Antidepressant Augmentation versus Switch in Treatment-Resistant Geriatric Depression.

BACKGROUND: The benefits and risks of augmenting or switching antidepressants in older adults with treatment-resistant depression have not been extensively studied. METHODS: We conducted a two-step, open-label trial involving adults 60 years of age or older with treatment-resistant depression. In step 1, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to augmentation of existing antidepressant medication with aripiprazole, augmentation with bupropion, or a switch from existing antidepressant medication to bupropion. Patients who did not benefit from or were ineligible for step 1 were randomly assigned in step 2 in a 1:1 ratio to augmentation with lithium or a switch to nortriptyline. Each step lasted approximately 10 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in psychological well-being, assessed with the National Institutes of Health Toolbox Positive Affect and General Life Satisfaction subscales (population mean, 50; higher scores indicate greater well-being). A secondary outcome was remission of depression. RESULTS: In step 1, a total of 619 patients were enrolled; 211 were assigned to aripiprazole augmentation, 206 to bupropion augmentation, and 202 to a switch to bupropion. Well-being scores improved by 4.83 points, 4.33 points, and 2.04 points, respectively. The difference between the aripiprazole-augmentation group and the switch-to-bupropion group was 2.79 points (95% CI, 0.56 to 5.02; P = 0.014, with a prespecified threshold P value of 0.017); the between-group differences were not significant for aripiprazole augmentation versus bupropion augmentation or for bupropion augmentation versus a switch to bupropion. Remission occurred in 28.9% of patients in the aripiprazole-augmentation group, 28.2% in the bupropion-augmentation group, and 19.3% in the switch-to-bupropion group. The rate of falls was highest with bupropion augmentation. In step 2, a total of 248 patients were enrolled; 127 were assigned to lithium augmentation and 121 to a switch to nortriptyline. Well-being scores improved by 3.17 points and 2.18 points, respectively (difference, 0.99; 95% CI, -1.92 to 3.91). Remission occurred in 18.9% of patients in the lithium-augmentation group and 21.5% in the switch-to-nortriptyline group; rates of falling were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults with treatment-resistant depression, augmentation of existing antidepressants with aripiprazole improved well-being significantly more over 10 weeks than a switch to bupropion and was associated with a numerically higher incidence of remission. Among patients in whom augmentation or a switch to bupropion failed, changes in well-being and the occurrence of remission with lithium augmentation or a switch to nortriptyline were similar. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; OPTIMUM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02960763.).

Duration of Adjunctive Antidepressant Maintenance in Bipolar I Depression.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants are used to treat acute depression in patients with bipolar I disorder, but their effect as maintenance treatment after the remission of depression has not been well studied. METHODS: We conducted a multisite, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of maintenance of treatment with adjunctive escitalopram or bupropion XL as compared with discontinuation of antidepressant therapy in patients with bipolar I disorder who had recently had remission of a depressive episode. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to continue treatment with antidepressants for 52 weeks after remission or to switch to placebo at 8 weeks. The primary outcome, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was any mood episode, as defined by scores on scales measuring symptoms of hypomania or mania, depression, suicidality, and mood-episode severity; additional treatment or hospitalization for mood symptoms; or attempted or completed suicide. Key secondary outcomes included the time to an episode of mania or hypomania or depression. RESULTS: Of 209 patients with bipolar I disorder who participated in an open-label treatment phase, 150 who had remission of depression were enrolled in the double-blind phase in addition to 27 patients who were enrolled directly. A total of 90 patients were assigned to continue treatment with the prescribed antidepressant for 52 weeks (52-week group) and 87 were assigned to switch to placebo at 8 weeks (8-week group). The trial was stopped before full recruitment was reached owing to slow recruitment and funding limitations. At 52 weeks, 28 of the patients in the 52-week group (31%) and 40 in the 8-week group (46%) had a primary-outcome event. The hazard ratio for time to any mood episode in the 52-week group relative to the 8-week group was 0.68 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 1.10; P = 0.12 by log-rank test). A total of 11 patients in the 52-week group (12%) as compared with 5 patients in the 8-week group (6%) had mania or hypomania (hazard ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 0.86 to 6.08), and 15 patients (17%) as compared with 35 patients (40%) had recurrence of depression (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.75). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a trial involving patients with bipolar I disorder and a recently remitted depressive episode, adjunctive treatment with escitalopram or bupropion XL that continued for 52 weeks did not show a significant benefit as compared with treatment for 8 weeks in preventing relapse of any mood episode. The trial was stopped early owing to slow recruitment and funding limitations. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00958633.).

Ketamine versus ECT for Nonpsychotic Treatment-Resistant Major Depression.

BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and subanesthetic intravenous ketamine are both currently used for treatment-resistant major depression, but the comparative effectiveness of the two treatments remains uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial involving patients referred to ECT clinics for treatment-resistant major depression. Patients with treatment-resistant major depression without psychosis were recruited and assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive ketamine or ECT. During an initial 3-week treatment phase, patients received either ECT three times per week or ketamine (0.5 mg per kilogram of body weight over 40 minutes) twice per week. The primary outcome was a response to treatment (i.e., a decrease of ≥50% from baseline in the score on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report; scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater depression). The noninferiority margin was -10 percentage points. Secondary outcomes included scores on memory tests and patient-reported quality of life. After the initial treatment phase, the patients who had a response were followed over a 6-month period. RESULTS: A total of 403 patients underwent randomization at five clinical sites; 200 patients were assigned to the ketamine group and 203 to the ECT group. After 38 patients had withdrawn before initiation of the assigned treatment, ketamine was administered to 195 patients and ECT to 170 patients. A total of 55.4% of the patients in the ketamine group and 41.2% of those in the ECT group had a response (difference, 14.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 3.9 to 24.2; P<0.001 for the noninferiority of ketamine to ECT). ECT appeared to be associated with a decrease in memory recall after 3 weeks of treatment (mean [±SE] decrease in the T-score for delayed recall on the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised, -0.9±1.1 in the ketamine group vs. -9.7±1.2 in the ECT group; scores range from -300 to 200, with higher scores indicating better function) with gradual recovery during follow-up. Improvement in patient-reported quality-of-life was similar in the two trial groups. ECT was associated with musculoskeletal adverse effects, whereas ketamine was associated with dissociation. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine was noninferior to ECT as therapy for treatment-resistant major depression without psychosis. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; ELEKT-D ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03113968.).

Esketamine Nasal Spray versus Quetiapine for Treatment-Resistant Depression.

BACKGROUND: In treatment-resistant depression, commonly defined as a lack of response to two or more consecutive treatments during the current depressive episode, the percentage of patients with remission is low and the percentage with relapse is high. The efficacy and safety of esketamine nasal spray as compared with extended-release quetiapine augmentation therapy, both in combination with ongoing treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), in patients with treatment-resistant depression are unknown. METHODS: In an open-label, single-blind (with raters unaware of group assignments), multicenter, phase 3b, randomized, active-controlled trial, we assigned patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive flexible doses (according to the summary of product characteristics) of esketamine nasal spray (esketamine group) or extended-release quetiapine (quetiapine group), both in combination with an SSRI or SNRI. The primary end point was remission, defined as a score of 10 or less on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), at week 8 (scores range from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating more severe depression). The key secondary end point was no relapse through week 32 after remission at week 8. All patients were included in the analysis; patients who discontinued the trial treatment were considered as having had an unfavorable outcome (i.e., they were grouped with patients who did not have remission or who had a relapse). Analyses of the primary and key secondary end points were adjusted for age and number of treatment failures. RESULTS: Overall, 336 patients were assigned to the esketamine group and 340 to the quetiapine group. More patients in the esketamine group than in the quetiapine group had remission at week 8 (91 of 336 patients [27.1%] vs. 60 of 340 patients [17.6%]; P = 0.003) and had no relapse through week 32 after remission at week 8 (73 of 336 patients [21.7%] vs. 48 of 340 patients [14.1%]). Over 32 weeks of follow-up, the percentage of patients with remission, the percentage of patients with a treatment response, and the change in the MADRS score from baseline favored esketamine nasal spray. The adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of the trial treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with treatment-resistant depression, esketamine nasal spray plus an SSRI or SNRI was superior to extended-release quetiapine plus an SSRI or SNRI with respect to remission at week 8. (Funded by Janssen EMEA; ESCAPE-TRD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04338321.).

Single-Dose Psilocybin for a Treatment-Resistant Episode of Major Depression.

