Clinical characteristics indexing genetic differences in schizophrenia: a systematic review.

Genome-wide studies are among the best available tools for identifying etiologic processes underlying psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia. However, it is widely recognized that disorder heterogeneity may limit genetic insights. Identifying phenotypes indexing genetic differences among patients with non-affective psychotic disorder will improve genome-wide studies of these disorders. The present study systematically reviews existing literature to identify phenotypes that index genetic differences among patients with schizophrenia and related disorders. We systematically reviewed family-based studies and genome-wide molecular-genetic studies investigating whether phenotypic variation in patients with non-affective psychotic disorders (according to DSM or equivalent systems) was associated with genome-wide genetic variation (PROSPERO number CRD42019136169). An electronic database search of PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO from inception until 17 May 2019 resulted in 4347 published records. These records included a total of 813 relevant analyses from 264 articles. Two independent raters assessed the quality of all analyses based on methodologic rigor and power. We found moderate to strong evidence for a positive association between genetic/familial risk for non-affective psychosis and four phenotypes: early age of onset, negative/deficit symptoms, chronicity, and functional impairment. Female patients also tended to have more affected relatives. Severity of positive symptoms was not associated with genetic/familial risk for schizophrenia. We suggest that phenotypes with the most evidence for reflecting genetic difference in participating patients should be measured in future large-scale genetic studies of schizophrenia to improve power to discover causal variants and to facilitate discovery of modifying genetic variants.

Clinical characteristics indexing genetic differences in bipolar disorder - a systematic review.

Bipolar disorder is a heterogenous condition with a varied clinical presentation. While progress has been made in identifying genetic variants associated with bipolar disorder, most common genetic variants have not yet been identified. More detailed phenotyping (beyond diagnosis) may increase the chance of finding genetic variants. Our aim therefore was to identify clinical characteristics that index genetic differences in bipolar disorder.We performed a systematic review of all genome-wide molecular genetic, family, and twin studies investigating familial/genetic influences on the clinical characteristics of bipolar disorder. We performed an electronic database search of PubMed and PsycInfo until October 2022. We reviewed title/abstracts of 2693 unique records and full texts of 391 reports, identifying 445 relevant analyses from 142 different reports. These reports described 199 analyses from family studies, 183 analyses from molecular genetic studies and 63 analyses from other types of studies. We summarized the overall evidence per phenotype considering study quality, power, and number of studies.We found moderate to strong evidence for a positive association of age at onset, subtype (bipolar I versus bipolar II), psychotic symptoms and manic symptoms with familial/genetic risk of bipolar disorder. Sex was not associated with overall genetic risk but could indicate qualitative genetic differences. Assessment of genetically relevant clinical characteristics of patients with bipolar disorder can be used to increase the phenotypic and genetic homogeneity of the sample in future genetic studies, which may yield more power, increase specificity, and improve understanding of the genetic architecture of bipolar disorder.

Statistical power in clinical trials of interventions for mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has suggested that statistical power is suboptimal in many biomedical disciplines, but it is unclear whether power is better in trials for particular interventions, disorders, or outcome types. We therefore performed a detailed examination of power in trials of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders. METHODS: We extracted data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Mental Health). We focused on continuous efficacy outcomes and estimated power to detect predetermined effect sizes (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.20-0.80, primary SMD = 0.40) and meta-analytic effect sizes (ESMA). We performed meta-regression to estimate the influence of including underpowered studies in meta-analyses. RESULTS: We included 256 reviews with 10 686 meta-analyses and 47 384 studies. Statistical power for continuous efficacy outcomes was very low across intervention and disorder types (overall median [IQR] power for SMD = 0.40: 0.32 [0.19-0.54]; for ESMA: 0.23 [0.09-0.58]), only reaching conventionally acceptable levels (80%) for SMD = 0.80. Median power to detect the ESMA was higher in treatment-as-usual (TAU)/waitlist-controlled (0.49-0.63) or placebo-controlled (0.12-0.38) trials than in trials comparing active treatments (0.07-0.13). Adequately-powered studies produced smaller effect sizes than underpowered studies (B = -0.06, p ⩽ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Power to detect both predetermined and meta-analytic effect sizes in psychiatric trials was low across all interventions and disorders examined. Consistent with the presence of reporting bias, underpowered studies produced larger effect sizes than adequately-powered studies. These results emphasize the need to increase sample sizes and to reduce reporting bias against studies reporting null results to improve the reliability of the published literature.

