Comparative effectiveness research trial for antidepressant incomplete and non-responders with treatment resistant depression (ASCERTAIN-TRD) a randomized clinical trial.

Further research is needed to help improve both the standard of care and the outcome for patients with treatment-resistant depression. A particularly critical evidence gap exists with respect to whether pharmacological or non-pharmacological augmentation is superior to antidepressant switch, or vice-versa. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of augmentation with aripiprazole or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation versus switching to the antidepressant venlafaxine XR (or duloxetine for those not eligible to receive venlafaxine) for treatment-resistant depression. In this multi-site, 8-week, randomized, open-label study, 278 subjects (196 females and 82 males, mean age 45.6 years (SD 15.3)) with treatment-resistant depression were assigned in a 1:1:1 fashion to treatment with either of these three interventions; 235 subjects completed the study. 260 randomized subjects with at least one post-baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating (MADRS) assessment were included in the analysis. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (score change (standard error (se)) = -17.39 (1.3) (p = 0.015) but not aripiprazole augmentation (score change (se) = -14.9 (1.1) (p = 0.069) was superior to switch (score change (se) = -13.22 (1.1)) on the MADRS. Aripiprazole (mean change (se) = -37.79 (2.9) (p = 0.003) but not repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation (mean change (se) = -42.96 (3.6) (p = 0.031) was superior to switch (mean change (se) = -34.45 (3.0)) on the symptoms of depression questionnaire. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation was shown to be more effective than switching antidepressants in treatment-resistant depression on the study primary measure. In light of these findings, clinicians should consider repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation early-on for treatment-resistant depression.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02977299.

Strong associations of telomere length and mitochondrial copy number with suicidality and abuse history in adolescent depressed individuals.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is highly prevalent in adolescents and is a major risk factor for suicidality. Recent evidence shows that accelerated cellular senescence/aging is associated with psychiatric illness, including depression, in adults. The present study examined if the relationships of telomere length (TL) and mitochondrial DNA copy number (mtDNAcn), two critical indicators of cellular senescence/aging, are altered in depressed adolescents and whether these alterations are associated with suicidality, early-life adversities, and other co-occuring factors. In genomic DNA isolated from 53 adolescents (ages 16-19, 19 MDD with suicide attempt/suicidal ideation [MDD + SI/SA], 14 MDD without SA/SI [MDD-SI/SA], and 20 healthy controls [HC]), TL and mtDNAcn were measured as the ratio between the number of telomere repeats and that of a single-copy nuclear-hemoglobin [HBG] gene or the amount of mtDNA (NADH dehydrogenase, subunit 1) relative to HBG. Our data show that TL was significantly lower, and mtDNAcn was significantly higher in the total MDD group than HC. TL was significantly lower and mtDNAcn was significantly higher in the MDD + SA/SI group than in the HC, whereas there were no differences in the MDD-SI/SA group. TL was positively correlated with mtDNAcn in both HC and MDD-SA/SI groups; however, TL was negatively correlated with mtDNAcn in MDD + SA/SI. Furthermore, TL was negatively correlated with the severity of both depression and anxiety, while mtDNAcn was positively correlated with the severity of prior emotional abuse. Our study indicates that cellular senescence is more advanced in depressed adolescents with suicidal ideation and that childhood emotional abuse may participate in such a process.

A Delphi-method-based consensus guideline for definition of treatment-resistant depression for clinical trials.

Criteria for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and partially responsive depression (PRD) as subtypes of major depressive disorder (MDD) are not unequivocally defined. In the present document we used a Delphi-method-based consensus approach to define TRD and PRD and to serve as operational criteria for future clinical studies, especially if conducted for regulatory purposes. We reviewed the literature and brought together a group of international experts (including clinicians, academics, researchers, employees of pharmaceutical companies, regulatory bodies representatives, and one person with lived experience) to evaluate the state-of-the-art and main controversies regarding the current classification. We then provided recommendations on how to design clinical trials, and on how to guide research in unmet needs and knowledge gaps. This report will feed into one of the main objectives of the EUropean Patient-cEntric clinicAl tRial pLatforms, Innovative Medicines Initiative (EU-PEARL, IMI) MDD project, to design a protocol for platform trials of new medications for TRD/PRD.

