Search

Background: Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who do not adequately respond to antidepressant treatment (ADT) may benefit from adjunctive atypical antipsychotics; however, certain agents target specific symptoms of depression and not the full syndrome. The aim of this analysis was to examine the effects of brexpiprazole, adjunct to ADT, on the core symptoms of MDD, defined using Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) items.Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind studies of adjunctive brexpiprazole in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs (n = 1056). Efficacy was assessed using the MADRS core symptom subscale (MADRS6) and individual items (apparent sadness, reported sadness, inner tension, lassitude, inability to feel, and pessimistic thoughts).Results: At Week 6, adjunctive brexpiprazole showed a greater effect than adjunctive placebo on the MADRS6 (within-group Cohen's d effect sizes: brexpiprazole, 1.05; placebo, 0.71; p < 0.001 between groups) and on each of the six core symptoms (effect sizes: brexpiprazole, 0.64-0.94; placebo, 0.39-0.64; all p < 0.001). At Week 2, adjunctive brexpiprazole already showed a greater effect than adjunctive placebo on the MADRS6, and on five of the core symptoms (all p < 0.01).Limitations: This was a post hoc analysis of studies that were not designed for this purpose. Correction for multiple comparisons was not performed.Conclusions: Brexpiprazole, as adjunct to ADT, produced a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement on the core symptoms of MDD. Brexpiprazole is thought to exert its effects in MDD by treating the core symptoms of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Lithium augmentation of antidepressants for treatment of unipolar major depression was one of the first adjunctive strategies based on a neuropharmacologic rationale. Randomized controlled trials supported its efficacy but most trials added lithium to tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). Despite its efficacy, use of lithium augmentation remains infrequent. The current systematic review and meta-analysis examines the efficacy of lithium augmentation as an adjunct to second generation antidepressants as well as to TCAs and considers reasons for its infrequent use. Method A systematic search of Medline and the Cochrane Clinical Trials database was performed. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials of lithium augmentation were selected. A fixed-effects meta-analysis was performed. Odds ratios for response were calculated for each treatment-control contrast, for the trials grouped by type of initial antidepressant (TCA or second generation antidepressant), and as a meta-analytic summary for all treatments combined. Results Nine trials that included 237 patients were selected. The odds ratio for response to lithium vs. placebo in all contrasts combined was 2.89 (95% CI 1.65, 5.05, z=3.72, p=0.0002). Heterogeneity was very low, I²=0%. Adjunctive lithium was effective with TCAs (7 contrasts) and with second generation agents (3 contrasts). Discontinuation due to adverse events was infrequent and did not differ between lithium and placebo. Limitations The meta-analysis is limited by the small size and number of trials and limited data for treatment resistant patients. Conclusions Adjunctive lithium appears to be as effective for second generation antidepressants as it was for the tricyclics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Although antipsychotic agents have a long history of use in depression, their effectiveness in treating core symptoms of depression such as loss of interest has been questioned. Adjunctive aripiprazole is beneficial for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder but its effects on specific symptoms have not been reported. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of aripiprazole on core symptoms of depression. Methods: This is a post-hoc, pooled analysis of two trials of aripiprazole augmentation of standard antidepressants (ADT) in patients with major depression. Patients with an inadequate response to ADT received adjunctive aripiprazole (n =373) or placebo (n =368) for 6weeks. Change on four subscales of the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) that capture core depression symptoms was determined and change on individual HAM-D items also was assessed. The magnitude of within-group change for the subscales and individual items was expressed as effect size (ES) and between-group significance tested with ANCOVA. The magnitude of change was also examined comparing the response rates for aripiprazole and placebo on HAM-D17 and the four subscales. Change on three composite subscales — anxiety, insomnia and drive was also examined. Results: Within-group change on the four core subscales was substantial (ES=1.1–1.2) and similar to that for the 17-item HAM-D total score. Between-group comparisons indicated mean change and response rates were significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole than placebo for each core subscale (all p <0.01). Individual HAM-D17 items showing the greatest change from baseline with adjunctive aripiprazole: depressed mood (within-group ES=1.03) work and activities (ES=0.86), guilt (ES=0.77) and psychic anxiety (ES=0.67) are the same symptoms identified by each of the core subscales and each of these items differed significantly from change on that item with placebo (p <0.01). On three composite scales, adjunctive aripiprazole was significantly more effective than placebo with respect to mean change for anxiety, insomnia and drive (all p <0.001). Conclusions: Aripiprazole augmentation of standard ADT results in significant, clinically meaningful changes in the core symptoms of depression. It is also associated with significant change in anxiety, insomnia, and drive components of the 17-item HAM-D. