Clinical features of depression in outpatients with and without co-occurring general medical conditions in STAR*D: confirmatory analysis.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent medical comorbidity influences the accurate diagnosis and treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to validate previous findings from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study using a confirmation analysis in a previously unanalyzed cohort. DESIGN: Baseline cross-sectional case-control study of patients enrolling in a prospective randomized multistage treatment study of nonpsychotic MDD. SETTING: Fourteen regional U.S. centers representing 18 primary care and 23 psychiatric practices. PARTICIPANTS: 2541 outpatients with DSM-IV nonpsychotic MDD. MEASUREMENTS: Sociodemographic status, medical illness ratings, psychiatric status, quality of life, and DSM-IV depression symptom ratings. RESULTS: The prevalence of significant general medical comorbidity in this population was 50.0% (95% CI = 48.1% to 52.0%), consistent with findings reported for the first cohort. Concurrent significant medical comorbidity was associated with older age, lower income, unemployment, limited education, and longer duration of index depressive episode. The group with significant medical comorbidity reported higher rates of somatic symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, sympathetic arousal, and leaden paralysis. These results were generally consistent between the 2 cohorts from STAR*D. CONCLUSIONS: Major depressive disorder with concurrent general medical conditions is associated with a specific sociodemographic profile and pattern of depressive symptoms. This association has implications for diagnosis and clinical care.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Exercise to Health Education for Stimulant Use Disorder: Results From the CTN-0037 STimulant Reduction Intervention Using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE) Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate exercise as a treatment for stimulant use disorders. METHODS: The STimulant Reduction Intervention using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE) study was a randomized clinical trial conducted in 9 residential addiction treatment programs across the United States from July 2010 to February 2013. Of 497 adults referred to the study, 302 met all eligibility criteria, including DSM-IV criteria for stimulant abuse and/or dependence, and were randomized to either a dosed exercise intervention (Exercise) or a health education intervention (Health Education) control, both augmenting treatment as usual and conducted thrice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary outcome of percent stimulant abstinent days during study weeks 4 to 12 was estimated using a novel algorithm adjustment incorporating self-reported Timeline Followback (TLFB) stimulant use and urine drug screen (UDS) data. RESULTS: Mean percent of abstinent days based on TLFB was 90.8% (SD = 16.4%) for Exercise and 91.6% (SD = 14.7%) for Health Education participants. Percent of abstinent days using the eliminate contradiction (ELCON) algorithm was 75.6% (SD = 27.4%) for Exercise and 77.3% (SD = 25.1%) for Health Education. The primary intent-to-treat analysis, using a mixed model controlling for site and the ELCON algorithm, produced no treatment effect (P = .60). In post hoc analyses controlling for treatment adherence and baseline stimulant use, Exercise participants had a 4.8% higher abstinence rate (78.7%) compared to Health Education participants (73.9%) (P = .03, number needed to treat = 7.2). CONCLUSIONS: The primary analysis indicated no significant difference between exercise and health education. Adjustment for intervention adherence showed modestly but significantly higher percent of abstinent days in the exercise group, suggesting that exercise may improve outcomes for stimulant users who have better adherence to an exercise dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01141608.

Evaluation of outcomes with citalopram for depression using measurement-based care in STAR*D: implications for clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are widely used to treat depression, but the rates, timing, and baseline predictors of remission in "real world" patients are not established. The authors' primary objectives in this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of citalopram, an SSRI, using measurement-based care in actual practice, and to identify predictors of symptom remission in outpatients with major depressive disorder. METHOD: This clinical study included outpatients with major depressive disorder who were treated in 23 psychiatric and 18 primary care "real world" settings. The patients received flexible doses of citalopram prescribed by clinicians for up to 14 weeks. The clinicians were assisted by a clinical research coordinator in the application of measurement-based care, which included the routine measurement of symptoms and side effects at each treatment visit and the use of a treatment manual that described when and how to modify medication doses based on these measures. Remission was defined as an exit score of or=50% in baseline QIDS-SR score. RESULTS: Nearly 80% of the 2,876 outpatients in the analyzed sample had chronic or recurrent major depression; most also had a number of comorbid general medical and psychiatric conditions. The mean exit citalopram dose was 41.8 mg/day. Remission rates were 28% (HAM-D) and 33% (QIDS-SR). The response rate was 47% (QIDS-SR). Patients in primary and psychiatric care settings did not differ in remission or response rates. A substantial portion of participants who achieved either response or remission at study exit did so at or after 8 weeks of treatment. Participants who were Caucasian, female, employed, or had higher levels of education or income had higher HAM-D remission rates; longer index episodes, more concurrent psychiatric disorders (especially anxiety disorders or drug abuse), more general medical disorders, and lower baseline function and quality of life were associated with lower HAM-D remission rates. CONCLUSIONS: The response and remission rates in this highly generalizable sample with substantial axis I and axis III comorbidity closely resemble those seen in 8-week efficacy trials. The systematic use of easily implemented measurement-based care procedures may have assisted in achieving these results.

