Meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of the augmentation of antidepressants with atypical antipsychotics in patients with major depressive disorder

Treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, and costs associated with use of atypical antipsychotics as first vs subsequent adjunctive treatment in major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly prevalent mental health condition associated with substantial economic burden. Inadequate response to first-line antidepressant monotherapy is common, with most patients requiring 1 or more changes in their treatment regimen. Adjunctive treatment with atypical antipsychotics (AAs) is a guideline-recommended treatment option in patients with inadequate response. However, patients often cycle through multiple treatments before receiving adjunctive AAs, and the economic impact of this delay is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe adjunctive treatment patterns among patients with MDD and compare health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs between patients whose first adjunctive therapy included an AA and those who received an AA after other adjunctive treatments. METHODS: The Merative MarketScan Commercial Database (January 1, 2014, to June 30, 2019) was used to identify patients with administrative claims meeting the following inclusion criteria: adults with newly diagnosed MDD (first observed MDD diagnosis = index diagnosis date); continuous health insurance for at least 6 months pre-index and at least 3 months post-index; and initiation of MDD treatment within 60 days post-index. Lines of therapy (LOTs), HCRU, and costs were analyzed in patients who received AA adjunctive therapy, including those who initiated AAs as the first adjunctive treatment and those who initiated AAs as subsequent adjunctive treatment. RESULTS: Of 508,830 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 121,060 (24%) received adjunctive treatment and 20,797 (4%) received an AA as adjunctive therapy. Mean time to adjunctive therapy initiation was approximately 7.3 months for AA adjunctive therapy. Patients who initiated an AA as their first adjunctive therapy compared with patients who initiated an AA as their subsequent adjunctive therapy had fewer LOTs on average (0.9 LOTs vs 3.9 LOTs) and shorter time between index diagnosis date and initiation of an AA (5 months vs 12 months). Subsequent AA initiators had significantly greater HCRU than first AA initiators (driven primarily by outpatient visits) and incurred significantly higher total health care costs, with mean all-cause and mental health-related health care cost differences per patient per year of $2,441 and $1,762, respectively (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Less than 5% of patients in this study received an adjunctive AA as part of their MDD treatment regimen, suggesting underutilization of this recommended therapeutic approach. Patients who received an AA as their first adjunctive treatment regimen had lower HCRU and health care costs than subsequent AA initiators. Along with published evidence of clinical benefits, this potential impact on economic burden should be considered when making treatment choices for patients with inadequate response to antidepressants.

Antidepressant Strategies for Treatment of Acute Depressive Episodes Among Veterans

OBJECTIVE

The 2016 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Major Depressive Disorder offers consensus-based recommendations when response to the initial antidepressant medication is suboptimal; however, little is known about "real-world" pharmacological strategies used by providers treating depression in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System (VAHCS).

METHODS

We extracted pharmacy and administrative records of patients diagnosed with a depressive disorder and treated at the Minneapolis VAHCS between January 1, 2010 and May 11, 2021. Patients with bipolar disorder, psychosis-spectrum, or dementia diagnoses were excluded. An algorithm was developed to identify antidepressant strategies: monotherapy (MONO); optimization (OPM); switching (SWT); combination (COM); and augmentation (AUG). Additional data extracted included demographics, service utilization, other psychiatric diagnoses, and clinical risk for hospitalization and mortality.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 1298 patients, 11.3% of whom were female. The mean age of the sample was 51 years. Half of the patients received MONO, with 40% of those patients receiving inadequate doses. OPM was the most common next-step strategy. SWT and COM/AUG were used for 15.9% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. Overall, patients who received COM/AUG were younger. OPM, SWT, and COM/AUG occurred more frequently in psychiatric services settings and required a greater number of outpatient visits. The association between antidepressant strategies and risk of mortality became nonsignificant after accounting for age.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the veterans with acute depression were treated with a single antidepressant, while COM and AUG were rarely used. The age of the patient, and not necessarily greater medical risks, appeared to be a major factor in decisions about antidepressant strategies. Future studies should evaluate whether implementation of underutilized COM and AUG strategies early in the course of depression treatment are feasible.