BACKGROUND: Psilocybin is being studied for use in treatment-resistant depression. METHODS: In this phase 2 double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adults with treatment-resistant depression to receive a single dose of a proprietary, synthetic formulation of psilocybin at a dose of 25 mg, 10 mg, or 1 mg (control), along with psychological support. The primary end point was the change from baseline to week 3 in the total score on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; range, 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating more severe depression). Secondary end points included response at week 3 (≥50% decrease from baseline in the MADRS total score), remission at week 3 (MADRS total score ≤10), and sustained response at 12 weeks (meeting response criteria at week 3 and all subsequent visits). RESULTS: A total of 79 participants were in the 25-mg group, 75 in the 10-mg group, and 79 in the 1-mg group. The mean MADRS total score at baseline was 32 or 33 in each group. Least-squares mean changes from baseline to week 3 in the score were -12.0 for 25 mg, -7.9 for 10 mg, and -5.4 for 1 mg; the difference between the 25-mg group and 1-mg group was -6.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], -10.2 to -2.9; P<0.001) and between the 10-mg group and 1-mg group was -2.5 (95% CI, -6.2 to 1.2; P = 0.18). In the 25-mg group, the incidences of response and remission at 3 weeks, but not sustained response at 12 weeks, were generally supportive of the primary results. Adverse events occurred in 179 of 233 participants (77%) and included headache, nausea, and dizziness. Suicidal ideation or behavior or self-injury occurred in all dose groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 trial involving participants with treatment-resistant depression, psilocybin at a single dose of 25 mg, but not 10 mg, reduced depression scores significantly more than a 1-mg dose over a period of 3 weeks but was associated with adverse effects. Larger and longer trials, including comparison with existing treatments, are required to determine the efficacy and safety of psilocybin for this disorder. (Funded by COMPASS Pathfinder; EudraCT number, 2017-003288-36; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03775200.).

Medication-Induced Weight Change Across Common Antidepressant Treatments : A Target Trial Emulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants are among the most commonly prescribed medications, but evidence on comparative weight change for specific first-line treatments is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare weight change across common first-line antidepressant treatments by emulating a target trial. DESIGN: Observational cohort study over 24 months. SETTING: Electronic health record (EHR) data from 2010 to 2019 across 8 U.S. health systems. PARTICIPANTS: 183 118 patients. MEASUREMENTS: Prescription data determined initiation of treatment with sertraline, citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, bupropion, duloxetine, or venlafaxine. The investigators estimated the population-level effects of initiating each treatment, relative to sertraline, on mean weight change (primary) and the probability of gaining at least 5% of baseline weight (secondary) 6 months after initiation. Inverse probability weighting of repeated outcome marginal structural models was used to account for baseline confounding and informative outcome measurement. In secondary analyses, the effects of initiating and adhering to each treatment protocol were estimated. RESULTS: Compared with that for sertraline, estimated 6-month weight gain was higher for escitalopram (difference, 0.41 kg [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.52 kg]), paroxetine (difference, 0.37 kg [CI, 0.20 to 0.54 kg]), duloxetine (difference, 0.34 kg [CI, 0.22 to 0.44 kg]), venlafaxine (difference, 0.17 kg [CI, 0.03 to 0.31 kg]), and citalopram (difference, 0.12 kg [CI, 0.02 to 0.23 kg]); similar for fluoxetine (difference, -0.07 kg [CI, -0.19 to 0.04 kg]); and lower for bupropion (difference, -0.22 kg [CI, -0.33 to -0.12 kg]). Escitalopram, paroxetine, and duloxetine were associated with 10% to 15% higher risk for gaining at least 5% of baseline weight, whereas bupropion was associated with 15% reduced risk. When the effects of initiation and adherence were estimated, associations were stronger but had wider CIs. Six-month adherence ranged from 28% (duloxetine) to 41% (bupropion). LIMITATION: No data on medication dispensing, low medication adherence, incomplete data on adherence, and incomplete data on weight measures across time points. CONCLUSION: Small differences in mean weight change were found between 8 first-line antidepressants, with bupropion consistently showing the least weight gain, although adherence to medications over follow-up was low. Clinicians could consider potential weight gain when initiating antidepressant treatment. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Clinical and Adverse Outcomes Associated With Concomitant Use of CYP2D6-Metabolized Opioids With Antidepressants in Older Nursing Home Residents : A Target Trial Emulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists on the safety of pharmacokinetic interactions of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 (CYP2D6)-metabolized opioids with antidepressants among older nursing home (NH) residents. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the associations of concomitant use of CYP2D6-metabolized opioids and antidepressants with clinical outcomes and opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using a target trial emulation framework. SETTING: 100% Medicare NH sample linked to Minimum Data Set (MDS) from 2010 to 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Long-term residents aged 65 years and older receiving CYP2D6-metabolized opioids with a disease indication for antidepressant use. INTERVENTION: Initiating CYP2D6-inhibiting versus CYP2D6-neutral antidepressants that overlapped with use of CYP2D6-metabolized opioids for 1 day or more. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical outcomes were worsening pain, physical function, and depression from baseline to quarterly MDS assessments and were analyzed using modified Poisson regression models. The ORAE outcomes included counts of pain-related hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits, opioid use disorder (OUD), and opioid overdose and were analyzed with negative binomial or Poisson regression models. All models were adjusted for baseline covariates via inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Among 29 435 identified residents, use of CYP2D6-metabolized opioids concomitantly with CYP2D6-inhibiting (vs. CYP2D6-neutral) antidepressants was associated with a higher adjusted rate ratio of worsening pain (1.13 [95% CI, 1.09 to 1.17]) and higher adjusted incidence rate ratios of pain-related hospitalization (1.37 [CI, 1.19 to 1.59]), pain-related ED visit (1.49 [CI, 1.24 to 1.80]), and OUD (1.93 [CI, 1.37 to 2.73]), with no difference in physical function, depression, and opioid overdose. LIMITATION: Findings are generalizable to NH populations only. CONCLUSION: Use of CYP2D6-metabolized opioids concomitantly with CYP2D6-inhibiting (vs. CYP2D6-neutral) antidepressants was associated with worsening pain and increased risk for most assessed ORAEs among older NH residents. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Psilocybin-assisted group therapy in patients with cancer diagnosed with a major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in patients with cancer and is associated with lower treatment adherence and reduced quality of life. Antidepressants and psychotherapy have limited success in improving depression among patients with cancer. This study explored the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of psilocybin-assisted therapy in patients with cancer and major depressive disorder. METHODS: This phase 2, open-label trial enrolled patients with curable and noncurable cancer and major depressive disorder at a single community oncology practice site. A single 25-mg dose of psilocybin was administered simultaneously to cohorts of three to four participants with individual (4.25 hours in 1:1 therapist-to-patient ratio) and group therapeutic support (3.75 hours) before, during, and after psilocybin administration. Outcomes included depression severity, anxiety, pain, demoralization, and disability. RESULTS: Thirty participants completed the study. No psilocybin-related serious adverse events occurred; treatment-related adverse events (e.g., nausea, headache) were generally mild and expected. There were no laboratory or electrocardiogram abnormalities. No suicidality was reported. Efficacy was suggested with a robust reduction in depression severity scores from baseline to posttreatment of 19.1 points (95% CI, 22.3 to -16.0; p < .0001) by week 8. Eighty percent of participants demonstrated a sustained response to psilocybin treatment; 50% showed full remission of depressive symptoms at week 1, which was sustained for 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Psilocybin-assisted therapy in group cohort administration was safe and feasible in patients with cancer and depression. Efficacy was suggested based on clinically meaningful reductions in depressive symptoms. The novel, group-oriented format, compact delivery time, community cancer center setting, and one-to-one therapist-to-patient ratio could also add to therapeutic gains and efficiency of administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04593563. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Depression is common in patients with cancer and associated with lower treatment adherence, reduced quality of life, and limited response to antidepressants and psychotherapy. We conducted a phase 2 trial to study a single dose of psilocybin administered in a group therapy setting with one-to-one therapist-to-participant psychological support to patients with curable and noncurable cancer and major depressive disorder. Findings of the study showed safety (no treatment-related serious adverse events or suicidality) with psilocybin and suggested efficacy, with a significant reduction in depression severity scores from baseline to posttreatment. Further investigation is warranted.