Lithium plus antipsychotics or anticonvulsants for bipolar disorder: Comparing clinical response and metabolic changes.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with bipolar disorder treated with lithium often require additional antipsychotics or anticonvulsants. However, the comparative effectiveness and safety of these agents as add-on to lithium has not been studied. METHODS: This secondary analysis combined two similar 24-week trials on outpatients with bipolar disorder randomized to lithium (target serum level 0.4-0.6 mEq/L). Guideline-based adjunctive antipsychotics (Li+AP) and anticonvulsants (Li+AC) could be used if clinically indicated and was assessed at every study visit. Response was measured on the Clinical Global Impression scale and we performed adjusted mixed effects linear regression analyses. Analysis of variance tests compared metabolic measures including a binary diagnosis of metabolic syndrome before and after 24 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Among 379 outpatients (57% female, mean age 38 years, mean Clinical Global Impression 4.4), users of Li+AP (N = 50, primarily quetiapine and aripiprazole) improved to a similar degree (mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.6, standard deviation = 1.5) as those using lithium-only (i.e. without adjunctive antipsychotics or anticonvulsants, N = 149, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.7, standard deviation = 1.4) (p = 0.59). Users of Li+AC (N = 107, primarily lamotrigine and valproate, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.2, standard deviation = 1.3) and users of Li+AP+AC (N = 73, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.1, standard deviation = 1.3) showed worse response compared to lithium-only users (all p < 0.01). When comparing Li+AP to Li+AC, users of Li+AP improved slightly better on general (p = 0.05) and manic symptoms (p = 0.01), but showed a worse development of glucose, triglycerides, and metabolic syndrome. CONCLUSION: Despite treatment-by-indication confounding, these findings are relevant for real-world treatment settings and emphasize the need for randomized trials on this clinically important topic.

Childhood trauma and treatment outcomes during mood-stabilising treatment with lithium or quetiapine among outpatients with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Childhood trauma affects the course of mood disorders. Researchers are now considering childhood trauma as an influential factor in the treatment of mood disorders. However, the role of childhood trauma in the treatment of bipolar disorder remains understudied. METHODS: The effect of childhood trauma on treatment outcomes was evaluated among participants randomised to treatment with lithium or quetiapine in the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiatives in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE) study by clinician assessment. Mixed effects linear regression models were used to analyse rates of improvement in symptom severity (assessed with the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale and the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder) and functional impairment (assessed with the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation-Range of Impaired Functioning Tool). RESULTS: A history of any childhood trauma was reported by 52.7% of the sample (N = 476). Although participants with a history of any childhood trauma presented with greater symptom severity and functional impairment at most study visits, participants with and without a history of any childhood trauma showed similar rates of improvement in symptom severity and functional impairment over the 24 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to explore the association between childhood trauma and treatment outcomes during treatment with lithium or quetiapine in the context of a randomised trial. In Bipolar CHOICE, a history of childhood trauma did not inhibit improvement in symptom severity or functional impairment. Nevertheless, these findings need replication across different settings.

Adjunctive antidepressant treatment among 763 outpatients with bipolar disorder: Findings from the Bipolar CHOICE and LiTMUS trials.