Efficacy and acceptability of second-generation antipsychotics with antidepressants in unipolar depression augmentation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Pharmacological treatment of major depressive disorder is often inefficient, and multiple strategies are used for inadequate response to antidepressants. Second-generation antipsychotics are used as augmentation measures in clinical practice; evidence of their efficacy and acceptability is insufficient, and it remains confusing as to which drug should be selected first. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we included randomised controlled trials of second-generation antipsychotics used as adjunctive treatment in patients with suboptimal responses. Outcome measures were efficacy (response and remission) and acceptability (dropout due to any reason and adverse events). Thirty-three trials comprising 10 602 participants were included. Regarding efficacy, response rates indicated that all antipsychotics except for ziprasidone were more efficacious than the placebo, with the odds ratios (ORs) ranging from 1.34 for olanzapine and cariprazine [95% credible interval (CrI) 1.04-1.73 and 1.07-1.67, respectively] to 2.17 for risperidone (95% CrI 1.38-3.42). When considering remission, cariprazine was not effective (OR 1.21, 95% CrI 0.96-1.54). For acceptability, quetiapine (OR 0.68, 95% CrI 0.50-0.91), brexpiprazole (OR 0.69, 95% CrI 0.55-0.86), and cariprazine (OR 0.61, 95% CrI 0.46-0.82) were worse than the placebo. With regards to tolerability, only olanzapine (OR 0.51, 95% CrI 0.25-1.07) and risperidone (OR 0.48, 95% CrI 0.10-2.21) showed no significant differences compared with placebo. The administration of adjunctive antipsychotics is associated with high effectiveness and low acceptability. Risperidone and aripiprazole are more efficacious and accepted than other atypical antipsychotics.

Factors associated with antipsychotic use in non-psychotic depressed patients: results from a clinical multicenter survey

BACKGROUND

The combination of antipsychotics is not well studied among non-psychotic major depressive disorder (MDD). This study aims to explore the antipsychotics use in this population and its associated factors.

METHODS

This cross-sectional and multi-site study was conducted in 11 sites of China. one Thousand five hundred three eligible MDD patients after 8-12 weeks of antidepressant treatment were included consecutively. A structured questionnaire was used to obtain socio-demographic data and medical histories. The Chinese version of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR), the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) were used for patient self-rating. Logistic regression model was used to explore the associated factors that could potentially be influential for the use antipsychotic augmentation.

RESULTS

Overall, quetiapine (43.4%) was the most commonly used as an adjunct to antidepressants, followed by olanzapine (38.8%). And antipsychotics were commonly combined with escitalopram (23.1%), venlafaxine (21.7%), sertraline (14.8%). The factors influencing the combination of antipsychotics in non-psychotic depressed patients included service setting (OR = 0.444; p < 0.001; 95%CI = 0.338-0.583), comorbidity of physical illness (OR = 1.704; p < 0.001; 95%CI = 1.274-2.278), PHQ level (OR = 0.680; p < 0.001; 95%CI = 0.548-0.844), SDS level (OR = 1.627; p < 0.001; 95%CI = 1.371-1.930) and antidepressants co-treatment (OR = 2.606; p < 0.001; 95%CI = 1.949-3.485).

CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotics use is common among non-psychotic MDD patient. Service setting, comorbidity of physical illness, somatic symptoms, social functioning and engagement, and antidepressants co-treatment could be the factors associated with the antipsychotics use in MDD patients.