Trial of Psilocybin versus Escitalopram for Depression.

BACKGROUND: Psilocybin may have antidepressant properties, but direct comparisons between psilocybin and established treatments for depression are lacking. METHODS: In a phase 2, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with long-standing, moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder, we compared psilocybin with escitalopram, a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor, over a 6-week period. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive two separate doses of 25 mg of psilocybin 3 weeks apart plus 6 weeks of daily placebo (psilocybin group) or two separate doses of 1 mg of psilocybin 3 weeks apart plus 6 weeks of daily oral escitalopram (escitalopram group); all the patients received psychological support. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the score on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR-16; scores range from 0 to 27, with higher scores indicating greater depression) at week 6. There were 16 secondary outcomes, including QIDS-SR-16 response (defined as a reduction in score of >50%) and QIDS-SR-16 remission (defined as a score of ≤5) at week 6. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients were enrolled; 30 were assigned to the psilocybin group and 29 to the escitalopram group. The mean scores on the QIDS-SR-16 at baseline were 14.5 in the psilocybin group and 16.4 in the escitalopram group. The mean (±SE) changes in the scores from baseline to week 6 were -8.0±1.0 points in the psilocybin group and -6.0±1.0 in the escitalopram group, for a between-group difference of 2.0 points (95% confidence interval [CI], -5.0 to 0.9) (P = 0.17). A QIDS-SR-16 response occurred in 70% of the patients in the psilocybin group and in 48% of those in the escitalopram group, for a between-group difference of 22 percentage points (95% CI, -3 to 48); QIDS-SR-16 remission occurred in 57% and 28%, respectively, for a between-group difference of 28 percentage points (95% CI, 2 to 54). Other secondary outcomes generally favored psilocybin over escitalopram, but the analyses were not corrected for multiple comparisons. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the trial groups. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the change in depression scores on the QIDS-SR-16 at week 6, this trial did not show a significant difference in antidepressant effects between psilocybin and escitalopram in a selected group of patients. Secondary outcomes generally favored psilocybin over escitalopram, but the analyses of these outcomes lacked correction for multiple comparisons. Larger and longer trials are required to compare psilocybin with established antidepressants. (Funded by the Alexander Mosley Charitable Trust and Imperial College London's Centre for Psychedelic Research; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03429075.).