Commentary: The evidence base regarding the long-term effects of childhood mental disorder treatments needs to be strengthened - reply to Dekkers et al. (2023).

In their reply to our editorial (Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2023, 64, 464), Dekkers et al. (Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2023, 64, 470) argue that treatment is the best choice for children with mental disorders because there is 'sound evidence' that interventions are effective, also in the long term. We agree that there is sound evidence for treatment effectiveness in the short-term and there is some evidence for longer-term effects of certain specific treatments, such as behavioral parent training in children with behavioral disorders, as acknowledged in our editorial. However, we strongly disagree that there is sound evidence for long-term effectiveness.

Editorial Perspective: Are treatments for childhood mental disorders helpful in the long run? An overview of systematic reviews.

Mental disorders may have severe consequences for individuals across their entire lifespan, especially when they start in childhood. Effective treatments (both psychosocial and pharmacological) exist for the short-term treatment of common mental disorders in young people. These could, at least theoretically, prevent future problems, including recurrence of the disorder, development of comorbidity, or problems in functioning. However, little is known about the actual effects of these treatments in the long run. In the current editorial perspective, we consider the available evidence for the long-term (i.e., ≥2 years) effectiveness and safety of treatments for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, behavior disorders, and anxiety and depressive disorders for children between 6 and 12 years old. After providing an overview of the literature, we reflect on two key issues, namely, methodological difficulties in establishing long-term treatment effects, and the risk-benefit ratio of treatments for common childhood mental disorders. In addition, we discuss future research possibilities, clinical implications, and other approaches, specifically whole-of-society-actions that could potentially reduce the burden of common childhood mental disorders.

Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy: Updated comparisons and meta-analyses of newer versus older trials.

BACKGROUND: Valid assessment of drug efficacy and safety requires an evidence base free of reporting bias. Using trial reports in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval packages as a gold standard, we previously found that the published literature inflated the apparent efficacy of antidepressant drugs. The objective of the current study was to determine whether this has improved with recently approved drugs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using medical and statistical reviews in FDA drug approval packages, we identified 30 Phase II/III double-blind placebo-controlled acute monotherapy trials, involving 13,747 patients, of desvenlafaxine, vilazodone, levomilnacipran, and vortioxetine; we then identified corresponding published reports. We compared the data from this newer cohort of antidepressants (approved February 2008 to September 2013) with the previously published dataset on 74 trials of 12 older antidepressants (approved December 1987 to August 2002). Using logistic regression, we examined the effects of trial outcome and trial cohort (newer versus older) on transparent reporting (whether published and FDA conclusions agreed). Among newer antidepressants, transparent publication occurred more with positive (15/15 = 100%) than negative (7/15 = 47%) trials (OR 35.1, CI95% 1.8 to 693). Controlling for trial outcome, transparent publication occurred more with newer than older trials (OR 6.6, CI95% 1.6 to 26.4). Within negative trials, transparent reporting increased from 11% to 47%. We also conducted and contrasted FDA- and journal-based meta-analyses. For newer antidepressants, FDA-based effect size (ESFDA) was 0.24 (CI95% 0.18 to 0.30), while journal-based effect size (ESJournals) was 0.29 (CI95% 0.23 to 0.36). Thus, effect size inflation, presumably due to reporting bias, was 0.05, less than for older antidepressants (0.10). Limitations of this study include a small number of trials and drugs-belonging to a single class-and a focus on efficacy (versus safety). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting bias persists but appears to have diminished for newer, compared to older, antidepressants. Continued efforts are needed to further improve transparency in the scientific literature.

Transdiagnostic development of internalizing psychopathology throughout the life course up to age 45: a World Mental Health Surveys report.