Antipsychotic-Related Stigma and the Impact on Treatment Choices: A Systematic Review and Framework Synthesis

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics are a class of medications primarily used to treat individuals with psychotic disorders. They have also been indicated for patients with other psychiatric conditions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder. Non-adherence is prominent amongst individuals prescribed antipsychotics, with medication-related self-stigma and social stigma identified as major factors. No previous reviews have focused on stigma associated specifically with antipsychotic medication. This systematic literature review aimed to synthesise evidence on the prevalence of stigmatising attitudes and behaviours related to antipsychotic treatment and understand their impact on antipsychotic treatment initiation and continuation.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers screened studies from databases, congress proceedings, ClinicalTrials.gov, and PsychU.org; relevant studies reported quantitative or qualitative data on antipsychotic-related stigma in adults with psychotic disorders, mood disorders, borderline personality disorder or anxiety disorders, or healthcare providers or caregivers of these patients, and any impact on treatment. Framework synthesis facilitated extraction and synthesis of relevant information; quantitative and qualitative data were coded and indexed against a pre-specified thematic framework by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Forty-five articles reporting on 40 unique studies were included; 22 reported quantitative data, 16 reported qualitative data, and two reported quantitative and qualitative data relating to antipsychotic-related stigma. Framework synthesis identified four themes: 1) impact of antipsychotic treatment on a) social stigma or b) self-stigma; 2) impact of side effects of antipsychotic treatment on a) social stigma or b) self-stigma; 3) impact of route of administration of antipsychotic treatment on stigma; 4) impact of stigma on the use of antipsychotics.

CONCLUSION

This systematic literature review found that antipsychotic-related social and self-stigma is a factor in non-adherence to antipsychotics. Further research should examine stigma in a wider range of patients and the extent to which clinicians' treatment decisions are impacted by the potential stigma associated with antipsychotic medications.

Efficacy and safety of adjunctive serotonin-dopamine activity modulators in major depression: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Serotonin dopamine activity modulators have been approved as an adjunctive treatment to antidepressants in patients with inadequate response. These drugs have been proposed to have a beneficial effect on cognition, sleep-related problems, and other affective symptoms in patients of depression. Previous studies have shown inconsistent evidence and have not reported a pooled effect of the two drugs of this class viz., aripiprazole and brexpiprazole. This meta-analysis evaluated the effect of augmentation with serotonin dopamine activity modulator (SDAM) drugs in patients with major depression. The meta-analysis protocol was made as per PRISMA-P guidelines and registered in PROSPERO. PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Trial registry, EudraCT databases were searched with prespecified search terms. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed using the meta package in R software. Fifteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. The random effects model analysis observed a pooled effect of 1.55 [95% CI 1.32-1.84; prediction interval: 0.95-2.55, z = 5.19 (p < 0.0001)] for remission between the SDAM and placebo groups. A pooled effect of 1.58 [95% CI 1.37-1.83; prediction interval: 1.00-2.51, z = 6.34 (p<0.0001)] for adverse events and 0.72 [95% CI 0.48-1.08) prediction interval: 0.46-1.12] [z = -1.58 (p = 0.113)] for serious adverse events was observed. No significant publication bias was noticed. The quality of the evidence was rated as high. Adjunct SDAM increased remission in patients and had no significant effect on serious adverse events compared to placebo. Therefore, we conclude that SDAM drugs can be an effective and safe antidepressant augmentation strategy in MDD patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Pharmacological Augmentation in Unipolar Depression: A Guide to the Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological augmentation is a recommended strategy for patients with treatment-resistant depression. A range of guidelines provide advice on treatment selection, prescription, monitoring and discontinuation, but variation in the content and quality of guidelines may limit the provision of objective, evidence-based care. This is of importance given the side effect burden and poorer long-term outcomes associated with polypharmacy and treatment-resistant depression. This review provides a definitive overview of pharmacological augmentation recommendations by assessing the quality of guidelines for depression and comparing the recommendations made.

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified current treatment guidelines for depression published in English. Guidelines were quality assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. Data relating to the prescription of pharmacological augmenters were extracted from those developed with sufficient rigor, and the included recommendations compared.

