The Cost-Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Versus Second-Generation Antidepressants for Initial Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in the United States: A Decision Analytic Model.

Background: Most guidelines for major depressive disorder recommend initial treatment with either a second-generation antidepressant (SGA) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Although most trials suggest that these treatments have similar efficacy, their health economic implications are uncertain. Objective: To quantify the cost-effectiveness of CBT versus SGA for initial treatment of depression. Design: Decision analytic model. Data Sources: Relative effectiveness data from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; additional clinical and economic data from other publications. Target Population: Adults with newly diagnosed major depressive disorder in the United States. Time Horizon: 1 to 5 years. Perspectives: Health care sector and societal. Intervention: Initial treatment with either an SGA or group and individual CBT. Outcome Measures: Costs in 2014 U.S. dollars, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results of Base-Case Analysis: In model projections, CBT produced higher QALYs (3 days more at 1 year and 20 days more at 5 years) with higher costs at 1 year (health care sector, $900; societal, $1500) but lower costs at 5 years (health care sector, -$1800; societal, -$2500). Results of Sensitivity Analysis: In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, SGA had a 64% to 77% likelihood of having an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $100 000 or less per QALY at 1 year; CBT had a 73% to 77% likelihood at 5 years. Uncertainty in the relative risk for relapse of depression contributed the most to overall uncertainty in the optimal treatment. Limitation: Long-term trials comparing CBT and SGA are lacking. Conclusion: Neither SGAs nor CBT provides consistently superior cost-effectiveness relative to the other. Given many patients' preference for psychotherapy over pharmacotherapy, increasing patient access to CBT may be warranted. Primary Funding Source: Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institute of Mental Health.

Effects of fluoxetine on functional outcomes after acute stroke (FOCUS): a pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Results of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects. METHODS: FOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762. FINDINGS: Between Sept 10, 2012, and March 31, 2017, 3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99·3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0·951 [95% CI 0·839-1·079]; p=0·439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13·43%] patients vs 269 [17·21%]; difference 3·78% [95% CI 1·26-6·30]; p=0·0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2·88%] vs 23 [1·47%]; difference 1·41% [95% CI 0·38-2·43]; p=0·0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months. INTERPRETATION: Fluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function. FUNDING: UK Stroke Association and NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme.

How do smoking cessation medicines compare with respect to their neuropsychiatric safety? A protocol for a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Cigarette smoking is one of the leading causes of early death in the UK and worldwide. Public health guidance recommends the use of varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) as smoking cessation aids in the UK. Additionally, the first electronic cigarette has been licensed for use as a smoking cessation medicine. However, there are ongoing concerns about the safety of these medicines. We present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine how these smoking cessation medicines compare to each other with respect to their neuropsychiatric safety in adult smokers. Secondary aims include updating the evidence regarding the effectiveness and cardiovascular safety of these medicines for use in a cost-effectiveness analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include randomised controlled trials and observational studies with control groups comparing monotherapy with varenicline, bupropion, NRT or electronic cigarette and combination therapies to each other, placebo or usual care. The primary composite safety outcome will be serious adverse events, defined as events that resulted in death, were life threatening, required hospitalisation or resulted in significant disability or congenital/birth defect. The preferred effectiveness outcome will be sustained smoking cessation defined as abstinence for a minimum of 6 months as determined by biochemical validation. We will include trials identified by previous reviews and search relevant databases for newly published trials as well as contacting study authors to identify unpublished information. We will conduct fixed-effect and random-effect meta-analyses for each pairwise comparison of treatments and outcome; where these estimates differ, we will consider reasons for heterogeneity, quantified using the between-study variance (τ2). For each outcome, we will construct a NMA in a Bayesian framework which will be compared with the pair-wise results, allowing us to rank treatments. The effectiveness estimates from the NMA will be entered into a probabilistic economic model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this evidence synthesis study as it involves analysis of secondary data from randomised controlled trials and observational studies. The review will make an important contribution to the knowledge base around the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation medicines. Results will be disseminated to the general public, healthcare practitioners and clinicians, academics, industry and policy makers. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016041302.

Treatment of depression in older adults beyond fluoxetine.

This review aimed to discuss the importance of the comprehensive treatment of depression among older adults in Brazil. The abuse of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, including fluoxetine hydrochloride, as antidepressants has been considered a serious public health problem, particularly among older adults. Despite the consensus on the need for a comprehensive treatment of depression in this population, Brazil is still unprepared. The interface between pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy is limited due to the lack of healthcare services, specialized professionals, and effective healthcare planning. Fluoxetine has been used among older adults as an all-purpose drug for the treatment of depressive disorders because of psychosocial adversities, lack of social support, and limited access to adequate healthcare services for the treatment of this disorder. Preparing health professionals is a sine qua non for the reversal of the age pyramid, but this is not happening yet.

