A qualitative investigation of the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale: discrepancies in rater perceptions and data trends in remote assessments of rapid-acting antidepressants in treatment resistant depression.

Introduction: Despite the development of many successful pharmaceutical interventions, a significant subset of patients experience treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Ketamine and its derivatives constitute a novel therapeutic approach to treat TRD; however, standard tools, such as the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) are still being used to measure symptoms and track changes. Methods: The aim of this study was to review item-level differences between rate of data change (MADRS score) and rater-weighted perception of the most useful items for assessing change in symptoms while remotely conducting the 10-item version of the MADRS in TRD in a clinical trial of rapid-acting antidepressants. Two studies of rapid-acting antidepressants in the treatment of TRD were used to identify item-scoring trends when MADRS is administered remotely and repeatedly (733 subjects across 10 visits). Scoring trends were evaluated in tandem to a rater survey completed by 75 raters. This was completed to gain insight on MADRS items' perceived level of helpfulness when assessing change of symptoms in rapid-acting antidepressant trials. Results: MADRS items 'Reduced sleep', 'Apparent sadness', and 'Pessimistic thoughts' were found to have the greatest average data change by visit, while raters ranked 'Reported sadness', 'Lassitude' and 'Apparent sadness' as the most helpful items when assessing symptom change. Discussion: The diversion between rate of data-change ranking and rater perception of helpfulness could be related to difficulty in assessing specific items, to the novel treatment itself, and/or to the sensitivity to symptom change to which raters are accustomed in traditional antidepressant treatments.

Functioning and Cognition in Patients with Schizophrenia After Initiating Treatment with Aripiprazole Lauroxil: Secondary Outcomes and Post Hoc Analysis.

Background: Clinical practice guidelines support efforts to improve functioning in patients with schizophrenia. Discrepancies in the perception of cognitive status between clinicians, patients with schizophrenia, and their caregivers have been associated with impaired functional abilities in patients; medication side effects might worsen both cognition and daily functioning. We assessed daily/social functioning and cognition in stable patients with schizophrenia who switched to the long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic aripiprazole lauroxil (AL). Methods: Clinically stable adults with residual symptoms of schizophrenia or intolerance following three or more doses of paliperidone palmitate or risperidone LAI were switched to flexibly dosed open-label AL treatment (441mg, 662mg, or 882mg every 4 weeks or 882mg every 6 weeks) for six months (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02634320). Daily/social functioning was assessed using the Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP); total and subscale scores were summarized using descriptive statistics. The cognitive status of patients was assessed using the New York Assessment of Adverse Cognitive Effects of Neuropsychiatric Treatment (NY-AACENT) at baseline and Month 6 or early termination, providing patient, caregiver, and clinician perspectives. A post hoc analysis assessed level of agreement in ratings of cognitive status among respondents, evaluated at baseline and last assessment, using weighted kappa coefficients (0.01-0.20, slight agreement; 0.21-0.40, fair agreement; 0.41-0.60, moderate agreement; 0.61-0.80, substantial agreement.). Results: All 51 enrolled patients received one or more AL doses; 35 completed the study, and 45 contributed data at last assessment. Mean age was 40.6 years; 72.5 percent of patients were male. Based on PSP total score, functioning was maintained from baseline (mean [standard deviation (SD)]: 55.1 [10.5]) through six months of AL treatment (mean [SD]: 57.7 [13.2]). Proportions of patients rating personal and social functioning issues as "not present" or "mild" remained stable between baseline and Month 6 for each PSP subscale. At baseline (n=50), cognitive difficulties were most commonly rated "not present" or "mild" in all NY-AACENT domains by patients (58-86% across domains), clinicians (62-94%), and caregivers (50-92%), and these rates were maintained or increased at last assessment for all reporters. Weighted kappa coefficients indicated fair-to-substantial agreement between patients and clinicians across domains at last assessment (0.32-0.64; baseline: 0.14-0.55); patient-caregiver agreement ranged from 0.07 to 0.50 at last assessment (baseline: 0.25-0.60). Conclusion: In clinically stable patients with schizophrenia who initiated AL, self-reported functioning was maintained over six months of treatment. Clinician-, caregiver-, and patient-reported cognitive function was stable at baseline and maintained in all NY-AACENT domains; patient-clinician agreement on level of cognitive impairment increased over six months of treatment with AL.

Enrichment using speech latencies improves treatment effect size in a clinical trial of bipolar depression.

Clinical trials in depression lack objective measures. Speech latencies are an objective measure of psychomotor slowing with face validity and empirical support. 'Turn latency' is the response time between speakers. Retrospective analysis was carried-out on the utility of turn latencies as an enrichment tool in a clinical trial of bipolar I depression. Speech data was obtained from 274 participants during 1,352 Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) recordings in a randomized, placebo controlled, 6-week clinical trial of SEP-4199 (200 mg or 400 mg). Post-randomization turn latencies were compared between patients with moderate to severe depression and patients whose depression had remitted. A cutoff was determined and applied to turn latencies pre-randomization to classify individuals into two groups: Speech Latencies Slow (SL-Slow) and Speech Latencies Normal (SL-Normal). At week 6, SL-Slow (N = 172) showed significant separation in MADRS scores between placebo and treatment arms. SL-Normal (N = 102) showed larger MADRS improvements and no significant separation between placebo and treatment arms. Excluding SL-Normal increased primary outcome effect size by 52 % and 100 % for the treatment arms. Turn latencies are an objective measure available from standard clinical assessments and may assess the severity of symptoms more accurately and screen out placebo responders.

Evaluating speech latencies during structured psychiatric interviews as an automated objective measure of psychomotor slowing.

We sought to derive an objective measure of psychomotor slowing from speech analytics during a psychiatric interview to avoid potential burden of dedicated neurophysiological testing. Speech latency, which reflects response time between speakers, shows promise from the literature. Speech data was obtained from 274 subjects with a diagnosis of bipolar I depression enrolled in a randomized, doubleblind, 6-week phase 2 clinical trial. Audio recordings of structured Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) interviews at 6 time points were examined (k = 1,352). We evaluated speech latencies, and other aspects of speech, for temporal stability, convergent validity, sensitivity/responsivity to clinical change, and generalization across seven socio-linguistically diverse countries. Speech latency was minimally associated with demographic features, and explained nearly a third of the variance in depression (categorically defined). Speech latency significantly decreased as depression symptoms improved over time, explaining nearly 20 % of variance in depression remission. Classification for differentiating people with versus without concurrent depression was high (AUCs > 0.85) both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Results replicated across countries. Other speech features offered modest incremental contribution. Neurophysiological speech parameters with face validity can be derived from psychiatric interviews without the added patient burden of additional testing.