RESULTS

Total of 1696 records were identified, 19 guidelines were assessed for quality, and 10 were included. Guidelines differed in their quality, the stage at which augmentation was recommended, the agents included, and the evidence base cited. Lithium and atypical antipsychotics were recommended by all 10, though the specific advice was not consistent. Of the 15 augmenters identified, no others were universally recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a comprehensive overview of current pharmacological augmentation recommendations for major depression and will support clinicians in selecting appropriate treatment guidance. Although some variation can be accounted for by date of guideline publication, and limited evidence from clinical trials, there is a clear need for greater consistency across guidelines to ensure patients receive consistent evidence-based care.

Defining Major Depressive Disorder Cohorts Using the EHR: Multiple Phenotypes Based on ICD-9 Codes and Medication Orders

Background

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is one of the most common mental illnesses and a leading cause of disability worldwide. Electronic Health Records (EHR) allow researchers to conduct unprecedented large-scale observational studies investigating MDD, its disease development and its interaction with other health outcomes. While there exist methods to classify patients as clear cases or controls, given specific data requirements, there are presently no simple, generalizable, and validated methods to classify an entire patient population into varying groups of depression likelihood and severity.

Methods

We have tested a simple, pragmatic electronic phenotype algorithm that classifies patients into one of five mutually exclusive, ordinal groups, varying in depression phenotype. Using data from an integrated health system on 278,026 patients from a 10-year study period we have tested the convergent validity of these constructs using measures of external validation, including patterns of psychiatric prescriptions, symptom severity, indicators of suicidality, comorbidity, mortality, health care utilization, and polygenic risk scores for MDD.

Results

We found consistent patterns of increasing morbidity and/or adverse outcomes across the five groups, providing evidence for convergent validity.

Limitations

The study population is from a single rural integrated health system which is predominantly white, possibly limiting its generalizability.

Conclusion

Our study provides initial evidence that a simple algorithm, generalizable to most EHR data sets, provides categories with meaningful face and convergent validity that can be used for stratification of an entire patient population.

Impact of Atypical Antipsychotics as Adjunctive Therapy on Psychiatric Cost and Utilization in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

Introduction

Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) incur high costs, despite established treatment options. Adding an atypical antipsychotic (AAP) to antidepressant therapy has shown to reduce depressive symptoms in MDD, but it remains unclear with which adjunctive AAP to initiate. As economic burden is one factor that can influence treatment selection, this study's objective was to evaluate the impact of adjunctive AAP choice on psychiatric costs and healthcare utilization in MDD.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective cohort study analyzed de-identified data from: (1) IBM^® MarketScan^® Commercial (C), Medicare Supplemental (MS), and MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid (M) Databases, and (2) Optum^® Clinformatics^® Datamart. Adult MDD patients were included if they had: initiated adjunctive AAPs during study identification period (7/1/15-9/30/16 MarketScan C/MS, and Optum; 7/1/15-6/30/16 MarketScan M), and ≥12 months of continuous enrollment before (baseline) and after (follow-up) first treatment date. Models included generalized linear models (GLMs) for psychiatric costs (total inpatient and outpatient services, excluding outpatient pharmacy costs), and a two-part model (logistic regression for psychiatric hospitalizations, GLM for psychiatric hospitalization costs among hospitalized patients); models were adjusted for baseline characteristics.

Results

The final study sample consisted of 10,325 patients (7657 aripiprazole, 1219 brexpiprazole, 827 lurasidone, 622 quetiapine). Using brexpiprazole as reference, lurasidone and quetiapine users had $1662 and $3894 higher psychiatric costs, respectively. Psychiatric costs were not statistically significantly different between aripiprazole and brexpiprazole (p>0.05). Quetiapine users had $15,159 (p<0.001) higher psychiatric hospitalization costs among those hospitalized, and higher odds of psychiatric hospitalization [2.11 (1.46-3.04); p<0.001] compared to brexpiprazole users. No statistically significant differences observed in psychiatric hospitalization risk comparing aripiprazole and lurasidone with brexpiprazole (p>0.05).

