Kava for generalised anxiety disorder: A 16-week double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Previous randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have shown that Kava (a South Pacific medicinal plant) reduced anxiety during short-term administration. The objective of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to perform a larger, longer-term trial assessing the efficacy and safety of Kava in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder and to determine whether gamma-aminobutyric acid transporter (SLC6A1) single-nucleotide polymorphisms were moderators of response. METHODS: The trial was a phase III, multi-site, two-arm, 16-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating an aqueous extract of dried Kava root administered twice per day in tablet form (standardised to 120 mg of kavalactones twice/day) in 171 currently non-medicated anxious participants with diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder. The trial took place in Australia. RESULTS: An analysis of 171 participants revealed a non-significant difference in anxiety reduction between the Kava and placebo groups (a relative reduction favouring placebo of 1.37 points; p = 0.25). At the conclusion of the controlled phase, 17.4% of the Kava group were classified as remitted (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score < 7) compared to 23.8% of the placebo group (p = 0.46). No SLC6A1 polymorphisms were associated with treatment response, while carriers of the rs2601126 T allele preferentially respond to placebo (p = 0.006). Kava was well tolerated aside from poorer memory (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.044) and tremor/shakiness (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.024) occurring more frequently in the Kava group. Liver function test abnormalities were significantly more frequent in the Kava group, although no participant met criteria for herb-induced hepatic injury. CONCLUSION: While research has generally supported Kava in non-clinical populations (potentially for more 'situational' anxiety as a short-term anxiolytic), this particular extract was not effective for diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder.

S-Adenosylmethionine (SAMe) monotherapy for depression: an 8-week double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

RATIONALE: Dysregulation of the one carbon cycle is documented in depression. Thereby, S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), a one-carbon cycle nutraceutical compound with a favourable side effect profile, has a theoretical rationale for efficacy. However, further controlled studies are required to confirm SAMe's efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To test the efficacy of SAMe versus placebo in unmedicated DSM-5 diagnosed (major depressive disorder) (MDD) patients with mild-to-moderate levels of depressive symptoms. METHODS: We conducted an 8-week, double-blind, randomised controlled trial testing 800 mg/day of SAMe monotherapy versus placebo in 49 patients with MDD (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] score 14-25) who were not currently taking antidepressants. One-carbon cycle biomarkers, brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF), and relevant single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were analysed as potential treatment moderators. RESULTS: A clinically relevant differential reduction from baseline to week 8 of 3.76 points occurred on the primary outcome (MADRS) in favour of SAMe. This however was not significant (p = 0.13) on an adjusted linear mixed model, notwithstanding a medium to large effect size of 0.72. A high placebo response rate of 53% occurred (> 50% reduction on MADRS). Exploratory analyses showed that SAMe was however effective in reducing depression amongst participants with milder depression severity (MADRS ≤ 22, p = 0.045). Response was not moderated by BDNF, SNPs, or one-carbon cycle biomarkers, although increased folate concentrations were correlated with improved symptoms in the SAMe group (r = - 0.57, p = 0.026). The treatment was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Although a differential reduction in depression symptoms between groups was observed in favour of SAMe, the results of this pilot study were not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR-Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; No.: ACTRN12613001299796; URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=364900.

L-theanine in the adjunctive treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

Partial or non-response to antidepressants in Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) is common in clinical settings, and adjunctive biological interventions may be required. Adjunctive herbal and nutraceutical treatments are a novel and promising treatment option. L-theanine is a non-protein amino acid derived most-commonly from tea (Camellia sinensis) leaves, which may be beneficial in the treatment of anxiety and sleep disturbance as suggested by preliminary evidence. We conducted a 10-week study (consisting of an 8-week double-blind placebo-controlled period, and 1-week pre-study and 2-week post-study single-blinded observational periods) involving 46 participants with a DSM-5 diagnosis of GAD. Participants received adjunctive L-theanine (450-900 mg) or matching placebo with their current stable antidepressant treatment, and were assessed on anxiety, sleep quality, and cognition outcomes. Results revealed that adjunctive L-theanine did not outperform placebo for anxiety reduction on the HAMA (p = 0.73) nor insomnia severity on the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI; p = 0.35). However, LT treated participants reported greater self-reported sleep satisfaction than placebo (ISI item 4; p = 0.015). Further, a separation in favour of L-theanine was noted on the ISI in those with non-clinical levels of insomnia symptoms (ISI ≤ 14; p = 0.007). No significant cognitive effects (trail making time and the modified emotional Stroop) were revealed. While this preliminary study did not support the efficacy of L-theanine in the treatment of anxiety symptoms in GAD, further studies to explore the application of L-theanine in sleep disturbance are warranted.