BACKGROUND: Adjunctive antidepressants are frequently used for bipolar depression but their clinical efficacy has been studied in few trials and little is known about how co-occurring manic symptoms affect treatment response. METHODS: Bipolar Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness (N = 482) and Lithium Treatment Moderate-Dose Use Study (N = 281) were similar comparative effectiveness trials on outpatients with bipolar disorder comparing four different randomized treatment arms with adjunctive personalized guideline-based treatment for 24 weeks. Adjunctive antidepressant treatment could be used if clinically indicated and was assessed at every study visit. Adjusted mixed effects linear regression analyses compared users of antidepressants to nonusers overall and in different subcohorts. RESULTS: Of the 763 patients, 282 (37.0%) used antidepressant drugs during the study. Antidepressant users had less improvement compared to nonusers on the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder and on measures of depression. This was particularly true among patients with co-occurring manic symptoms. Exclusion of individuals begun on antidepressants late in the study (potentially due to overall worse response) resulted in no differences between users and nonusers. We found no differences in treatment effects on mania scales. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of outpatients with bipolar disorder, clinically indicated and guideline-based adjunctive antidepressant treatment was not associated with lower depressive symptoms or higher mania symptoms. The treatment-by-indication confounding due to the nonrandomized design of the trials complicates causal interpretations, but no analyses indicated better treatment effects of adjunctive antidepressants.

A Pilot Study of Nicotine Replacement Therapy Sampling and Selection to Increase Medication Adherence in Low-Income Smokers.

INTRODUCTION: Adherence to smoking cessation medications remains suboptimal, particularly among low-income smokers. Guided, experiential sampling of nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) may increase NRT adherence and smoking cessation over gold standard counseling plus NRT. The present pilot study aimed to examine feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a novel experiential intervention. AIMS AND METHODS: This pilot randomized controlled trial (N = 83) compared gold standard smoking cessation treatment (four weekly sessions of behavioral counseling followed by self-selected combination NRT in week 5) to a novel experiential approach (ie, In Vivo; four weekly sessions of sampling each short form of NRT-gum, lozenge, inhaler, nasal spray-in-session while wearing the nicotine patch followed by NRT selection in week 5). Both groups received 8 weeks of nicotine patch plus their selected additional short form NRT for smoking cessation followed by a 1-month assessment. RESULTS: Screening and enrollment rates supported feasibility. In Vivo was comparable in acceptability with the gold standard of care intervention; however, there was greater attrition in the In Vivo group compared with the gold standard of care group. Results suggested higher medication adherence and improvements in smoking behavior in the In Vivo intervention; with generally small-to-medium effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: This experiential approach to sampling NRT is feasible and acceptable to low-income people who smoke. This intervention may increase adherence and reduce harmful smoking behavior but needs to be tested on a larger scale. IMPLICATIONS: Medication adherence remains a significant impediment to the successful smoking cessation. The results of this study suggest that guided sampling of NRT products improves adherence among low-income smokers. Additionally, this approach yielded greater improvements in smoking behavior compared with gold standard smoking cessation treatment. This intervention shows promise as a feasible smoking cessation treatment for low-income smokers.

Effect of race on the relationship between child maltreatment and obesity in Whites and Blacks.

This cross-sectional study was designed to determine what role race plays in the relationship between obesity and child maltreatment (CM), which is currently unknown. One hundred fifteen participants successfully completed the study, including Whites (n = 60) and Blacks (n = 55) of both sexes. CM was assessed using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire. Total fat, trunk/total fat ratio, visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and VAT/trunk ratio, were measured through Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) and Corescan software estimation. A significant interaction between identifying as White and having a history of CM was found to predict body mass index (BMI) (ß = 5.02, p = .025), total fat (kg) (ß = 9.81, p = .036), and VAT (kg) (ß = 0.542, p = .025), whereas race by itself was an insignificant predictor. An interaction between having history of physical abuse and identifying as White was found to predict BMI (ß = 6.993, p = .003), total fat (ß = 12.683, p = .010), and VAT (ß = 0.591, p = .018). An interaction between having multiple CM subtypes and identifying as White predicts increased total fat (ß = 5.667, p = .034) and VAT (ß = 0.335, p = .014). Our findings indicate that the relationship between CM and obesity, measured through BMI, total body fat, and VAT, is seen in Whites but not in Blacks. Future research should investigate the nature of this racial influence to guide obesity prevention and target at-risk populations.