Conclusion

In MDD, brexpiprazole users had significantly lower psychiatric costs than lurasidone and quetiapine users, and significantly lower psychiatric hospitalization risk than quetiapine users. Adjunctive AAP choice may impact subsequent healthcare costs and utilization in MDD.

Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders in China: The second edition

BACKGROUND

The recent guidelines for depressive disorders in China are based on both the first edition published in 2003, and new scientific evidence reviewed until the end of 2014. The purpose of the guidelines is to provide a comprehensive overview of the scientific evidence for the diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders for Chinese patients.

METHODS

The data used in the guidelines were extracted from the recent literature, and various international treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

The current (second) guidelines are based on both evidence-based and measurement-based approaches. Comprehensive and regular assessments with standard instruments are recommended in the acute, continuation, and maintenance treatment phases, and the stage prior to the termination of treatment. In order to reduce the risk of relapse, the new guidelines are extended to the entire course of treatment. Recommendations for pharmacotherapeutic and other treatment modalities are described in detail.

CONCLUSIONS

Although major advances have been made compared to the 2003 edition of the guidelines, more intensive research is needed to optimize diagnosis and treatment of depressive disorders in China. The new guidelines provide only recommendations for diagnosis and treatment, therefore clinicians should develop individualized treatment plans along the lines of the comprehensive information obtained from patients and their families.

Changes in healthcare resource use and costs associated with early versus delayed initiation of atypical antipsychotic adjunctive treatment in major depressive disorder

AIMS

The study compared all-cause and major depressive disorder (MDD)-related healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs in patients with MDD treated with atypical antipsychotic (AAP) adjunctive therapy early or later in treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adults with MDD and antidepressant treatment (ADT) who newly initiated adjunctive aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, lurasidone, or quetiapine between October 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015 were identified in the IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims database; the index date was the date of the first AAP claim. Patients were stratified into three cohorts: AAP initiated in the first year (Y1); in the second year (Y2); and more than 2 years (Y3) of first ADT use. Within each cohort, HRU and costs were compared between the 12 months before and after the index date. Pre-post changes in HRU and costs were then compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Five hundred and six (36.7%) patients were categorized as Y1; 252 (18.3%) as Y2; and 622 (45.1%) as Y3. AAP use was associated with significantly decreased rates of all-cause and MDD-related hospitalization and emergency department visits, and increased rates of pharmacy fills and physician office visits; and the magnitude of changes was largest in cohort Y1. Cohort Y1 had the largest reductions in mean (±SD) all-cause medical costs per patient (-$10,496 ± $85,022, p = .015) compared to Y2 (-$2,474 ± $85,022, p = .572) and Y3 (-$472 ± $31,334, p = .823), mainly due to the reduction in hospitalization. After adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics, the largest reductions in hospitalization and medical costs were observed in cohort Y1. Similar increases in all-cause pharmacy costs were seen in all cohorts. A similar trend in costs was observed in MDD-related healthcare services.

LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

AAP treatment was associated with reductions in all-cause and MDD-related medical costs, primarily in decreased hospitalization. The reductions were largest among patients who initiated treatment in the first year.

Korean Medication Algorithm for Depressive Disorders 2017: Third Revision

OBJECTIVE

In 2002, the Korean Society for Affective Disorders developed the guidelines for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), and revised it in 2006 and 2012. The third revision of these guidelines was undertaken to reflect advances in the field.

METHODS

Using a 44-item questionnaire, an expert consensus was obtained on pharmacological treatment strategies for MDD 1) without or 2) with psychotic features, 3) depression subtypes, 4) maintenance, 5) special populations, 6) the choice of an antidepressant (AD) regarding safety and adverse effects, and 7) non-pharmacological biological therapies. Recommended first, second, and third-line strategies were derived statistically.