Maintenance or Discontinuation of Antidepressants in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Patients with depression who are treated in primary care practices may receive antidepressants for prolonged periods. Data are limited on the effects of maintaining or discontinuing antidepressant therapy in this setting. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial involving adults who were being treated in 150 general practices in the United Kingdom. All the patients had a history of at least two depressive episodes or had been taking antidepressants for 2 years or longer and felt well enough to consider stopping antidepressants. Patients who had received citalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, or mirtazapine were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to maintain their current antidepressant therapy (maintenance group) or to taper and discontinue such therapy with the use of matching placebo (discontinuation group). The primary outcome was the first relapse of depression during the 52-week trial period, as evaluated in a time-to-event analysis. Secondary outcomes were depressive and anxiety symptoms, physical and withdrawal symptoms, quality of life, time to stopping an antidepressant or placebo, and global mood ratings. RESULTS: A total of 1466 patients underwent screening. Of these patients, 478 were enrolled in the trial (238 in the maintenance group and 240 in the discontinuation group). The average age of the patients was 54 years; 73% were women. Adherence to the trial assignment was 70% in the maintenance group and 52% in the discontinuation group. By 52 weeks, relapse occurred in 92 of 238 patients (39%) in the maintenance group and in 135 of 240 (56%) in the discontinuation group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.56 to 2.70; P<0.001). Secondary outcomes were generally in the same direction as the primary outcome. Patients in the discontinuation group had more symptoms of depression, anxiety, and withdrawal than those in the maintenance group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in primary care practices who felt well enough to discontinue antidepressant therapy, those who were assigned to stop their medication had a higher risk of relapse of depression by 52 weeks than those who were assigned to maintain their current therapy. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; ANTLER ISRCTN number, ISRCTN15969819.).

Metabolic bioactivation of antidepressants: advance and underlying hepatotoxicity.

Many drugs that serve as first-line medications for the treatment of depression are associated with severe side effects, including liver injury. Of the 34 antidepressants discussed in this review, four have been withdrawn from the market due to severe hepatotoxicity, and others carry boxed warnings for idiosyncratic liver toxicity. The clinical and economic implications of antidepressant-induced liver injury are substantial, but the underlying mechanisms remain elusive. Drug-induced liver injury may involve the host immune system, the parent drug, or its metabolites, and reactive drug metabolites are one of the most commonly referenced risk factors. Although the precise mechanism by which toxicity is induced may be difficult to determine, identifying reactive metabolites that cause toxicity can offer valuable insights for decreasing the bioactivation potential of candidates during the drug discovery process. A comprehensive understanding of drug metabolic pathways can mitigate adverse drug-drug interactions that may be caused by elevated formation of reactive metabolites. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on antidepressant bioactivation, the metabolizing enzymes responsible for the formation of reactive metabolites, and their potential implication in hepatotoxicity. This information can be a valuable resource for medicinal chemists, toxicologists, and clinicians engaged in the fields of antidepressant development, toxicity, and depression treatment.

Deprescribing of antidepressants: development of indicators of high-risk and overprescribing using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants are first-line medications for many psychiatric disorders. However, their widespread long-term use in some indications (e.g., mild depression and insomnia) is concerning. Particularly in older adults with comorbidities and polypharmacy, who are more susceptible to adverse drug reactions, the risks and benefits of treatment should be regularly reviewed. The aim of this consensus process was to identify explicit criteria of potentially inappropriate antidepressant use (indicators) in order to support primary care clinicians in identifying situations, where deprescribing of antidepressants should be considered. METHODS: We used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to identify the indicators of high-risk and overprescribing of antidepressants. We combined a structured literature review with a 3-round expert panel, with results discussed in moderated meetings in between rounds. Each of the 282 candidate indicators was scored on a 9-point Likert scale representing the necessity of a critical review of antidepressant continuation (1-3 = not necessary; 4-6 = uncertain; 7-9 = clearly necessary). Experts rated the indicators for the necessity of review, since decisions to deprescribe require considerations of patient risk/benefit balance and preferences. Indicators with a median necessity rating of ≥ 7 without disagreement after 3 rating rounds were accepted. RESULTS: The expert panel comprised 2 general practitioners, 2 clinical pharmacologists, 1 gerontopsychiatrist, 2 psychiatrists, and 3 internists/geriatricians (total N = 10). After 3 assessment rounds, there was consensus for 37 indicators of high-risk and 25 indicators of overprescribing, where critical reviews were felt to be necessary. High-risk prescribing indicators included settings posing risks of drug-drug, drug-disease, and drug-age interactions or the occurrence of adverse drug reactions. Indicators with the highest ratings included those suggesting the possibility of cardiovascular risks (QTc prolongation), delirium, gastrointestinal bleeding, and liver injury in specific patient subgroups with additional risk factors. Overprescribing indicators target patients with long treatment durations for depression, anxiety, and insomnia as well as high doses for pain and insomnia. CONCLUSIONS: Explicit indicators of antidepressant high-risk and overprescribing may be used directly by patients and health care providers, and integrated within clinical decision support tools, in order to improve the overall risk/benefit balance of this commonly prescribed class of prescription drugs.