Incidence of type 2 diabetes among patients exposed to the combination of pravastatin and paroxetine.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effects of concomitant pravastatin and paroxetine use on the incidence of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: A new-user retrospective cohort design was employed using data selected from US health insurance claims databases (OptumInsight and MarketScan) between July 1, 2002, and December 31, 2009. Patients included were of age ≥18; newly prescribed pravastatin or paroxetine; and enrolled in the database for ≥180 days prior to the index date (i.e., first prescription of incident drug). Patients were assigned to either incident pravastatin or incident paroxetine user groups. Patients were followed until the study endpoint (T2DM), discontinuation of incident drug, second drug, or end of study/patient data. Cox proportional hazards models compared T2DM in users of pravastatin who were also taking paroxetine at index the date (combination users) versus pravastatinonly users. A similar analysis among users of paroxetine evaluated the use or non-use of pravastatin at index date. RESULTS: OptumInsight yielded 288,678 incident users of pravastatin or paroxetine; 443,137 were identified in MarketScan. The risk of T2DM among combination users compared to incident pravastatin only users was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.76, 1.44) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90, 0.97) in OptumInsight and MarketScan, respectively. The risk of T2DM among combination users compared to incident paroxetine only users was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.69, 1.54) in OptumInsight and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.07) in MarketScan. CONCLUSION: The results indicate no increase in the risk of T2DM due to combined use of pravastatin and paroxetine compared to individual use of the two drugs; however, this study is limited by short mean follow-up.

Treatment of depression in older adults beyond fluoxetine / Tratamento de depressão no idoso além do cloridrato de fluoxetina

This review aimed to discuss the importance of the comprehensive treatment of depression among older adults in Brazil. The abuse of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, including fluoxetine hydrochloride, as antidepressants has been considered a serious public health problem, particularly among older adults. Despite the consensus on the need for a comprehensive treatment of depression in this population, Brazil is still unprepared. The interface between pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy is limited due to the lack of healthcare services, specialized professionals, and effective healthcare planning. Fluoxetine has been used among older adults as an all-purpose drug for the treatment of depressive disorders because of psychosocial adversities, lack of social support, and limited access to adequate healthcare services for the treatment of this disorder. Preparing health professionals is a sine qua non for the reversal of the age pyramid, but this is not happening yet.

Esse comentário tem como objetivo discutir a importância da multidisciplinariedade do tratamento da depressão do idoso no Brasil. O abuso de prescrições de antidepressivos inibidores seletivos da receptação de serotonina, como o cloridrato de fluoxetina, já tem sido apontado como grave problema de saúde pública, especialmente entre idosos. Embora seja consenso a necessidade de multidisciplinariedade no tratamento da depressão nessa população, o Brasil ainda encontra-se despreparado. A interface entre farmacoterapia e psicoterapia encontra-se prejudicada por falta de serviços, de profissionais especializados e de planejamento assistencial efetivo. A fluoxetina tornou-se uma “muleta” para a cura de males causados pelas adversidades psicossociais, falta de suporte social e de acesso a serviços de saúde adequados para o tratamento desse transtorno em idosos. É condição sine qua non haver preparo para a inversão das pirâmides etárias, o que parece não acontecer atualmente.

Do suicidal thoughts or behaviors recur during a second antidepressant treatment trial?

OBJECTIVE: A subset of patients undergoing initial antidepressant treatment experience worsening of symptoms, including thoughts of suicide or suicidal behavior. The present study explores whether this subset of patients is also more likely to experience recurrence or worsening of these symptoms during a second treatment trial with a different antidepressant. METHOD: We examined data collected between July 2001 and September 2006 from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study, a multicenter effectiveness study of outpatients with major depressive disorder diagnosed by a DSM-IV checklist. In that study, subjects who did not remit with citalopram treatment were randomized among next-step treatment options. The main outcome measure for this post hoc analysis, presence of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, was assessed using the suicide item on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Rated. Logistic regression was used to examine association between emergence or worsening of these symptoms with the first-step (level 1) citalopram treatment and emergence or worsening with next-step (level 2) pharmacologic or psychosocial treatment, including augmentation with bupropion or buspirone; switch to sertraline, venlafaxine, or bupropion; or addition of or switch to cognitive therapy. RESULTS: Of 1,240 subjects entering level 2 with a score less than 3 on the suicide item, 102 (8.2%) experienced emergence or worsening of suicidal thoughts or behaviors. Emergence or worsening at level 1 was strongly associated with reemergence or worsening at level 2 (crude OR = 4.00 [95% CI, 2.45-6.51], adjusted OR = 2.95 [95% CI, 1.76-4.96]). Overall magnitude of risk was similar among next-step pharmacologic augmentation versus switching. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that individuals who experience emergence or worsening of suicidal thoughts or behaviors with one antidepressant treatment may warrant closer follow-up during the next-step treatment, as these symptoms may recur regardless of which modality is selected.