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Less than half of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to their first antidepressant trial. Our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) remains poor, and there is no reliable method of predicting treatment response.Methods: Thirty-seven MDD subjects and 41 healthy controls, somatically healthy and medication-free for at least six weeks, were recruited, and plasma serotonin (5-HT) levels were assessed at baseline. Twenty-six of the MDD subjects were then treated in an open-label manner with clinically appropriate doses of sertraline for 8 weeks, after which plasma 5-HT levels were again assessed. Response to treatment was defined as an improvement of 50% or more on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.Results: Non-responders to sertraline treatment had significantly lower pre-treatment 5-HT levels compared to both healthy controls and responders (F = 4.4, p = 0.004 and p = 0.036, respectively). There was a significant decrease in 5-HT levels over treatment in all MDD subjects (t = 6.2, p = 0.000003). The decrease was significantly more prominent in responders compared to non-responders (t = 2.1, p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in post-treatment 5-HT levels between responders and non-responders.Limitations: The study had a modest sample size. 5-HT levels in plasma may not reflect 5-HT levels in the brain.Conclusions: The results indicate that SSRI response may be facilitated by adequate baseline plasma 5-HT content and that successful SSRI treatment is associated with greater decreases in circulating 5-HT. Plasma 5-HT content may be a predictor of SSRI treatment outcome. Potential underlying mechanisms are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Randomised, placebo-controlled trials of treatments for depression typically collect outcomes data but traditionally only analyse data to demonstrate efficacy and safety. Additional post-hoc statistical techniques may reveal important insights about treatment variables useful when considering inter-individual differences amongst depressed patients. This paper aims to examine the Gradient Boosted Model (GBM), a statistical technique that uses regression tree analyses and can be applied to clinical trial data to identify and measure variables that may influence treatment outcomes. Methods GBM was applied to pooled data from 12 randomised clinical trials of 4987 participants experiencing an acute depressive episode who were treated with duloxetine, an SSRI or placebo to predict treatment remission. Additional analyses were conducted on the same dataset using the logistic regression model for comparison between these two methods. Results With GBM, there were noticeable differences between treatments when identifying which and to what extent variables were associated with remission. A single logistic regression only revealed a decreasing or increasing relationship between predictors and remission while GBM was able to reveal a complex relationship between predictors and remission. Limitations These analyses were conducted post-hoc utilising clinical trials databases. The criteria for constructing the analyses data were based on the characteristics of the clinical trials. Conclusions GBM can be used to identify and quantify patient variables that predict remission with specific treatments and has greater flexibility than the logistic regression model. GBM may provide new insights into inter-individual differences in treatment response that may be useful for selecting individualised treatments. Trial registration IMPACT clinical trial number 3327; IMPACT clinical trial number 4091; IMPACT clinical trial number 4689; IMPACT clinical trial number 4298; NCT00071695; NCT00062673; NCT00036335; NCT00067912; NCT00073411; NCT00489775; NCT00536471; NCT00666757 (note that trials with IMPACT numbers predate mandatory clinical trial registration requirements) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: There is a paucity of evidence for outcome predictors in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) not responding to initial antidepressant therapy (ADT). This post-hoc analysis evaluated whether MDD severity affects response to adjunctive aripiprazole. Methods: Data from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive aripiprazole in adults with MDD and inadequate response to 1 to 3 ADT trials were pooled and stratified based on Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score (mild, ≤24; moderate, 25–30; severe, ≥31). Treatment differences in change in MADRS total score and rates of response (≥50% MADRS improvement) and remission (response with MADRS total score ≤10) were analyzed at endpoint. Adverse events were assessed within each subgroup. Results: Aripiprazole produced greater improvement than placebo in the MADRS total score regardless of MDD severity at baseline (between-treatment difference [95% CI]: mild, −2.5 [−4.0 to −1.1]; moderate, −3.2 [−4.9 to −1.6]; severe, −4.5 [−6.8 to −2.2]). Compared with placebo, adjunctive aripiprazole increased the likelihood of response in all subgroups (risk ratio [95% CI]: mild, 1.50 [1.15, 1.95]; moderate, 1.51 [1.09, 2.11]; severe, 1.95 [1.23, 3.10]). Common treatment-emergent adverse events included akathisia and restlessness. Limitations: The original studies were not designed to assess the efficacy of adjunctive aripiprazole by baseline severity, and this post-hoc analysis was not powered to evaluate differences in severity subgroups. Conclusions: In patients who failed to respond to initial ADT, adjunctive aripiprazole was more effective than placebo in mild, moderate, and severe MDD strata. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00095823, NCT00105196, and NCT00095758. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objective: We investigated patient and disease characteristics predictive of relapse of MDD during a 52-week placebo controlled trial of selegiline transdermal system (STS) to identify patient characteristics relevant for STS treatment. Method: After 10 weeks of open-label stabilization with STS, 322 remitted patients with MDD were randomized to 52-weeks of double-blind treatment with STS (6mg/24h) or placebo (PLB). Relapse was defined as Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) score of ≥14 and a CGI-S score of ≥3 with at least 2-point increase from the beginning of the double blind phase on 2 consecutive visits. Cox's proportional hazards regression was used to examine the effect of potential predictors (age, sex, age at onset of first MDD, early response pattern, number of previous antidepressant trials, severity of index episode, number of previous episodes, melancholic features, atypical features and anxious feature) on outcome. Exploratory analyses examined additional clinical variables (medical history, other psychiatric history, and individual items of HAM-D 28) on relapse. Results: For all predictor variables analyzed, treatment Hazard Ratio (HR=0.48~0.54) was significantly in favor of STS (i.e., lower relapse risk than PLB). Age of onset was significantly predictive of relapse. Type, duration, and severity of depressive episodes, previous antidepressant trials, or demographic variables did not predict relapse. In additional exploratory analysis, eating disorder history and suicidal ideation were significant predictors of relapse after controlling for the effect of treatment in individual predictor analysis. Conclusions: While age of onset, eating disorder history and suicidal ideation were significant predictors, the majority of clinical and demographic variables were not predictive of relapse. Given the post-hoc nature of analysis, the findings need confirmation from a prospective study. It appears that selegiline transdermal system was broadly effective in preventing relapse across different subtypes and symptoms clusters of MDD. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]