RESULTS

AD monotherapy is recommended as the first-line strategy for non-psychotic depression in adults, children/adolescents, elderly adults, patient with persistent depressive disorder, and pregnant women or patients with postpartum depression or premenstrual dysphoric disorder. The combination of AD and atypical antipsychotics (AAP) was recommended for psychotic depression in adult, child/adolescent, postpartum depression, and mixed features or anxious distress. Most experts recommended stopping the ongoing initial AD and AAP after a certain period in patients with one or two depressive episodes. As an MDD treatment modality, 92% of experts are considering electroconvulsive therapy and 46.8% are applying it clinically, while 86% of experts are considering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation but only 31.6% are applying it clinically.

CONCLUSION

The pharmacological treatment strategy in 2017 is similar to that of Korean Medication Algorithm for Depressive Disorder 2012. The preference of AAPs was more increased.

Delusional parasitosis on the psychiatric consultation service - a longitudinal perspective: case study

BACKGROUND

Delusional parasitosis is infrequently seen in hospital-based consultation-liaison psychiatry.

AIMS

Although there are many publications on delusional parasitosis, this report reviews a unique case that was diagnosed during a hospital admission and treated over the next 36 months.

METHOD

Case report and literature review.

RESULTS

This case report describes a 65-year-old man who was diagnosed with delusional parasitosis during a hospital admission for congestive heart failure and acute kidney injury. A longitudinal description of the patient's condition during the hospital stay and in the 36 months following discharge, during which time he was treated by a consultation psychiatrist, is provided.

CONCLUSIONS

In discussing the treatment of a challenging presentation, this case demonstrates the opportunity for consultation psychiatrists to initiate care in patients who might not otherwise seek psychiatric services. Patients with somatic delusions represent one group of patients who are unlikely to independently seek psychiatric treatment.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

None.

COPYRIGHT AND USAGE

© The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2017. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) license.

Adjunctive Brexpiprazole as a Novel Effective Strategy for Treating Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Brexpiprazole was approved for adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in 2015. Because only a small number of randomized controlled trials have investigated the use of brexpiprazole in MDD, we performed a meta-analysis.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

We systematically searched literatures in PubMed, Cochrane Library database, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov up to January 2016. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in total Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score from baseline. Secondary efficacy measures were the mean change in total Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (17 items) score from baseline and the response (≥50% reduction in MADRS total score) and remission (MADRS total score ≤ 10 with ≥50% reduction) rates.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

Four studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Brexpiprazole showed superior efficacy over placebo with effect sizes (mean differences) of -1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.45 to -1.07) for MADRS and -1.21 (95% CI, -1.71 to -0.72) for the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The risk ratios for response and remission were 1.57 (95% CI, 1.29-1.91) and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.22-1.96), respectively. The incidences of discontinuation due to adverse events, akathisia, and weight increase were higher in the brexpiprazole group than in the placebo group, with risk ratios of 3.44 (95% CI, 1.52-7.80), 3.39 (95% CI, 2.08-5.51), and 4.36 (95% CI, 2.45-7.77), respectively, and the incidence of akathisia was related to the brexpiprazole dose.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Although our results suggest that brexpiprazole could be an effective adjunctive agent for MDD, they should be cautiously translated into clinical practice because the meta-analysis was based on only a handful of randomized controlled trials.

Looking back (and in)to the future: A personal reflection on 'Serotonin autoreceptor function and antidepressant drug action' (Hjorth et al., 2000)

Our article in this journal some 15 years ago focussed on the role of serotonin (5-HT) autoreceptors in the mechanism of action of antidepressant drugs. Specifically in this regard, the results were summarised of rat microdialysis studies carried out to examine: (a) the relative importance of 5-HT_1A and 5-HT_1B autoreceptors, including (b) possible regional variation, and (c) potential changes in autoreceptor responsiveness following chronic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor administration. In the present reflection piece, I recap some of the key findings against a brief background and provide an account of their bearing within the context of subsequent endeavours in the antidepressant drug research and development field. I conclude by shortly commenting on selected topics relevant to novel, interesting advances and avenues for future research.