BACKGROUND: Depressive and anxiety disorders are highly comorbid, which has been theorized to be due to an underlying internalizing vulnerability. We aimed to identify groups of participants with differing vulnerabilities by examining the course of internalizing psychopathology up to age 45. METHODS: We used data from 24158 participants (aged 45+) in 23 population-based cross-sectional World Mental Health Surveys. Internalizing disorders were assessed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). We applied latent class growth analysis (LCGA) and investigated the characteristics of identified classes using logistic or linear regression. RESULTS: The best-fitting LCGA solution identified eight classes: a healthy class (81.9%), three childhood-onset classes with mild (3.7%), moderate (2.0%), or severe (1.1%) internalizing comorbidity, two puberty-onset classes with mild (4.0%) or moderate (1.4%) comorbidity, and two adult-onset classes with mild comorbidity (2.7% and 3.2%). The childhood-onset severe class had particularly unfavorable sociodemographic outcomes compared to the healthy class, with increased risks of being never or previously married (OR = 2.2 and 2.0, p < 0.001), not being employed (OR = 3.5, p < 0.001), and having a low/low-average income (OR = 2.2, p < 0.001). Moderate or severe (v. mild) comorbidity was associated with 12-month internalizing disorders (OR = 1.9 and 4.8, p < 0.001), disability (B = 1.1-2.3, p < 0.001), and suicidal ideation (OR = 4.2, p < 0.001 for severe comorbidity only). Adult (v. childhood) onset was associated with lower rates of 12-month internalizing disorders (OR = 0.2, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We identified eight transdiagnostic trajectories of internalizing psychopathology. Unfavorable outcomes were concentrated in the 1% of participants with childhood onset and severe comorbidity. Early identification of this group may offer opportunities for preventive interventions.

Increased risks for mental disorders among LGB individuals: cross-national evidence from the World Mental Health Surveys.

PURPOSE: Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals, and LB women specifically, have an increased risk for psychiatric morbidity, theorized to result from stigma-based discrimination. To date, no study has investigated the mental health disparities between LGB and heterosexual AQ1individuals in a large cross-national population-based comparison. The current study addresses this gap by examining differences between LGB and heterosexual participants in 13 cross-national surveys, and by exploring whether these disparities were associated with country-level LGBT acceptance. Since lower social support has been suggested as a mediator of sexual orientation-based differences in psychiatric morbidity, our secondary aim was to examine whether mental health disparities were partially explained by general social support from family and friends. METHODS: Twelve-month prevalence of DSM-IV anxiety, mood, eating, disruptive behavior, and substance disorders was assessed with the WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview in a general population sample across 13 countries as part of the World Mental Health Surveys. Participants were 46,889 adults (19,887 males; 807 LGB-identified). RESULTS: Male and female LGB participants were more likely to report any 12-month disorder (OR 2.2, p < 0.001 and OR 2.7, p < 0.001, respectively) and most individual disorders than heterosexual participants. We found no evidence for an association between country-level LGBT acceptance and rates of psychiatric morbidity between LGB and heterosexualAQ2 participants. However, among LB women, the increased risk for mental disorders was partially explained by lower general openness with family, although most of the increased risk remained unexplained. CONCLUSION: These results provide cross-national evidence for an association between sexual minority status and psychiatric morbidity, and highlight that for women, but not men, this association was partially mediated by perceived openness with family. Future research into individual-level and cross-national sexual minority stressors is needed.

Comparing the evidential strength for psychotropic drugs: a Bayesian meta-analysis.

Approval and prescription of psychotropic drugs should be informed by the strength of evidence for efficacy. Using a Bayesian framework, we examined (1) whether psychotropic drugs are supported by substantial evidence (at the time of approval by the Food and Drug Administration), and (2) whether there are systematic differences across drug groups. Data from short-term, placebo-controlled phase II/III clinical trials for 15 antipsychotics, 16 antidepressants for depression, nine antidepressants for anxiety, and 20 drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were extracted from FDA reviews. Bayesian model-averaged meta-analysis was performed and strength of evidence was quantified (i.e. BFBMA). Strength of evidence and trialling varied between drugs. Median evidential strength was extreme for ADHD medication (BFBMA = 1820.4), moderate for antipsychotics (BFBMA = 365.4), and considerably lower and more frequently classified as weak or moderate for antidepressants for depression (BFBMA = 94.2) and anxiety (BFBMA = 49.8). Varying median effect sizes (ESschizophrenia = 0.45, ESdepression = 0.30, ESanxiety = 0.37, ESADHD = 0.72), sample sizes (Nschizophrenia = 324, Ndepression = 218, Nanxiety = 254, NADHD = 189.5), and numbers of trials (kschizophrenia = 3, kdepression = 5.5, kanxiety = 3, kADHD = 2) might account for differences. Although most drugs were supported by strong evidence at the time of approval, some only had moderate or ambiguous evidence. These results show the need for more systematic quantification and classification of statistical evidence for psychotropic drugs. Evidential strength should be communicated transparently and clearly towards clinical decision makers.