Ketamine Produces Antidepressant Effects by Inhibiting Histone Deacetylases and Upregulating Hippocampal Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in a Diisopropyl Fluorophosphate-Based Rat Model of Gulf War Illness.

Approximately one-third of Gulf War veterans suffer from Gulf War Illness (GWI), which encompasses mood disorders and depressive symptoms. Deployment-related exposure to organophosphate compounds has been associated with GWI development. Epigenetic modifications have been reported in GWI veterans. We previously showed that epigenetic histone dysregulations were associated with decreased brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) expression in a GWI rat model. GWI has no effective therapies. Ketamine (KET) has recently been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for therapy-resistant depression. Interestingly, BDNF upregulation underlies KET's antidepressant effect in GWI-related depression. Here, we investigated whether KET's effect on histone mechanisms signals BDNF upregulations in GWI. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were injected once daily with diisopropyl fluorophosphate (DFP; 0.5 mg/kg, s.c., 5 days). At 6 months following DFP exposure, KET (10 mg/kg, i.p.) was injected, and brains were dissected 24 hours later. Western blotting was used for protein expression, and epigenetic studies used chromatin immunoprecipitation methods. Dil staining was conducted for assessing dendritic spines. Our results indicated that an antidepressant dose of KET inhibited the upregulation of histone deacetylase (HDAC) enzymes in DFP rats. Furthermore, KET restored acetylated histone occupancy at the Bdnf promoter IV and induced BDNF protein expression in DFP rats. Finally, KET treatment also increased the spine density and altered the spine diversity with increased T-type and decreased S-type spines in DFP rats. Given these findings, we propose that KET's actions involve the inhibition of HDAC expression, upregulation of BDNF, and dendritic modifications that together ameliorates the pathologic synaptic plasticity and exerts an antidepressant effect in DFP rats. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This study offers evidence supporting the involvement of epigenetic histone pathways in the antidepressant effects of ketamine (KET) in a rat model of Gulf War Illness (GWI)-like depression. This effect is achieved through the modulation of histone acetylation at the Bdnf promoter, resulting in elevated brain-derived neurotrophic factor expression and subsequent dendritic remodeling in the hippocampus. These findings underscore the rationale for considering KET as a potential candidate for clinical trials aimed at managing GWI-related depression.

The relationship between antidepressants and breast cancer: evidence from Mendelian randomization.

BACKGROUND: The use of antidepressants has increased over the years, but the relationship between antidepressant use and the risk of breast cancer is not uniform because of confounding factors. We aimed to assess the effect of antidepressants on breast cancer risk using a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach.stet METHODS: Secondary data analysis was performed on pooled data from genome-wide association studies based on single-nucleotide polymorphisms that were highly correlated with antidepressants, SSRI drugs, and serotonin and prolactin levels were selected as instrumental variables to evaluate the association between antidepressants and SSRI drugs and prolactin levels with breast cancer and ER+/ER- breast cancer. We then performed a test of the hypothesis that SSRI drugs elevate prolactin concentrations. We performed two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses using inverse variance weighting, MR-Egger regression, and weighted median methods, respectively. RESULTS: There was no significant risk association between antidepressant and SSRI use and the development of breast cancer, ER-positive or ER-negative breast cancer (P > 0.05), and serotonin concentration was not associated with breast cancer risk (P > 0.05). There was a positive causal relationship between prolactin levels and breast cancer (IVW, P = 0.02, OR = 1.058) and ER-positive breast cancer (Weighted median, P = 0.043, OR = 1.141; IVW, P = 0.009, OR = 1.125). Results in SSRI medication and prolactin levels showed no association between SSRI analogs and prolactin levels (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Large MR analysis showed that antidepressants as well as SSRI drugs were not associated with breast cancer risk and the SSRI-prolactin-breast cancer hypothesis did not hold in our analysis.

Isolated central hypothyroidism: Underlying pathophysiology and relation to antidepressant and antipsychotic medications-A multi-centre South Wales study.