Nutraceuticals for major depressive disorder- more is not merrier: An 8-week double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: One of the most pressing questions in "Nutritional Psychiatry" is whether using combinations of different nutraceuticals with putative antidepressant activity may provide an enhanced synergistic antidepressant effect. METHODS: A phase II/III, Australian multi-site, 8-week, double-blind, RCT involving 158 outpatients with a DSM-5 diagnosis of MDD. The intervention consisted of a nutraceutical combination: S-adenosyl methionine; Folinic acid; Omega-3 fatty acids; 5-HTP, Zinc picolinate, and relevant co-factors versus placebo. The primary outcome was change in MADRS score. Hypothesis-driven analyses of potential moderators of response involving key SNPs, and BDNF were also conducted. RESULTS: Placebo was superior to the nutraceutical combination in reducing MADRS score (differential reduction -1.75 points), however a mixed linear model revealed a non-significant Group X Time interaction (p = 0.33). Response rates were 40% for the active intervention and 51% for the placebo; remission rates were 34% and 43% for active and placebo groups, respectively. No significant differences were found between groups on any other secondary depression, anxiety, psychosocial, or sleep outcome measures. Key SNPs and BDNF did not significantly moderate response. No significant differences occurred between groups for total adverse effects, aside from more nausea in the active group. LIMITATIONS: Very high placebo response rates suggest a placebo run-in design may have been valuable. INTERPRETATION: The adoption of a nutraceutical 'shotgun' approach to treating MDD was not supported, and appeared to be less effective than adding placebo to treatment as usual.

Adjunctive S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) in treating non-remittent major depressive disorder: An 8-week double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

There has been increasing interest in nutraceutical augmentation strategies to boost the efficacy of antidepressants. This study assessed whether S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), a methyl donor that occurs naturally in the body, may be of such benefit. We conducted an 8-week, double-blind RCT in which 107 treatment non-remittent outpatients with DSM-5 diagnosed Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) were randomized to either SAMe or placebo adjunctively to antidepressants. One-carbon cycle nutrients, pertinent single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and BDNF were also analysed as potential moderators of response. A linear mixed-effects model revealed a significant overall reduction in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score across time, however there was no significant between-group difference observed (p = 0.51). Response rates at Week 8 were 54.3% in the SAMe group and 50.0% in the placebo group, with remission rates 43.5% for SAMe and 38.3% for placebo (all results NS). No effect of SAMe was found on any secondary outcome. Differential response to SAMe was not modified by a range of key genotypes (e.g. COMT), nor reflected in a change of homocysteine, red cell folate, or BDNF. Use of SAMe elicited no significant adverse effects beyond placebo, however it was implicated in one case of serotonin syndrome-like symptoms. This study concludes that 800 mg/day of SAMe is not an effective adjunctive treatment in MDD, and no obvious biomarker reflected any differential response to treatment. Due to such a distinctly high placebo-response (despite rigorous screening), future studies should employ a placebo run-in period and other strategies to minimize placebo response.

The Therapy Attitudes and Process Questionnaire: A Brief Measure of Factors Related to Psychotherapy Appointment Attendance.

BACKGROUND: Patient non-attendance and dropout remains problematic in mental health settings. The theory of planned behavior (TPB) has proven useful in understanding such challenges in a variety of healthcare settings, but the absence of an adequate measure in mental health has hampered research in this area. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to develop and conduct an initial psychometric investigation of a brief measure, the Therapy Attitudes and Process Questionnaire (TAP), utilizing the TPB to understand factors associated with attendance in mental health settings. METHODS: We used a quantitative survey-based design and administered the TAP to 178 adult participants who were engaged in individual or group psychotherapy. A subsample also provided data to assess validity and reliability. RESULTS: A four-factor solution was revealed through exploratory factor analysis and accounted for approximately 75 % of the variance in scores. Factors corresponded to those predicted by the TPB. Analyses supported the reliability, validity, and internal consistency of the measure. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the TAP may be a useful tool for examining patients' attitudes and beliefs about attending psychotherapy appointments. The TAP can be used to better understand patients' intentions, attitudes, perceptions of behavioral control, and subjective norms relating to psychotherapy attendance. This understanding may facilitate improved outcomes for patients and clinicians.