Adherence to antidepressant combinations and monotherapy for major depressive disorder: a CO-MED report of measurement-based care.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to antidepressant treatment is not routinely measured in practical clinical trials. It has not been related to outcomes in a large sample of adults with chronic and/or recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) or any sample treated with antidepressant combinations. METHODS: Adult outpatients with chronic and/or recurrent MDD were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with bupropion-SR plus escitalopram, venlafaxine-XR plus mirtazapine, or escitalopram plus placebo. We compared non-adherence (the frequency with which daily medications were not taken) and specifically the frequency of temporarily stopping and/or skipping medication, or reducing or increasing the dose across treatments in 567 participants using a self-report questionnaire collected at each visit. We tested the association between non-adherence, and both treatment type and outcomes. RESULTS: A non-adherence rate under 10% was reported by 77.9%, 70.9%, and 71.6% of participants during weeks 1-4, 5-12, and 1-12, respectively. Antidepressant combinations were associated with a higher non-adherence rate than monotherapy during weeks 1-4 and 1-12. During weeks 1-4, 24.1% stopped/skipped doses and 6.1% reduced the dose. During weeks 5-12, 34.7% stopped/skipped doses and 9.4% reduced the dose. Across 12 weeks, 43.2% stopped/skipped doses, and 12.9% reduced the dose. Stopping/skipping doses during all time frames and dose decreases during weeks 1-12 occurred most frequently with combination treatments. Non-adherence was unrelated to symptom remission, response, or symptom change. CONCLUSIONS: With closely monitored treatment, non-adherence is low and unrelated to depressive symptom outcome. Nonadherence is highest with antidepressant combinations. Specific non-adherent events are most often sporadic.

Major depression and treatment response in adolescents with ADHD and substance use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) frequently co-occurs in adolescents with substance use disorders (SUDs) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but the impact of MDD on substance treatment and ADHD outcomes and implications for clinical practice are unclear. METHODS: Adolescents (n=303; ages 13-18) meeting DSM-IV criteria for ADHD and SUD were randomized to osmotic release methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) or placebo and 16 weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Adolescents with (n=38) and without (n=265) MDD were compared on baseline demographic and clinical characteristics as well as non-nicotine substance use and ADHD treatment outcomes. RESULTS: Adolescents with MDD reported more non-nicotine substance use days at baseline and continued using more throughout treatment compared to those without MDD (p<0.0001 based on timeline followback; p<0.001 based on urine drug screens). There was no difference between adolescents with and without MDD in retention or CBT sessions attended. ADHD symptom severity (based on DSM-IV ADHD rating scale) followed a slightly different course of improvement although with no difference between groups in baseline or 16-week symptom severity or 16-week symptom reduction. There was no difference in days of substance use or ADHD symptom outcomes over time in adolescents with MDD or those without MDD treated with OROS-MPH or placebo. Depressed adolescents were more often female, older, and not court ordered. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings suggest that compared to non-depressed adolescents with ADHD and SUD, those with co-occurring MDD have more severe substance use at baseline and throughout treatment. Such youth may require interventions targeting depression.

What did STAR*D teach us? Results from a large-scale, practical, clinical trial for patients with depression.

The authors provide an overview of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study (www.star-d.org), a large-scale practical clinical trial to determine which of several treatments are the most effective "next-steps" for patients with major depressive disorder whose symptoms do not remit or who cannot tolerate an initial treatment and, if needed, ensuing treatments. Entry criteria were broadly defined and inclusive, and patients were enrolled from psychiatric and primary care clinics. All participants began on citalopram and were managed by clinic physicians, who followed an algorithm-guided acute-phase treatment through five visits over 12 weeks. At the end of each sequence, patients whose depression had not fully remitted were eligible for subsequent randomized trials in a sequence of up to three clinical trials. In general, remission rates in the study clinics were lower than expected, suggesting the need for several steps to achieve remission for most patients. There was no clear medication "winner" for patients whose depression did not remit after one or more aggressive medication trials. Both switching and augmenting appeared to be reasonable options when an initial antidepressant treatment failed, although these two strategies could not be directly compared. Further, the likelihood of remission after two vigorous medication trials substantially decreased, and remission would likely require more complicated medication regimens for which the existing evidence base is quite thin. STAR*D demonstrated that inclusion of more real-world patients in clinical trials is both feasible and informative. Policy implications of the findings, as well as the study's limitations, are discussed.