Efficacy of combined oral contraceptives for depressive symptoms and overall symptomatology in premenstrual syndrome: pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: Combined oral contraceptives are often considered a treatment option for women with premenstrual syndrome or premenstrual dysphoric disorder also seeking contraception, but evidence for this treatment is scarce. We aimed to determine (1) the level of evidence for the efficacy of combined oral contraceptives in managing premenstrual depressive symptoms and overall premenstrual symptomatology and (2) the comparative efficacy of combined oral contraceptives (the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number CRD42020205510). DATA SOURCES: We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, EMCare, and Embase from inception to June 3, 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All randomized clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy of combined oral contraceptives in women with premenstrual syndrome or premenstrual dysphoric disorder were considered eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: A random effect Bayesian pairwise and network meta-analysis was conducted with change in premenstrual depressive symptoms and overall premenstrual symptomatology between baseline and 3 cycles as outcome. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Of 3664 records, 9 eligible trials were included that studied 1205 women with premenstrual syndrome or premenstrual dysphoric disorder (mean age per study range, 24.6-36.5 years). The pairwise meta-analysis revealed that combined oral contraceptives were more efficacious than placebo in treating overall premenstrual symptomatology (standardized mean difference, 0.41; 95% credible interval, 0.17-0.67), but not premenstrual depressive symptoms specifically (standardized mean difference, 0.22; 95% credible interval, -0.06 to 0.47). However, none of the combined oral contraceptives were more effective than each other in reducing premenstrual depressive symptoms and overall premenstrual symptomatology. CONCLUSION: Combined oral contraceptives may improve overall premenstrual symptomatology in women with premenstrual syndrome or premenstrual dysphoric disorder, but not premenstrual depressive symptoms. There is no evidence for one combined oral contraceptive being more efficacious than any other.

Mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders in the ICD-11: an international perspective on key changes and controversies.

An update of the chapter on Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental Disorders in the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) is of great interest around the world. The recent approval of the 11th Revision of the ICD (ICD-11) by the World Health Organization (WHO) raises broad questions about the status of nosology of mental disorders as a whole as well as more focused questions regarding changes to the diagnostic guidelines for specific conditions and the implications of these changes for practice and research. This Forum brings together a broad range of experts to reflect on key changes and controversies in the ICD-11 classification of mental disorders. Taken together, there is consensus that the WHO's focus on global applicability and clinical utility in developing the diagnostic guidelines for this chapter will maximize the likelihood that it will be adopted by mental health professionals and administrators. This focus is also expected to enhance the application of the guidelines in non-specialist settings and their usefulness for scaling up evidence-based interventions. The new mental disorders classification in ICD-11 and its accompanying diagnostic guidelines therefore represent an important, albeit iterative, advance for the field.

The antidepressant standoff: why it continues and how to resolve it.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressant medications (ADMs) are widely used and long-term use is increasing. Given this extensive use and recommendation of ADMs in guidelines, one would expect ADMs to be universally considered effective. Surprisingly, that is not the case; fierce debate on their benefits and harms continues. This editorial seeks to understand why the controversy continues and how consensus can be achieved. METHODS: 'Position' paper. Critical analysis and synthesis of relevant literature. RESULTS: Advocates point at ADMs impressive effect size (number needed to treat, NNT = 6-8) in acute phase treatment and continuation/maintenance ADM treatment prevention relapse/recurrence in acute phase ADM responders (NNT = 3-4). Critics point at the limited clinically significant surplus value of ADMs relative to placebo and argue that effectiveness is overstated. We identified multiple factors that fuel the controversy: certainty of evidence is low to moderate; modest efficacy on top of strong placebo effects allows critics to focus on small net efficacy and advocates on large gross efficacy; ADM withdrawal symptoms masquerade as relapse/recurrence; lack of association between ADM treatment and long-term outcome in observational databases. Similar problems affect psychological treatments as well, but less so. We recommend four approaches to resolve the controversy: (1) placebo-controlled trials with relevant long-term outcome assessments, (2) inventive analyses of observational databases, (3) patient cohort studies including effect moderators to improve personalized treatment, and (4) psychological treatments as universal first-line treatment step. CONCLUSIONS: Given the public health significance of depression and increased long-term ADM usage, new approaches are needed to resolve the controversy.