Second Generation Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: An Update

Less than one third of patients who suffer from major depressive disorder (MDD) report remission following antidepressant treatments requiring more diverse treatment approaches. Augmentation of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) has been increasingly recognized as an important treatment option. The authors have previously provided a comprehensive review of SGAs for the treatment of MDD in 2013. Since then, numerous additional clinical trials have been conducted to investigate diverse issues regarding the utility of SGAs in MDD. Moreover, a new SGA, brexpiprazole, was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration in July 2015 for the treatment of MDD as an augmentation agent to antidepressants. Thus, the aim of this study was to provide a concise update of all the available SGAs for the treatment of MDD, in particular on the additional clinical trials which have been published since 2013.

Aripiprazole Improves Associated Comorbid Conditions in Addition to Tics in Adult Patients with Gilles de la Tourette Syndrome

Gilles de la Tourette Syndrome (GTS) is characterized by motor and vocal tics, as well as associated comorbid conditions including obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), depression, and anxiety which are present in a substantial number of patients. Although randomized controlled trials including a large number of patients are still missing, aripiprazole is currently considered as a first choice drug for the treatment of tics. The aim of this study was to further investigate efficacy and safety of aripiprazole in a group of drug-free, adult patients. Specifically, we investigated the influence of aripiprazole on tic severity, comorbidities, premonitory urge (PU), and quality of life (QoL). Moreover, we were interested in the factors that influence a patient's decision in electing for-or against- pharmacological treatment. In this prospective uncontrolled open-label study, we included 44 patients and used a number of rating scales to assess tic severity, PU, comorbidities, and QoL at baseline and during treatment with aripiprazole. Eighteen out of fortyfour patients decided for undergoing treatment for their tics with aripiprazole and completed follow-up assessments after 4–6 weeks. Our major findings were (1) aripiprazole resulted in significant reduction of tics, but did not affect PU; (2) aripiprazole significantly improved OCD and showed a trend toward improvement of other comorbidities including depression, anxiety, and ADHD; (3) neither severity of tics, nor PU or QoL influenced patients' decisions for or against treatment of tics with aripiprazole; instead patients with comorbid OCD tended to decide in favor of, while patients with comorbid ADHD tended to decide against tic treatment; (4) most frequently reported adverse effects were sleeping problems; (5) patients' QoL was mostly impaired by comorbid depression. Our results suggest that aripiprazole may improve associated comorbid conditions in addition to tics in patients with GTS. It can be hypothesized that these beneficial effects are related to aripiprazole's adaptive pharmacological profile, which exhibits an influence on the dopaminergic as well as a number of other neurotransmitter systems. For the first time, our data provide evidence that patients' decision making process for or against medical treatment is influenced by other factors than tic severity and QoL.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2016 Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Adults with Major Depressive Disorder: Section 3. Pharmacological Treatments

BACKGROUND

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) conducted a revision of the 2009 guidelines by updating the evidence and recommendations. The scope of the 2016 guidelines remains the management of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults, with a target audience of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals.

METHODS

Using the question-answer format, we conducted a systematic literature search focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Evidence was graded using CANMAT-defined criteria for level of evidence. Recommendations for lines of treatment were based on the quality of evidence and clinical expert consensus. "Pharmacological Treatments" is the third of six sections of the 2016 guidelines. With little new information on older medications, treatment recommendations focus on second-generation antidepressants.