OBJECTIVE: Isolated biochemical central hypothyroidism is a presentation we are experiencing more frequently as endocrinologists, with variation in levels of investigation between physicians. We therefore conducted research to investigate the final diagnosis and clinical outcome of patients across multiple hospitals in South Wales with biochemical isolated central hypothyroidism; namely to establish whether this isolated biochemical picture was clinically significant. We also analysed whether there is an association between this biochemical picture and treatment with antidepressant and antipsychotic medications, and how common this is. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective observational study of patients across nine different hospitals in South Wales. We analysed patients referred to endocrinology at each site over a 6-year period with unexplained isolated biochemical central hypothyroidism. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: 1022 individual patients' thyroid function test results were identified from our biochemical database using our inclusion criteria. After exclusion criteria were applied, 71 patients' results were analysed as to the final pathophysiology of their central hypothyroidism. RESULT: Of the 71 patients included in the study, none were found to have any clinically significant pathology on pituitary imaging. On reviewing their medications, 46/71 (65%) were found to be taking psychotropic medications. CONCLUSIONS: Our study strongly suggests isolated central hypothyroidism, in the absence of other pituitary hormone dysfunction or visual field defect, does not require further investigation, saving resources as well as sparing patients unnecessary anxiety. It also strongly supports a relationship between patients taking psychotropic medications and biochemical isolated central hypothyroidism, an association only described in a very limited amount of literature before this, and further supporting our previous single-centre study findings. The mechanism behind this is likely to be the suppression of thyrotropin secretion via antagonism of the dopamine-serotoninergic pathway. In our opinion, patients found to have isolated biochemical central hypothyroidism who are taking psychotropic medications can therefore be regarded to have a recognised cause for this biochemical finding and do not require further radiological investigation.

Emotional Blunting in Depression in the PREDDICT Clinical Trial: Inflammation-Stratified Augmentation of Vortioxetine With Celecoxib.

BACKGROUND: Emotional symptoms are recognized as a key feature in individuals with major depressive disorder. Previously, emotional blunting has been described both as a side effect of antidepressant treatment and as a symptom of depression. Little is known about the change of emotional blunting during antidepressant treatment. METHODS: The PREDDICT trial is a randomized, placebo-controlled, 6-week trial on the augmentation of vortioxetine with the anti-inflammatory agent celecoxib or placebo. Presently we report on exploratory secondary outcomes of changes in emotional blunting in depression assessed with the Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ) total score and subscores from baseline to 8-week, 3-month, and 6-month follow-up assessments. RESULTS: In the whole group, there was a significant improvement in the ODQ total score and all subscores after 8 weeks. After stratification of participants into the treatment groups, the ODQ total score as well as subscores related to emotional blunting as a symptom of depression (reduction in positive emotions, not caring) improved between baseline and all follow-up time points in both treatment groups. Changes in subscores considered as a side effect of antidepressants (general reduction in emotions, emotional detachment) were inconclusive in both treatment groups. Overall, the placebo-augmented group showed slightly better results in changes of emotional blunting scores than the celecoxib group as did those with elevated inflammation at screening, regardless of treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests favorable effects of vortioxetine on emotional blunting in both short- and long-term course. The beneficial impact of vortioxetine on emotional blunting was weaker in celecoxib-augmented patients compared with placebo, possibly due to pharmacokinetic interactions. Clinical Trials Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12617000527369p. Registered on 11 April 2017, http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12617000527369p.

Is combined antidepressant medication (ADM) and psychotherapy better than either monotherapy at preventing suicide attempts and other psychiatric serious adverse events for depressed patients? A rare events meta-analysis.

Antidepressant medication (ADM)-only, psychotherapy-only, and their combination are the first-line treatment options for major depressive disorder (MDD). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) established that psychotherapy and combined treatment were superior to ADM-only for MDD treatment remission or response. The current meta-analysis extended previous ones by determining the comparative efficacy of ADM-only, psychotherapy-only, and combined treatment on suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events (i.e. psychiatric emergency department [ED] visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death; SAEs). Peto odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals were computed from the present random-effects meta-analysis. Thirty-four relevant RCTs were included. Psychotherapy-only was stronger than combined treatment (1.9% v. 3.7%; OR 1.96 [1.20-3.20], p = 0.012) and ADM-only (3.0% v. 5.6%; OR 0.45 [0.30-0.67], p = 0.001) in decreasing the likelihood of SAEs in the primary and trim-and-fill sensitivity analyses. Combined treatment was better than ADM-only in reducing the probability of SAEs (6.0% v. 8.7%; OR 0.74 [0.56-0.96], p = 0.029), but this comparative efficacy finding was non-significant in the sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses revealed the advantage of psychotherapy-only over combined treatment and ADM-only for reducing SAE risk among children and adolescents and the benefit of combined treatment over ADM-only among adults. Overall, psychotherapy and combined treatment outperformed ADM-only in reducing the likelihood of SAEs, perhaps by conferring strategies to enhance reasons for living. Plausibly, psychotherapy should be prioritized for high-risk youths and combined treatment for high-risk adults with MDD.