Combinatorial Pharmacogenomic Testing Improves Outcomes for Older Adults With Depression.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the clinical utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing for informing medication selection among older adults who have experienced antidepressant medication failure for major depressive disorder (MDD). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of data from a blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing two active treatment arms. SETTING: Psychiatry specialty and primary care clinics across 60 U.S. community and academic sites. PARTICIPANTS: Adults age 65 years or older at baseline (n = 206), diagnosed with MDD and inadequate response to at least one medication on the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test report during the current depressive episode. INTERVENTION: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing to inform medication selection (guided-care), compared with treatment as usual (TAU). OUTCOMES: Mean percent symptom improvement, response rate, and remission rateat week 8, measured using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; medication switching; and comorbidity moderator analysis. RESULTS: At week 8, symptom improvement was not significantly different for guided-care than for TAU (∆ = 8.1%, t = 1.64, df = 187; p = 0.102); however, guided-care showed significantly improved response (∆ = 13.6%, t = 2.16, df = 187; p = 0.032) and remission (∆ = 12.7%, t = 2.49, df = 189; p = 0.014) relative to TAU. By week 8, more than twice as many patients in guided-care than in TAU were on medications predicted to have no gene-drug interactions (χ2 = 19.3, df = 2; p <0.001). Outcomes in the guided-care arm showed consistent improvement through the end of the open-design 24-week trial, indicating durability of the effect. Differences in outcomes between arms were not significantly impacted by comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic test-informed medication selection improved outcomes over TAU among older adults with depression.

Ketamine for acute suicidal ideation. An emergency department intervention: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept trial.

BACKGROUND: Depressed patients presenting to emergency departments with acute suicidal ideation are a major public health concern. Ketamine, a rapidly acting antidepressant with antisuicidal properties, might offer relief. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept trial, 18 depressed subjects with acute suicidal ideation, who required hospitalization, were randomized to either an intravenous ketamine 0.2 mg/kg group or a saline placebo group. Safety and efficacy evaluations were scheduled for 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 min, and on Days 1, 2, 3, 7, and 14 after infusion. The main outcome measure was suicidal ideation with secondary measures of depression. RESULTS: Nine subjects were randomized to each group. There were no differences between groups at baseline in any demographic or assessment scales. A reduction in suicidal ideation was noted at 90-180 min (p < .05). Ninety minutes after infusion, 88% of the ketamine group had achieved remission of suicidal ideation compared with 33% in the placebo group (p < .05). No serious adverse events were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine was safe and effective for rapid reduction in suicidal ideation in depressed, highly suicidal subjects presenting to the emergency department. Our results support further study of ketamine for acute suicidal ideation.

Improvement of sexual functioning during treatment of MDD with adjunctive pimavanserin: A secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sexual dysfunction is common among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). In the CLARITY study, the safety and efficacy of adjunctive pimavanserin, an inverse agonist at 5-HT2A receptors, were demonstrated when added to existing treatment for MDD. This analysis provides a detailed assessment of the effects of pimavanserin on sexual function from the CLARITY study. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of MDD in a depressive episode, inadequate response to ongoing antidepressant therapy, and a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score >20 were randomized to pimavanserin 34 mg/day or placebo added to ongoing treatment with an immediate revision of all selective serotonin or serotonin-norepinephrine for 5 weeks (Stage 1), and nonresponders (<50% improvement from baseline in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAMD-17]) were re-randomized for an additional 5 week (Stage 2). Effects of pimavanserin on the Massachusetts General Hospital Sexual Functioning Index (MGH-SFI) and HAMD-17 Item 14 (sexual interest) were examined. RESULTS: Among 203 patients (51 on pimavanserin; 152 on placebo), pimavanserin demonstrated significant improvement from baseline to Week 5 on the MGH-SFI (least square [LS]mean difference -0.634, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-0.964, -0.304]; p = .0002; effect size [ES], Cohen's d: .614). Across Stages 1 and 2, the weighted LSmean difference was -0.468 (95% CI [-0.720, -0.216]; p = .0003) for pimavanserin versus placebo. Mean changes from baseline to Week 5 for MGH-SFI Items 1, 2, 3, and 5 and HAMD Item 14 were significantly (p < .05) greater with pimavanserin versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive pimavanserin improved sexual function in patients with MDD. Adding pimavanserin to ongoing treatment for MDD may be especially useful for patients experiencing sexual dysfunction.