Breastfeeding among women exposed to antidepressants during pregnancy.

This prospective cohort study compares the breastfeeding outcomes of women exposed to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants at the time of delivery, those who discontinued use prior to delivery, and those not exposed. Participants include 466 pregnant women who enrolled in the California Teratogen Information Service Clinical Research Program (CTIS) over 10 years. In bivariate analyses, breastfeeding rates were significantly different across SSRI exposure groups, with unexposed women having the highest rates. We used logistic regression to examine the relationship between SSRI exposure and breastfeeding outcomes. After adjustment for potential confounders, those exposed to an SSRI both prior to delivery (odds ratio [OR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.94) and at the time of delivery (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16-0.72) were significantly less likely to initiate breastfeeding as compared to unexposed women. Women exposed to an SSRI during pregnancy appear to be at risk for poorer breastfeeding outcomes and may benefit from additional education and support.

Clinically unintended medication switches and inability to prescribe preferred medications under Medicare Part D.

Medicare Part D has expanded medication access; however, there is some evidence that dually eligible psychiatric patients have experienced medication access problems. The aim of this study was to characterize medication switches and access problems for dually eligible psychiatric patients and associations with adverse events, including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, homelessness, and incarceration. Reports on 986 systematically sampled, dually eligible patients were obtained from a random sample of practicing psychiatrists. A total of 27.6% of previously stable patients had to switch medications because clinically indicated and preferred refills were not covered or approved. An additional 14.0% were unable to have clinically indicated/preferred medications prescribed because of drug coverage/approval. Adjusting for case-mix, switched patients (p = 0.0009) and patients with problems obtaining clinically indicated medications (p = 0.0004) had significantly higher adverse event rates. Patients at greatest risk were prescribed a medication in a different class or could not be prescribed clinically-indicated atypical antipsychotics, other antidepressants, mood stabilizers, or stimulants. Patients with problems obtaining clinically preferred/indicated antipsychotics had a 17.6 times increased odds (p = 0.0039) of adverse events. These findings call for caution in medication switches for stable patients and support prescription drug policies promoting access to clinically indicated medications and continuity for clinically stable patients.

Cost effectiveness of escitalopram versus SNRIs in second-step treatment of major depressive disorder in Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: Escitalopram is the S-enantiomer of citalopram and is the most discriminating of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI). The aim of the current analysis was to assess the cost effectiveness of escitalopram versus the serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) duloxetine and generic venlafaxine as second-step treatment of major depressive disorder. METHODS: The analysis was based on a decision analytic model. Effectiveness outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and remission rates; cost outcomes were direct medical costs, including impact of treating adverse events, and indirect costs associated with lost productivity. The analysis was performed from the societal perspective in Sweden over a 6-month timeframe. RESULTS: Estimated remission rates showed an incremental effectiveness in favour of escitalopram of 16.4 percentage points compared with both SNRI comparators. The escitalopram strategy was associated with a 0.025 increase in QALYs. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the model is robust and that escitalopram remains a cost-effective option when considering future predicted price reductions of generic venlafaxine. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation in this study was the lack of data available for second-step treatment. The remission rates, which are a key input to the model, were obtained from a relatively small sample of patients on second-step treatment and there are no published relapse rates for second-step treatment. The model also assumed that there was no difference in the adverse event (AE) rates between treatments after the first 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: This cost-effectiveness analysis indicates that, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000, escitalopram is the most cost-effective second-step treatment option for MDD in Sweden in over 85% cases compared with both venlafaxine and with duloxetine. Benefits for escitalopram included both increased effectiveness and reduced overall costs. The major contributing costs were those associated with productivity loss. The model was shown to have internal validity and robustness through the use of stochastic simulations and sensitivity analyses, which were conducted around the key efficacy parameters.

Quality of life measurement in antidepressant trials. Is there an added value?