RESULTS

Evidence-informed responses are given for 21 questions under 4 broad categories: 1) principles of pharmacological management, including individualized assessment of patient and medication factors for antidepressant selection, regular and frequent monitoring, and assessing clinical and functional outcomes with measurement-based care; 2) comparative aspects of antidepressant medications based on efficacy, tolerability, and safety, including summaries of newly approved drugs since 2009; 3) practical approaches to pharmacological management, including drug-drug interactions and maintenance recommendations; and 4) managing inadequate response and treatment resistance, with a focus on switching antidepressants, applying adjunctive treatments, and new and emerging agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based pharmacological treatments are available for first-line treatment of MDD and for management of inadequate response. However, given the limitations of the evidence base, pharmacological management of MDD still depends on tailoring treatments to the patient.

Baseline Perfusion Alterations Due to Acute Application of Quetiapine and Pramipexole in Healthy Adults

BACKGROUND

The dopaminergic system is implicated in many mental processes and neuropsychiatric disorders. Pharmacologically, drugs with dopamine receptor antagonistic and agonistic effects are used, but their effects on functional brain metabolism are not well known.

METHODS

In this randomized crossover, placebo-controlled, and rater-blinded study, 25 healthy adults received an acute dose placebo substance (starch), quetiapine (dopamine receptor antagonist), or pramipexole (dopamine agonist of the nonergoline class) 1 hour before the experiment. Background-suppressed 2D pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling was used to examine whole-brain baseline cerebral blood flow differences induced by the 3 substances.

RESULTS

We found that quetiapine reduced perfusion in the occipital (early visual areas) and bilateral cerebellar cortex relative to placebo. In contrast, quetiapine enhanced cerebral blood flow (relative to placebo) in the striatal system (putamen and caudate nucleus) but also in the supplementary motor area, insular-, prefrontal- as well as in the pre- and postcentral cortex. Pramipexole increased cerebral blood flow compared with placebo in the caudate nucleus, putamen, middle frontal, supplementary motor area, and brainstem (substantia nigra), but reduced cerebral blood flow in the posterior thalamus, cerebellum, and visual areas. Pramipexole administration resulted in stronger cerebral blood flow relative to quetiapine in the hypothalamus, cerebellum, and substantia nigra.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that quetiapine and pramipexole differentially modulate regional baseline cerebral blood flow. Both substances act on the dopaminergic system, although they affect distinct regions. Quetiapine altered dopaminergic function in frontal, striatal, and motor regions. In contrast, pramipexole affected cerebral blood flow of the nigrostriatal (striatum and substantia nigra) dopaminergic, but less the fronto-insular system.

Effects of aripiprazole on caffeine-induced hyperlocomotion and neural activation in the striatum

Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic that acts as a partial agonist at dopamine D2 receptors. In addition to its antipsychotic activity, this compound blocks the effects of some psychostimulant drugs. It has not been verified, however, if aripiprazole interferes with the effects of caffeine. Hence, this study tested the hypothesis that aripiprazole prevents caffeine-induced hyperlocomotion and investigated the effects of these drugs on neural activity in the striatum. Male Swiss mice received injections of vehicle or antipsychotic drugs followed by vehicle or caffeine. Locomotion was analyzed in a circular arena and c-Fos protein expression was quantified in the dorsolateral, dorsomedial, and ventrolateral striatum, and in the core and shell regions of nucleus accumbens. Aripiprazole (0.1, 1, and 10 mg/kg) prevented caffeine (10 mg/kg)-induced hyperlocomotion at doses that do not change basal locomotion. Haloperidol (0.01, 0.03, and 0.1 mg/kg) also decreased caffeine-induced hyperlocomotion at all doses, although at the two higher doses, this compound reduced basal locomotion. Immunohistochemistry analysis showed that aripiprazole increases c-Fos protein expression in all regions studied, whereas caffeine did not alter c-Fos protein expression. Combined treatment of aripiprazole and caffeine resulted in a decrease in the number of c-Fos positive cells as compared to the group receiving aripiprazole alone. In conclusion, aripiprazole prevents caffeine-induced hyperlocomotion and increases neural activation in the striatum. This latter effect is reduced by subsequent administration of caffeine. These results advance our understanding on the pharmacological profile of aripiprazole.