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.).

Impacts of X-linked Retinitis Pigmentosa and Patient Pathways in European Countries: Results from the Cross-sectional EXPLORE XLRP-1 Physician Survey.

INTRODUCTION: X-linked retinitis pigmentosa (XLRP) is a rare, incurable, vision-threatening, genetic disease. In this study, we aimed to reveal the real-world burden of this disease from the viewpoint of retina specialists and geneticists involved directly in XLRP care and to identify unique insights that may not otherwise be available through typical clinical studies or health economic research. METHODS: In this exploratory, cross-sectional study (EXPLORE XLRP-1), retina specialists (n = 20) and geneticists (n = 5) in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK provided anonymized insights on their experiences managing patients with XLRP (n = 80) via an online survey and 60-min telephone interview. RESULTS: Survey respondents reported that patient independence decreased over time, where 37% of patients were considered "completely autonomous" at diagnosis versus 23% at the last consultation. At their last visit, 45% of patients were active in the workforce; 67% (12/18) of "completely autonomous" patients had active working status compared with 13% (1/8) of "completely dependent" patients. The average time from onset of symptoms to diagnosis was 4 years and varied among countries. In 78% of patients, XLRP was confirmed by genetic testing, the rate of which varied among countries (range, 50-94%), taking up to 6 months to receive results. Specialists identified unmet needs in XLRP management including more standardized assessments of quality of life (QoL) as well as easier and earlier access to specialists, genetic testing, patient support programs, and effective treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis, genetic testing, and management pathways among patients with XLRP can vary considerably. There is a need for more standardized diagnosis and management pathways, and QoL assessments, due to the major impact that XLRP has on patients' lives.

Treatment-Resistant Depression in Real-World Clinical Practice: A Systematic Literature Review of Data from 2012 to 2022.

OBJECTIVE: Real-world evidence in treatment-resistant depression (TRD; commonly defined as non-response to ≥ 2 consecutive treatments at adequate dosage and duration) is lacking. A systematic literature review was conducted to understand disease burden and treatment outcomes for patients with TRD, studied in a real-world setting over the last decade. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted in May 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Libraries and PsycINFO, comprising studies published from 2012 to 2022. Bibliographies of all relevant identified systematic reviews and relevant conference proceedings from 2020 to 2022 were manually hand-searched. STUDY SELECTION: Real-world studies, including cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, chart review and registry studies, published in English and reporting outcomes in adults with TRD, were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Extracted data included study and baseline disease characteristics, treatment type, treatment response, clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included. Criteria for TRD varied, but patients typically experienced long-lasting depression (range 1.4 to 16.5 years). Across studies, mean disease severity scores demonstrated moderate to severe depression, reflecting a high burden of disease at baseline. Remission rates were typically low but generally increased with longer follow-up durations. However, the heterogeneity of interventions, follow-up durations (range 2 weeks to 9.4 years) and assessment tools precluded their quantitative synthesis. Studies were frequently limited by low sample size (range 14 to 411 patients) and health-related quality of life was infrequently assessed. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of clinical consensus regarding the definition, assessment and monitoring of TRD in real-world practice. Nevertheless, TRD carries a high burden of illness and there is an unmet need for faster and more effective treatments. To better understand the personal burden of affected patients, future studies would benefit from standardisation of severity assessment and measures of treatment effectiveness, as well as greater consideration of health-related quality of life.

Many people continue to experience depression even after trying two or more medications. This is called treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Most of the information we have on TRD comes from clinical trials, which take place under tightly-controlled conditions. It is important to understand the effects of TRD and TRD treatments on people in their day-to-day lives. Researchers studying people's day-to-day lives call this researching in a "real-world setting". We searched for studies carried out in real-world settings in the last 10 years. We found 20 relevant studies. As these studies were in real-world settings, there were many differences between them, including differences in how TRD was diagnosed, the treatments used, how long people were monitored and how results were measured. This made it difficult to compare how successful different treatments were. Most studies included a small number of people and monitored them for a relatively short time. We found people with TRD had usually lived with it for many years and their symptoms were moderate or severe. Only two studies asked people how TRD affected their lives. These two studies found health-related quality of life and work productivity was low. Most studies found lots of people still had symptoms of depression after treatment. However, symptoms typically improved more when studies monitored people for a longer time. To improve our knowledge of TRD, future studies should monitor more people for longer and use the same ways of measuring results. They should also ask how TRD affects people's daily lives.