mild to moderate depression in an 8-week randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

Methods

Forty-five adult outpatients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5) for major depression, were randomly assigned to 3 groups to daily receive either M. officinalis (2 g) or L. angustifolia (2 g) or fluoxetine (20 mg) and were assessed in weeks 0, 2, 4 and 8 by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) including 17 items.

Results

Our study showed that M. officinalis and L. angustifolia effect similar to fluoxetine in mild to moderate depression. (F = 0.131, df = 2,42, p = 0.877).

Conclusion

Due to some restrictions in this study including absence of placebo group, large-scale trials are needed to investigate the anti-depressant effect of these two herbs with more details.

Trial registration

IRCT2014061718126N1. Registration date: 2015-06-04-“Retrospectively registered”.

Comparing the Effects of Sertraline with Duloxetine for Depression Severity and Symptoms: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Selecting the most effective treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) is a challenge for clinicians. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of sertraline with duloxetine on major depression signs and symptoms.

METHODS

The trial was a 6-week, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. Sixty-three patients with diagnosis of MDD according to DSM-IV-TR criteria were randomly assigned to receive either duloxetine (31 patients) or sertraline (32 patients). The mean dosage of duloxetine was 55 mg/day (range 40-60 mg/day) and the mean dosage of sertraline was 146 mg/day (range 50-200 mg/day). Subjects were assessed at baseline, and at the end of week 6. Depression severity and symptoms were assessed by 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D).

RESULTS

Of 63 patients who were randomized to treatment, 54 patients including 28 in the sertraline group and 26 in the duloxetine group completed the trial. The HAM-D total score for both groups was significantly reduced at the end of the trial period without significant difference from each other (p = 0.463). Of the symptoms studied, psychomotor retardation, general somatic symptoms and sexual problems improved more in the duloxetine group. On the other hand, agitation, anxiety symptoms and hypochondriasis ameliorated better in the sertraline group. There was no difference between the two groups regarding the other symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that the antidepressant mechanism of action has influence on its effects on different signs and symptoms. Clinician awareness of an antidepressant's special effects can help in selecting appropriate medicine.

Clinical pharmacology review of escitalopram for the treatment of depression

INTRODUCTION

Depression is a serious and debilitating psychiatric condition with serious societal health and economic implications. Escitalopram , the S-enantiomer of racemic citalopram, is an effective treatment for major depressive disorder.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the clinical pharmacology of escitalopram, with emphasis on regulatory approval. Its pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical efficacy for major depressive disorder are evaluated, along with data regarding safety and tolerability.

EXPERT OPINION

Drug development of escitalopram was heavily guided by prior approval of citalopram. Select safety and efficacy studies for escitalopram in combination with supportive evidence from the results of prior citalopram studies allowed for regulatory approval for acute and maintenance claims in both adults and adolescents, while minimizing burden on the sponsor. Escitalopram has been shown to have better efficacy and safety profile than other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor drugs, including racemic citalopram. The first generic escitalopram was approved in 2012, along with Abbreviated New Drug Applications. The associated cost savings have helped reduce the burden of weighing the benefits of escitalopram over less-expensive alternatives.

Prevalence of and factors related to the use of antidepressants and benzodiazepines: results from the Singapore Mental Health Study

BACKGROUND

Prescription and use of antidepressants and benzodiazepines are common in the general population. Prescription of psychotropic drugs is a complex process: patient, physician and healthcare characteristics mediate, interact and influence it. The current study aimed to establish the prevalence and factors associated with the use of antidepressants (ADs) and benzodiazepines (BZDs) in Singapore.

METHODS

The Singapore Mental Health Study (SMHS) was a nationally representative survey of Singapore Residents aged 18 years and above. Face-to-face interviews were conducted from December 2009 to December 2010. The diagnoses of mental disorders were established using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview version 3.0 (CIDI-3.0). The pharmacoepidemiology section was used to collect information on medication use.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence estimates for ADs and BZDs use during the 12 months prior to the interview were 1.1% and 1.2% respectively. In all, 2.0% had used ADs and/or BZDs. 'Help seeking for emotional or mental health problems' was the most important predictor for the use of ADs and BZDs-help seekers were much more likely to use ADs (adjusted OR: 31.62, 95% CI: 13.36-74.83) and more likely to use BZDs than non--help seekers in the previous 12 months (adjusted OR: 34.38, 95% CI: 12.97-91.16). Only 27.6% of those with 12-month major depressive disorder (MDD) had sought formal medical help for their problems and ADs were being used by just over a quarter of this 'help-seeking group' (26.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the use of ADs and BZDs in our population was relatively low, and 'help-seeking' was the most important predictor of the use of ADs and BZDs. In concordance with research from other Western countries, use of ADs was low among those with 12-month MDD.