Real-world approach to managing dysgeusia following the use of esketamine nasal spray: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Patients with depression who are treated with esketamine nasal spray may commonly experience dysgeusia (bad/metallic/bitter taste) and related side effects such as nausea and vomiting. While pretreatment with antiemetics can mitigate or prevent nausea and vomiting, it may not address dysgeusia as a contributing factor. Alternative interventions could help to manage vomiting due to dysgeusia following administration of esketamine nasal spray in those patients who are affected. CASE PRESENTATION: A 40-year-old man presented to the emergency department with depression and started treatment with an oral antidepressant. After providing informed consent to participate in a clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of esketamine for major depressive disorder with active suicidal ideation with intent, he received 84 mg of esketamine nasal spray twice per week for 4 weeks. On the first 2 days of esketamine administration, the patient reported dysgeusia lasting several hours and intermittent retching lasting approximately 20 min. The patient was then given a fruit punch-flavored powdered drink (Crystal Light Fruit Punch™) approximately 25 min after nasal spray administration during the study period. The use of a fruit punch drink resulted in notable improvement of dysgeusia and associated vomiting, with time to resolution occurring within 30 min of the report of the adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: A fruit punch-flavored powdered drink mix taken shortly after administration of esketamine nasal spray may rapidly manage and prevent vomiting due to dysgeusia.

Multi-site investigation of strategies for the clinical implementation of CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing.

PURPOSE: A number of institutions have clinically implemented CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing. We compared implementation strategies of early adopters of CYP2D6 testing, barriers faced by both early adopters and institutions in the process of implementing CYP2D6 testing, and approaches taken to overcome these barriers. METHODS: We surveyed eight early adopters of CYP2D6 genotyping and eight institutions in the process of adoption. Data were collected on testing approaches, return of results procedures, applications of genotype results, challenges faced, and lessons learned. RESULTS: Among early adopters, CYP2D6 testing was most commonly ordered to assist with opioid and antidepressant prescribing. Key differences among programs included test ordering and genotyping approaches, result reporting, and clinical decision support. However, all sites tested for copy-number variation and nine common variants, and reported results in the medical record. Most sites provided automatic consultation and had designated personnel to assist with genotype-informed therapy recommendations. Primary challenges were related to stakeholder support, CYP2D6 gene complexity, phenotype assignment, and sustainability. CONCLUSION: There are specific challenges unique to CYP2D6 testing given the complexity of the gene and its relevance to multiple medications. Consensus lessons learned may guide those interested in pursuing similar clinical pharmacogenetic programs.

Patterns of changes in bipolar depressive symptoms revealed by trajectory analysis among 482 patients with bipolar disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Depressive episodes are often prevalent among patients with bipolar disorder, but little is known regarding the differential patterns of development over time. We aimed to determine and characterize trajectories of depressive symptoms among adults with bipolar disorder during 6 months of systematic treatment. METHODS: The pragmatic clinical trial, Bipolar Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE), randomized 482 outpatients with bipolar disorder to lithium or quetiapine. Depressive symptoms were rated at up to 9 visits using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Growth mixture modeling was utilized to identify trajectories and multinomial regression analysis estimated associations with potential predictors. RESULTS: Four distinct trajectories of depressive symptoms were identified. The responding class (60.3%) with a rapid reduction and subsequent low level; the partial-responding class (18.4%) with an initial reduction followed by an increase during the remaining weeks; the fluctuating class (11.6%) with a fluctuation in depressive symptoms; and the non-responding class (9.7%) with sustained moderate-severe depressive symptoms. Bipolar type I predicted membership of the non-responding class and randomization to quetiapine predicted membership of either the responding or the non-responding class. CONCLUSION: Approximately 30% experienced a partial or fluctuating course, and almost 10% had a chronic course with moderate-severe depression during 6 months. Patients diagnosed with bipolar type 1 had higher risk of being categorized into a class with a worse outcome. While no differences in average overall outcomes occurred between the lithium and quetiapine groups, trajectory analysis revealed that the lithium group had more variable courses.