A Prescription Trend Analysis of Methylphenidate: Relation to Study Reports on Efficacy.

Use of methylphenidate in children has increased substantially, despite conflicting evidence regarding efficacy. In this study, prescription data were analyzed in relation to the publication of new evidence regarding efficacy. Incidence rates and prescribed doses of methylphenidate increased, with a decline during the last few years. Duration of use is still increasing. In half of the cases, starting dosages are higher than recommended in guidelines. There was little evidence that publication of new evidence directly influenced the use of methylphenidate. Recent and critical study findings should receive more attention to contribute to the development and use of treatment guidelines for ADHD and evidence-based methylphenidate use.

Childhood generalized specific phobia as an early marker of internalizing psychopathology across the lifespan: results from the World Mental Health Surveys.

BACKGROUND: Specific phobia (SP) is a relatively common disorder associated with high levels of psychiatric comorbidity. Because of its early onset, SP may be a useful early marker of internalizing psychopathology, especially if generalized to multiple situations. This study aimed to evaluate the association of childhood generalized SP with comorbid internalizing disorders. METHODS: We conducted retrospective analyses of the cross-sectional population-based World Mental Health Surveys using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Outcomes were lifetime prevalence, age of onset, and persistence of internalizing disorders; past-month disability; lifetime suicidality; and 12-month serious mental illness. Logistic and linear regressions were used to assess the association of these outcomes with the number of subtypes of childhood-onset (< 13 years) SP. RESULTS: Among 123,628 respondents from 25 countries, retrospectively reported prevalence of childhood SP was 5.9%, 56% of whom reported one, 25% two, 10% three, and 8% four or more subtypes. Lifetime prevalence of internalizing disorders increased from 18.2% among those without childhood SP to 46.3% among those with one and 75.6% those with 4+ subtypes (OR = 2.4, 95% CI 2.3-2.5, p < 0.001). Twelve-month persistence of lifetime internalizing comorbidity at interview increased from 47.9% among those without childhood SP to 59.0% and 79.1% among those with 1 and 4+ subtypes (OR = 1.4, 95% CI 1.4-1.5, p < 0.001). Respondents with 4+ subtypes also reported significantly more disability (3.5 days out of role in the past month) than those without childhood SP (1.1 days) or with only 1 subtype (1.8 days) (B = 0.56, SE 0.06, p < 0.001) and a much higher rate of lifetime suicide attempts (16.8%) than those without childhood SP (2.0%) or with only 1 subtype (6.5%) (OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.7-1.8, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This large international study shows that childhood-onset generalized SP is related to adverse outcomes in the internalizing domain throughout the life course. Comorbidity, persistence, and severity of internalizing disorders all increased with the number of childhood SP subtypes. Although our study cannot establish whether SP is causally associated with these poor outcomes or whether other factors, such as a shared underlying vulnerability, explain the association, our findings clearly show that childhood generalized SP identifies an important target group for early intervention.

Predicting antidepressant response by monitoring early improvement of individual symptoms of depression: individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Improvement in depression within the first 2 weeks of antidepressant treatment predicts good outcomes, but non-improvers can still respond or remit, whereas improvers often do not.AimsWe aimed to investigate whether early improvement of individual depressive symptoms better predicts response or remission. METHOD: We obtained individual patient data of 30 trials comprising 2184 placebo-treated and 6058 antidepressant-treated participants. Primary outcome was week 6 response; secondary outcomes were week 6 remission and week 12 response and remission. We compared models that only included improvement in total score by week 2 (total improvement model) with models that also included improvement in individual symptoms. RESULTS: For week 6 response, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and negative and positive predictive values of the total improvement model were 0.73, 0.67 and 0.74 compared with 0.77, 0.70 and 0.71 for the item improvement model. Model performance decreased for week 12 outcomes. Of predicted non-responders, 29% actually did respond by week 6 and 43% by week 12, which was decreased from the baseline (overall) probabilities of 51% by week 6 and 69% by week 12. In post hoc analyses with continuous rather than dichotomous early improvement, including individual items did not enhance model performance. CONCLUSIONS: Examining individual symptoms adds little to the predictive ability of early improvement. Additionally, early non-improvement does not rule out response or remission, particularly after 12 rather than 6 weeks. Therefore, our findings suggest that routinely adapting pharmacological treatment because of limited early improvement would often be premature.Declaration of interestNone.