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) measurement in medicine has gone a long way. It has gained popularity as a more humanitarian outcome measurement. In this paper, a review is given of its historical backgrounds with a special focus on the use of QoL assessment in psychiatry. Different theoretical concepts are discussed. A closer look is taken at the use of QoL measurements in antidepressant trials. METHODS: An analysis was performed on the use of QoL measurement in recent antidepressant trials of duloxetine and escitalopram. RESULTS: QoL measurement was found to have abandoned its initial purposes, and to have been used without any theoretical framework. CONCLUSIONS: Although frequently used in antidepressant trials, the analysis and reporting of results is virtually non-existent. It remains unclear if QoL measurement, as currently used, gives any information that is not already captured by more formal depression rating scales. The question then remains whether QoL measurement in antidepressant trials has any added value and, if so, whether this is just a story of missed opportunities.

Seroxat and the suppression of clinical trial data: regulatory failure and the uses of legal ambiguity.

This article critically evaluates the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency's announcement, in March 2008, that GlaxoSmithKline would not face prosecution for deliberately withholding trial data, which revealed not only that Seroxat was ineffective at treating childhood depression but also that it increased the risk of suicidal behaviour in this patient group. The decision not to prosecute followed a four and a half year investigation and was taken on the grounds that the law at the relevant time was insufficiently clear. This article assesses the existence of significant gaps in the duty of candour which had been assumed to exist between drugs companies and the regulator, and reflects upon what this episode tells us about the robustness, or otherwise, of the UK's regulation of medicines.

Adequacy of venlafaxine dose prescribing in major depression and hospital resources implications.

Venlafaxine, a dual serotonin and noradrenaline re-uptake inhibitor, has been found to be effective at doses below 375 mg daily, but for patients with major depression higher doses can be required. In this retrospective naturalistic study, we investigated the effectiveness and resource implications of prescribing higher than standard doses of venlafaxine (tablet preparation). Ninety-six outpatients fulfilling DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder were assigned to two demographically matched cohorts: cohort A, receiving high doses (n = 38; doses > or =375 mg/day) and cohort B, receiving standard doses (n = 58; doses <375 mg/day). Data on hospital resources, drugs and medical profiles were extracted from patients' records. Information on cohort A was also obtained before their high-dose regime, while taking standard doses. A within-group analysis of cohort A showed that patients spent fewer days in hospital (P = 0.03) and had fewer outpatients visits (P < 0.01) when on high doses than when on standard doses. A between-group analysis found that cohort A, while on higher doses, had fewer outpatient visits compared with cohort B (P < 0.01). Patients in both groups had satisfactory drug tolerability and efficacy profiles. There were no differences between cohorts with regard to baseline characteristics, a part from the more intensive use of additional medications made by cohort A. Our preliminary investigation suggests that higher doses of venlafaxine may be cost-saving in relation to selected hospital resources. However, one cannot firmly conclude that the change in service use is due to the higher-dose regime, and we recommend further research to ascertain the cost-effectiveness of adequate dose prescribing in patients with poor symptom resolution at lower doses of venlafaxine.

Pediatric prescribing practices and the FDA Black-box warning on antidepressants.

BACKGROUND: Since the FDA Black box warning in 2004, there has been a 58% drop in antidepressant use among children and adolescents with depression. Paralleling this decrease is an associated increase in completed suicides in youth. To date, no study has examined, on a clinician level, the changes in practice that have occurred subsequent to the FDA warning. OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in pediatrician clinical practice resulting from the FDA warning on antidepressants. METHODS: Subjects were recruited through a national program sponsored by the Canadian Pediatric Society that regularly surveys practicing pediatricians. The mail survey inquired about knowledge of the Black-box warning, whether their practice changed and reasons for changes in prescribing practices with antidepressants after the warning. We surveyed a total of 2395 pediatricians in Canada. RESULTS: Of the 1748 eligible pediatricians, 670 (38%) responded.Seventy-two percent (n = 484) of respondents were aware of the FDA warning. Of the 484 respondents who were aware of the warning, 80% (n = 386) changed their prescribing practices including 32% (n = 154) who followed their patients more closely. Seven percent (n = 35) stopped treatment with SSRIs in at least one patient. Physicians who had observed worsening depression/suicidality were more likely to discontinue treatment with SSRI's compared to those who had not observed these side effects previously (25% versus 6%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This is the first national study to examine individual pediatrician practice changes in antidepressant use subsequent to the FDA warning. Further research is needed to better understand the reasons for these changes to aid in the development of strategies that could help clinicians to optimally integrate these warnings into clinical practice.