Comparing sensitivity to change using the 6-item versus the 17-item Hamilton depression rating scale in the GUIDED randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests that the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) is less sensitive in detecting differences between active treatment and placebo for major depressive disorder (MDD) than is the HAM-D6 scale, which focuses on six core depression symptoms. Whether HAM-D6 shows greater sensitivity when comparing two active MDD treatment arms is unknown. METHODS: This post hoc analysis used data from the intent-to-treat (ITT) cohort (N = 1541) of the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) trial, a rater- and patient-blinded randomized controlled trial. GUIDED compared combinatorial pharmacogenomics-guided care with treatment as usual (TAU) in patients with MDD. Percent of symptom improvement, response rate and remission rate from baseline to week 8 were evaluated using both scales. Analyses were performed for the full cohort and for the subset of patients who at baseline were taking medications predicted by the test to have moderate or significant gene-drug interactions. A Mokken scale analysis was conducted to compare the homogeneity of HAM-D17 with that of HAM-D6. RESULTS: At week 8, the guided-care arm demonstrated statistically significant benefit over TAU when the HAM-D6 (∆ = 4.4%, p = 0.023) was used as the continuous measure of symptom improvement, but not when using the HAM-D17 (∆ = 3.2%, p = 0.069). Response rates increased significantly for guided-care compared with TAU when evaluated using both HAM-D6 (∆ = 7.0%, p = 0.004) and HAM-D17 (∆ = 6.3%, p = 0.007). Remission rates also were significantly greater for guided-care versus TAU using both measures (HAM-D6 ∆ = 4.6%, p = 0.031; HAM-D17 ∆ = 5.5%, p = 0.005). Patients in the guided-care arm who at baseline were taking medications predicted to have gene-drug interactions showed further increased benefit over TAU at week 8 for symptom improvement (∆ = 7.3%, p = 0.004) response (∆ = 10.0%, p = 0.001) and remission (∆ = 7.9%, p = 0.005) using HAM-D6. All outcomes showed continued improvement through week 24. Mokken scale analysis demonstrated the homogeneity and unidimensionality of HAM-D6, but not of HAM-D17, across treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: The HAM-D6 scale identified a statistically significant difference in symptom improvement between combinatorial pharmacogenomics-guided care and TAU, whereas the HAM-D17 did not. The demonstrated utility of pharmacogenomics-guided treatment over TAU as detected by the HAM-D6 highlights its value for future biomarker-guided trials comparing active treatment arms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02109939. Registered 10 April 2014.

Serotonin and Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors.