Escitalopram in major depressive disorder: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose, parallel trial in a Chinese population

Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of citalopram and the most selective of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) has been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of major depression in white populations. Our aim in this study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram in Chinese patients with moderate to severe major depression. Patients who met DSM-IV criteria for a major depressive episode were enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose comparison trial. Patients were given escitalopram 10 mg/day or fluoxetine 20 mg/day for 8 weeks. All patients were assessed with the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-17) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Tolerability was assessed on the basis of adverse effects (measured with a locally developed checklist), regular biochemical tests, and electrocardiograph (ECG) assessments. Two hundred forty patients were enrolled and randomized to escitalopram (123 patients) or fluoxetine (117 patients). The HAM-D-17 total scores of both groups decreased significantly from baseline, but there was no significant difference at week 8 between the two groups (15.8 for escitalopram and 14.7 for fluoxetine; P >.05). There were no significant differences in response rates at all visits after treatment based on either HAM-D-17 or MADRS. A post hoc analysis indicated that escitalopram was superior to fluoxetine on two items of the HAM-D-17: "depressed mood" (P =.023) and "work and interest" (P =.024). The adverse events reported in the escitalopram and fluoxetine groups were comparable, and most were mild to moderate. Both drugs showed good compliance profiles. Escitalopram 10 mg/day is at least as efficacious as fluoxetine 20 mg/day and well tolerated in Chinese patients with major depression, with possible superiority in some core symptoms such as "depressed mood" and "work and interest."

The economic implications of the racial and ethnic disparities in the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies have examined racial and ethnic disparities in the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI). This study aims to examine the economic implications of these disparities.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, the study sample was adult survey respondents with a diagnosis of depression from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2002-2003). SSRI use was measured as the number of times when SSRIs were obtained. The racial and ethnic disparities in SSRI use were examined employing a negative binomial model. The economic implications of disparities were explored using a linear regression with SSRI use as an independent variable. Interaction terms between the variable for SSRI use and dummy variables for racial and ethnic groups were included to explore whether the relationships between SSRI use and health expenditures differ across racial and ethnic groups.

RESULTS

The mean number of times of SSRI use was higher for non-Hispanic whites than non-Hispanic blacks (3.02 vs. 1.79; p < 0.05) and Hispanic whites (3.02 vs. 1.68; p < 0.05). These differences were still significant after adjusting for covariates (p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, each time of SSRI use was associated with health expenditures of $301 higher. Neither dummy variables for racial and ethnic groups nor the interaction terms between these dummy variables and the variable for SSRI use were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The lower use of SSRIs among minorities compared to non-Hispanic whites is associated with lower health expenditures among minorities. SSRI may be a proxy for improved access to health care due to under-treatment of depression in general. The main limitation of this study is that its observational nature does not allow the researchers to determine whether the association between SSRI use and the increase in health expenditures is a causal effect.

Shortened onset of action of antidepressants in major depression using acetylsalicylic acid augmentation: a pilot open-label study

Based on our preclinical data showing a potential accelerating effect of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in combination with fluoxetine in an animal model of depression, we examined the effect of ASA augmentation therapy on selective reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) in major depressed non-responder patients. Twenty-four non-responder patients having received at least 4 weeks of an adequate SSRI treatment were included in a pilot open-label study. Participants were treated openly during 4 weeks with 160 mg/day ASA in addition to their current antidepressant treatment. The combination SSRI-ASA was associated with a response rate of 52.4%. Remission was achieved in 43% of the total sample and 82% of the responder sample. In the responder group, a significant improvement was observed within week 1 (mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-21 items at day 0=29.3+/-4.5, at day 7=14.0+/-4.1; P<0.0001) and remained sustained until day 28. Despite limitations due to the open nature of this study, our preliminary results confirm our preclinical findings and are in favour of an accelerating effect of ASA in combination with SSRIs in the treatment of major depression. Potential physiological and biochemical mechanisms may involve an anti-inflammatory and/or neurotrophic effect.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antidepressant treatment in primary health care: a six-month randomised study comparing fluoxetine to imipramine

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, studies of the effectiveness of pharmacological treatment for depression have often been based on research designs intended to measure efficacy, and for this reason the results are of limited generalizability. Research is needed comparing the clinical and economic outcomes of antidepressants in day-to-day clinical practice.

METHODS

A six-month randomised prospective naturalistic study comparing fluoxetine to imipramine carried out in three primary care health centres. Outcome measures were the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), direct costs, indirect costs and total costs. Subjects were evaluated at the beginning of treatment and at one, three and six months thereafter.