The role of exercise in the treatment of depression: biological underpinnings and clinical outcomes.

Globally, depression is a leading cause of disability and has remained so for decades. Antidepressant medications have suboptimal outcomes and are too frequently associated with side effects, highlighting the need for alternative treatment options. Although primarily known for its robust physical health benefits, exercise is increasingly recognized for its mental health and antidepressant benefits. Empirical evidence indicates that exercise is effective in treating individuals with depression; however, the mechanisms by which exercise exerts anti-depressant effects are not fully understood. Acute bouts of exercise have been shown to transiently modulate circulating levels of serotonin and norepinephrine, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, and a variety of immuno-inflammatory mechanisms in clinical cohorts with depression. However, exercise training has not been demonstrated to consistently modulate such mechanisms, and evidence linking these putative mechanisms and reductions in depression is lacking. The complexity of the biological underpinnings of depression coupled with the intricate molecular cascade induced by exercise are significant obstacles in the attempt to disentangle exercise's effects on depression. Notwithstanding our limited understanding of these effects, clinical evidence uniformly argues for the use of exercise to treat depression. Regrettably, exercise remains underutilized despite being an accessible, low-cost alternative/adjunctive intervention that can simultaneously reduce depression and improve overall health. To address the gaps in our understanding of the clinical and molecular effects of exercise on depression, we propose a model that leverages systems biology and multidisciplinary team science with a large-scale public health investment. Until the science matches the scale of complexity and burden posed by depression, our ability to advance knowledge and treatment will continue to be plagued by fragmented, irreproducible mechanistic findings and no guidelines for standards of care.

Concurrent administration of serotonergic antidepressants and ozanimod in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis from the open-label extension DAYBREAK trial.

BACKGROUND: Monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors can interact with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). There is clinical interest surrounding use of ozanimod with SSRIs/SNRIs because the major metabolites of ozanimod are weak inhibitors of MAO-B in vitro. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) potentially related to serotonin accumulation (SA) during concomitant ozanimod and SSRI/SNRI use by performing analyses of data from an open-label, oral ozanimod 0.92 mg trial (DAYBREAK; NCT02576717). METHODS: SA narrow (serotonin syndrome, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, and hyperthermia malignant) and broad (terms potentially associated with SA) MedDRA v24.0 searches were performed using TEAE data from participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis who entered DAYBREAK from phase 3 studies (cutoff February 1, 2022). Incidences of TEAEs matching terms from each search were stratified by SSRI/SNRI use. RESULTS: Of 2257 DAYBREAK participants, 274 (12.1%) used an SSRI/SNRI. No participants had TEAEs matching the SA narrow search terms. There was no significant difference in the percentage of participants with ⩾1 TEAE matching the SA broad search for those on versus off SSRIs/SNRIs (on: 12.4%, n = 34/274; off: 15.6%, n = 310/1982, nominal p = 0.1630). CONCLUSION: MedDRA searches showed no increase in TEAEs potentially associated with SA with concomitant SSRI/SNRI and ozanimod use.

Drugs associated with reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome: A pharmacovigilance study in vigiBase®.

BACKGROUND: Data on drug-induced reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS) are scarce. We aimed to describe RCVS characteristics with drugs previously identified as associated with RCVS and investigate potential signals related to other drugs. METHODS: VigiBase® was queried for all reports of RCVS until 31 May 2023. A descriptive study was performed on reports concerning drug classes known to precipitate RCVS. To identify new drugs, a disproportionality analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 560 reports were included. RCVS occurred in patients aged between 45-64 years (40%) and 18-44 years (35%), mainly in females (72.5%). Drugs were antidepressants (38.4%), triptans (6.4%), nasal decongestants (3.7%) and immunosupressants (8.7%). In 50 cases, antidepressants were in association with drugs known to precipitate RCVS. The median time to onset was 195 days for antidepressants and much shorter (1-10 days) for triptans, nasal decongestants and immunosuppressants. The outcome was favorable in 87% of cases, and fatal in 4.4%. We found a disproportionality signal with 14 drugs: glucocorticoids, bupropion, varenicline, mycophenolic acid, aripiprazole, trazodone, monoclonal antibodies (erenumab, ustekinumab and tocilizumab), leuprorelin and anastrozole. CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirms the role of vasoconstrictors in the onset of RCVS, particularly when used in combination and found potential signals, which may help clinicians envisage an iatrogenic etiology of RCVS.