This chapter covers antidepressants that fall into the class of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) reuptake inhibitors. That is, they bind to the 5-HT and NE transporters with varying levels of potency and binding affinity ratios. Unlike the selective serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), most of these antidepressants have an ascending rather than a flat dose-response curve. The chapter provides a brief review of the chemistry, pharmacology, metabolism, safety and adverse effects, clinical use, and therapeutic indications of each antidepressant. Venlafaxine, a phenylethylamine, is a relatively weak 5-HT and weaker NE uptake inhibitor with a 30-fold difference in binding of the two transporters. Therefore, the drug has a clear dose progression, with low doses predominantly binding to the 5-HT transporter and more binding of the NE transporter as the dose ascends. Venlafaxine is metabolized to the active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV; desvenlafaxine) by CYP2D6, and it therefore is subject to significant inter-individual variation in blood levels and response dependent on variations in CYP2D6 metabolism. The half-life of venlafaxine is short at about 5 h, with the ODV metabolite being 12 h. Both parent compound and metabolite have low protein binding and neither inhibit CYP enzymes. Therefore, both venlafaxine and desvenlafaxine are potential options if drug-drug interactions are a concern, although venlafaxine may be subject to drug-drug interactions with CYP2D6 inhibitors. At low doses, the adverse effect profile is similar to an SSRI with nausea, diarrhea, fatigue or somnolence, and sexual side effects, while venlafaxine at higher doses can produce mild increases in blood pressure, diaphoresis, tachycardia, tremors, and anxiety. A disadvantage of venlafaxine relative to the SSRIs is the potential for dose-dependent blood pressure elevation, most likely due to the NE reuptake inhibition caused by higher doses; however, this adverse effect is infrequently observed at doses below 225 mg per day. Venlafaxine also has a number of potential advantages over the SSRIs, including an ascending dose-antidepressant response curve, with possibly greater overall efficacy at higher doses. Venlafaxine is approved for MDD as well as generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Desvenlafaxine is the primary metabolite of venlafaxine, and it is also a relatively low-potency 5-HT and NE uptake inhibitor. Like venlafaxine it has a favorable drug-drug interaction profile. It is subject to CYP3A4 metabolism, and it is therefore vulnerable to enzyme inhibition or induction. However, the primary metabolic pathway is direct conjugation. It is approved in the narrow dose range of 50-100 mg per day. Duloxetine is a more potent 5-HT and NE reuptake inhibitor with a more balanced profile of binding at about 10:1 for 5HT and NE transporter binding. It is also a moderate inhibitor of CYP2D6, so that modest dose reductions and careful monitoring will be needed when prescribing duloxetine in combination with drugs that are preferentially metabolized by CYP2D6. The most common side effects identified in clinical trials are nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, constipation, insomnia, asthenia, and hypertension, consistent with its mechanisms of action. Clinical trials to date have demonstrated rates of response and remission in patients with major depression that are comparable to other marketed antidepressants reviewed in this book. In addition to approval for MDD, duloxetine is approved for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and musculoskeletal pain. Milnacipran is marketed as an antidepressant in some countries, but not in the USA. It is approved in the USA and some other countries as a treatment for fibromyalgia. It has few pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with other drugs. Milnacipran has a half-life of about 10 h and therefore needs to be administered twice per day. It is metabolized by CYP3A4, but the major pathway for clearance is direct conjugation and renal elimination. As with other drugs in this class, dysuria is a common, troublesome, and dose-dependent adverse effect (occurring in up to 7% of patients). High-dose milnacipran has been reported to cause blood pressure and pulse elevations. Levomilnacipran is the levorotary enantiomer of milnacipran, and it is pharmacologically very similar to the racemic compound, although the side effects may be milder within the approved dosing range. As with other NE uptake inhibitors, it may increase blood pressure and pulse, although it appears to do so less than some other medications. All medications in the class can cause serotonin syndrome when combined with MAOIs.

Correlation between white blood cell count and mood-stabilising treatment response in two bipolar disorder trials.

BACKGROUND: Immune system markers may predict affective disorder treatment response, but whether an overall immune system marker predicts bipolar disorder treatment effect is unclear. METHODS: Bipolar CHOICE (N = 482) and LiTMUS (N = 283) were similar comparative effectiveness trials treating patients with bipolar disorder for 24 weeks with four different treatment arms (standard-dose lithium, quetiapine, moderate-dose lithium plus optimised personalised treatment (OPT) and OPT without lithium). We performed secondary mixed effects linear regression analyses adjusted for age, gender, smoking and body mass index to investigate relationships between pre-treatment white blood cell (WBC) levels and clinical global impression scale (CGI) response. RESULTS: Compared to participants with WBC counts of 4.5-10 × 109/l, participants with WBC < 4.5 or WBC ≥ 10 showed similar improvement within each specific treatment arm and in gender-stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: An overall immune system marker did not predict differential treatment response to four different treatment approaches for bipolar disorder all lasting 24 weeks.