Hiding negative trials by pooling them: a secondary analysis of pooled-trials publication bias in FDA-registered antidepressant trials.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on reporting bias generally examined whether trials were published in stand-alone publications. In this study, we investigated whether pooled-trials publications constitute a specific form of reporting bias. We assessed whether negative trials were more likely to be exclusively published in pooled-trials publications than positive trials and examined the research questions, individual trial results, and conclusions presented in these articles. METHODS: Data from a cohort of 105 randomized controlled trials of 16 antidepressants were extracted from earlier publications and the corresponding Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify pooled-trials publications. RESULTS: We found 107 pooled-trials publications that reported results of 23 (72%) of 32 trials not published in stand-alone publications. Only two (3.8%) of 54 positive trials were published exclusively in pooled-trials publications, compared with 21 (41.1%) of 51 negative trials (p < 0.001). Thirteen (12%) of 107 publications had as primary aim to present data on the trial's primary research question (drug efficacy compared with placebo). Only four of these publications, reporting on five (22%) trials, presented individual efficacy data for the primary research question. Additionally, only five (5%) of 107 pooled-trials publications had a negative conclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with positive trials, negative trials of antidepressants for depression were much more likely to be reported exclusively in pooled-trials publications. Pooled-trials publications flood the evidence base with often-redundant articles that, instead of addressing the original primary research question, present (positive) results on secondary questions. Therefore, pooled-trials publications distort the apparent risk-benefit profile of antidepressants.

A comparison of DSM-5 and DSM-IV agoraphobia in the World Mental Health Surveys.

BACKGROUND: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, version 5 (DSM-5) definition of agoraphobia (AG) as an independent diagnostic entity makes it timely to re-examine the epidemiology of AG. Study objective was to present representative data on the characteristics of individuals who meet DSM-IV criteria for AG (AG without a history of panic disorder [PD] and PD with AG) but not DSM-5 criteria, DSM-5 but not DSM-IV criteria, or both sets of criteria. METHODS: Population-based surveys from the World Mental Health Survey Initiative including adult respondents (n = 136,357) from 27 countries across the world. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview was used to assess AG and other disorders. RESULTS: Lifetime and 12-month prevalence estimates of DSM-5 AG (1.5% and 1.0%) were comparable to DSM-IV (1.4% and 0.9%). Of respondents meeting criteria in either system, 57.1% met criteria in both, while 24.2% met criteria for DSM-5 only and 18.8% for DSM-IV only. Severe role impairment due to AG was reported by a lower proportion of respondents who met criteria only for DSM-IV AG (30.4%) than those with both DSM-5 and DSM-IV AG (44.0%; χ 21 = 4.7; P = 0.031). The proportion of cases with any comorbidity was lower among respondents who met criteria only for DSM-IV AG (78.7%) than those who met both sets (92.9%; χ 21 = 14.5; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This first large survey shows that, compared to the DSM-IV, the DSM-5 identifies a substantial group of new cases with AG, while the prevalence rate remains stable at 1.5%. Severity and comorbidity are higher in individuals meeting DSM-5 AG criteria compared with individuals meeting DSM-IV AG criteria only.