RESULTS

Of the 103 patients, 38.8% (n = 40) were diagnosed with major depressive disorder, 14.6% (n = 15) with dysthymic disorder, and 46.6% (n = 48) with depressive disorder not otherwise specified. Patients with major depressive disorder or dysthymic disorder achieved similar clinical improvement in both treatment groups (mean MADRS ratings decrease in major depressive disorder from baseline to 6 months of 18.3 for imipramine and 18.8 for fluoxetine). For patients with major depressive disorder and dysthymic disorder, the imipramine group had fewer treatment-associated costs (imipramine 469.66 Euro versus fluoxetine 1,585.93 Euro in major depressive disorder, p < 0.05; imipramine 175.39 Euro versus fluoxetine 2,929.36 Euro in dysthymic disorder, p < 0.05). The group with depressive disorder not otherwise specified did not experience statistically significant differences in clinical and costs outcomes between treatment groups.

LIMITATIONS

Exclusion criteria, participating physicians may not represent GPs.

CONCLUSIONS

In a primary care context, imipramine may represent a more cost-effective treatment option than fluoxetine for treating major depressive disorder or dysthymic disorder. There were no differences in cost-effectiveness in the treatment of depressive disorder not otherwise specified.

Information versus experience: a comparison of an information leaflet on antidepressants with lay experience of treatment

The quality of patient information leaflets has been criticised for being too medico centred. Written information produced by a patient organisation should be tailored to members' expressed needs, and based on their experience and therefore useful in helping patients to self-manage their condition. Views expressed in semi-structured interviews with 30 members of a self help group for depression were compared with the content of an antidepressant leaflet produced by the parent organisation. The information leaflet used six frequently asked questions to deliver a biomedical discourse on antidepressants. Members of the group had questions not included in the leaflet around self help, stigma and sense of self, and more complex answers to the six questions. It cannot be assumed that information leaflets written by lay led organisations are patient centred and promote self help. To assist in facilitating concordance between patient and prescriber medicine information leaflets should draw on patient experience of the condition and treatment for it.

Comparison of Lavandula angustifolia Mill. tincture and imipramine in the treatment of mild to moderate depression: a double-blind, randomized trial

Depression is a major health problem and is not only underrecognized and undertreated but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (Lamiacae) is used to treat depression. Many medicinal plant textbooks refer to this indication, whereas there is no evidence-based document. Our objective was to compare the efficacy of tincture of L. angustifolia with imipramine in the treatment of mild to moderate depression and to evaluate the possible adjuvant effect of this tincture in a 4 week double-blind, randomized trial. Forty-five adult outpatients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, for major depression based on the structured clinical interview for DSM IV participated in the trial. Patients have a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score of at least 18. In this double-blind, single-center trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive lavandula tincture (1:5 in 50% alcohol ) 60 drops/day plus placebo tablet (Group A), tablet imipramine 100 mg/day plus placebo drop (Group B) and tablet imipramine 100 mg/day plus lavandula tincture 60 drops/day (Group C) for a 4-week study. In this small preliminary double-blind and randomized trial, lavandula tincture at this concentration was found to be less effective than imipramine in the treatment of mild to moderate depression (F=13.16, df=1, P=.001). In the imipramine group, anticholinergic effects such as dry mouth and urinary retention were observed more often that was predictable, whereas headache was observed more in the lavandula tincture group. A combination of imipramine and lavandula tincture was more effective than imipramine alone (F=20.83, df=1, P<.0001). As this study indicates, one of the advantages of this combination is a better and earlier improvement. The main overall finding from this study is that lavandula tincture may be of therapeutic benefit in the management of mild to moderate depression as adjuvant therapy. A large-scale trial is justified.

Depression in Parkinson's disease

Depression in Parkinson's disease (PD) is a common complication, with a major impact on quality of life. Failure to recognize and treat depression can lead to premature and inappropriate discontinuation of antiparkinsonian therapies. Cited frequency for depression in PD varies between 2.7 and 70%. Methodological differences account for much of the disparity. The aetiology of depression in PD is complex, with 'tonic' (slowly changing and persistent) and 'phasic' (short-lived and fluctuating) components. Both depression and anxiety may predate the onset of the motor disorder by some years. Hedonistic homeostatic dysregulation is a cyclical mood disorder associated with excessive intake of dopaminergic therapies, inappropriate for the motor state. Negative affective symptoms occur on attempted reduction of medication, reinforcing the abnormal medication pattern. The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression have good diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for assessing depression in PD. There is a dearth of sizeable, placebo-controlled studies for evaluating drug treatment of depression in PD. Dopaminergic drugs have variable antidepressant properties. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are currently the most commonly prescribed group of antidepressants in the depressed PD patient. Depression in the PD patient may be associated with a more rapid deterioration in cognitive and motor functions.