Treatment outcomes of acute bipolar depressive episode with psychosis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of psychosis on the treatment of bipolar depression is remarkably understudied. The primary aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of bipolar depressed individuals with and without psychosis. The secondary aim was to compare the effect of lithium and quetiapine, each with adjunctive personalized treatments (APTs), in the psychotic subgroup. METHODS: We assessed participants with DSM-IV bipolar depression included in a comparative effectiveness study of lithium and quetiapine with APTs (the Bipolar CHOICE study). Severity was assessed by the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale (BISS) and by the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity-Bipolar Version (CGI-S-BP). Mixed models were used to assess the course of symptom change, and Cox regression survival analysis was used to assess the time to remission. RESULTS: Psychotic features were present in 10.6% (n = 32) of the depressed participants (n = 303). Those with psychotic features had higher scores on the BISS before (75.2 ± 17.6 vs. 54.9 ± 16.3; P < .001) and after (37.2 ± 19.7 vs. 26.3 ± 18.0; P = .003) 6-month treatment. The CGI-S-BP yielded similar results. Participants with and without psychosis had similar course of symptom improvement and similar time to remission. There was no significant difference in the treatment outcomes of lithium (n = 11) and quetiapine (n = 21) among the psychotic subgroup. CONCLUSION: Bipolar depressive episodes with psychotic features are more severe, and compared to nonpsychotic depressions, present a similar course of improvement. Given the small number of participants presenting psychosis, the lack of statistically significant difference between lithium- and quetiapine-based treatment of psychotic bipolar depressive episodes needs replication in a larger sample.

Decreased activation and subsyndromal manic symptoms predict lower remission rates in bipolar depression.

OBJECTIVE: Activation encompasses energy and activity and is a central feature of bipolar disorder. However, the impact of activation on treatment response of bipolar depression requires further exploration. The aims of this study were to assess the association of decreased activation and sustained remission in bipolar depression and test for factors that could affect this association. METHODS: We assessed participants with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed) bipolar depression ( n = 303) included in a comparative effectiveness study of lithium- and quetiapine-based treatments (the Bipolar CHOICE study). Activation was evaluated using items from the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale. The selection of these items was based on a dimension of energy and interest symptoms associated with poorer treatment response in major depression. RESULTS: Decreased activation was associated with lower remission rates in the raw analyses and in a logistic regression model adjusted for baseline severity and subsyndromal manic symptoms (odds ratio = 0.899; p = 0.015). The manic features also predicted lower remission (odds ratio = 0.934; p < 0.001). Remission rates were similar in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Decreased activation and subsyndromal manic symptoms predict lower remission rates in bipolar depression. Patients with these features may require specific treatment approaches, but new studies are necessary to identify treatments that could improve outcomes in this population.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and paracetamol do not affect 6-month mood-stabilizing treatment outcome among 482 patients with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Many mood disorder patients need analgesics due to increased pain sensitivity. Recent studies have suggested that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may inhibit antidepressant treatment, which requires replication before clinical recommendations. METHODS: The Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiatives in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder Study randomized participants to 6 months lithium or quetiapine treatment. Use of NSAIDs and paracetamol was assessed throughout the study period and psychopathology measured with the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP) and Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale (BISS). The effects of NSAIDs and paracetamol on treatment outcome were examined using mixed effects linear regression adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, exercise, and somatic diseases. RESULTS: Among 482 participants, 177 (36.7%) used NSAIDs and/or paracetamol during the study. NSAID and paracetamol users did not differ from nonusers with respect to treatment outcome with lithium or quetiapine at any time point during 6 months treatment on the overall CGI-BP (ß = 0.001 (95% CI = -0.01 to -0.01), P = .87), the BISS (ß = 0.01 (95% CI = -0.17 to 0.15), P = .91), nor the CGI-BP subscales for depression or mania. Users of NSAIDs only (n = 76), paracetamol only (n = 62), and users of both NSAIDs and paracetamol (n = 39) showed no statistical difference compared to nonusers (all P > .3). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first trial to show that use of NSAIDs and paracetamol, alone or in combination, does not affect lithium- or quetiapine-based bipolar disorder mood-stabilizing treatment outcomes. Prior studies have suggested that NSAIDs may inhibit antidepressant treatment, whereas our results support findings indicating no detrimental effects of NSAIDs or paracetamol on affective disorder treatment.