Initial severity and antidepressant efficacy for anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that antidepressant benefits are smaller for mild than severe depression. Because antidepressants are also used for anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), we examined the influence of severity for these disorders. METHODS: We used individual patient data of eight trials (3,430 participants) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD); four trials (1,195 participants) for social anxiety disorder (SAD); four trials (1,132 participants) for OCD; three trials (1,071 participants) for PTSD; and 10 trials (2,151 participants) for panic disorder (PD). Mixed-effects models were used to investigate an interaction between severity and treatment group. RESULTS: For GAD and PD, severity moderated antidepressant efficacy. The antidepressant-placebo difference was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.4-2.5; SMD: 0.21) Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) points for participants with mild GAD (baseline HAM-A = 10), increasing to 4.0 (3.4-4.6; SMD: 0.45) or greater for severely ill participants (HAM-A ≥ 30). For PD, the difference was 0.4 (0.3-0.6) panic attacks/2 weeks for participants with 10 panic attacks/2 weeks at baseline, increasing to 4.7 (3.0-6.4) for participants with 40. For SAD, OCD, and PTSD, no interaction was found. Across severity levels, the differences were 16.1 (12.9-19.3; SMD: 0.59) Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale points, 3.4 (2.5-4.4, SMD: 0.39) Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale points, and 10.3 (6.9-13.6; SMD: 0.41) Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale points. CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressants are equally effective across severity levels for SAD, OCD, and PTSD. For GAD and PD, however, benefits are small at low severity, and the benefit-risk ratio may be unfavorable for these patients.

Influence of baseline severity on antidepressant efficacy for anxiety disorders: meta-analysis and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants are established first-line treatments for anxiety disorders, but it is not clear whether they are equally effective across the severity range. AIMS: To examine the influence of baseline severity of anxiety on antidepressant efficacy for generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), social anxiety disorder (SAD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and panic disorder. METHOD: Fifty-six trials of second-generation antidepressants for the short-term treatment of an anxiety disorder were included. Baseline and change scores were extracted for placebo and treatment groups in each trial. Mixed effects meta-regression was used to investigate the effects of treatment group, baseline severity and their interaction. RESULTS: Increased baseline severity did not predict greater improvement in drug groups compared with placebo groups. Standardised regression coefficients of the interaction term between baseline severity and treatment group were 0.04 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.20, P = 0.65) for GAD, -0.06 (95% CI -0.20 to 0.09, P = 0.43) for SAD, 0.04 (95% CI -0.07 to 0.16, P = 0.46) for OCD, 0.16 (95% CI -0.22 to 0.53, P = 0.37) for PTSD and 0.002 (95% CI -0.10 to 0.10, P = 0.96) for panic disorder. For OCD, baseline severity did predict improvement in both placebo and drug groups equally (ß = 0.11, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.17, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: No relationship between baseline severity and drug-placebo difference was found for anxiety disorders. These results suggest that if the efficacy of antidepressants is considered clinically relevant, they may be prescribed to patients with anxiety regardless of symptom severity.

Poor guideline adherence in the initiation of antidepressant treatment in children and adolescents in the Netherlands: choice of antidepressant and dose.

The Dutch guideline for the treatment of depression in young people recommends initiating antidepressant treatment with fluoxetine, as the evidence for its efficacy is strongest and the risk of suicidality may be lower than with other antidepressants. Furthermore, low starting doses are recommended. We aimed to determine whether antidepressant prescriptions are in accord with guidelines. A cohort of young people aged between 6 and 17 at the time of antidepressant initiation was selected from IABD, a Dutch pharmacy prescription database. The percentage of prescriptions for each antidepressant was determined. Starting and maintenance doses were determined and compared with recommendations for citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, and sertraline. During the study period, 2942 patients initiated antidepressant treatment. The proportion of these young people who were prescribed fluoxetine increased from 10.1 % in 1994-2003 to 19.7 % in 2010-2014. However, the most commonly prescribed antidepressants were paroxetine in 1994-2003 and citalopram in 2004-2014. The median starting and maintenance doses were ≤0.5 DDD/day for tricyclic antidepressants and 0.5-1 DDD/day for SSRIs and other antidepressants. Starting doses were guideline-concordant 58 % of the time for children, 31 % for preteens, and 16 % for teens. Sixty percent of teens were prescribed an adult starting dose. In conclusion, guideline adherence was poor. Physicians preferred citalopram over fluoxetine, in contrast to the recommendations. Furthermore, although children were prescribed a low starting dose relatively frequently, teens were often prescribed an adult starting dose. These results suggest that dedicated effort may be necessary to improve guideline adherence.