The prescriber's guide to classic MAO inhibitors (phenelzine, tranylcypromine, isocarboxazid) for treatment-resistant depression.

This article is a clinical guide which discusses the "state-of-the-art" usage of the classic monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) antidepressants (phenelzine, tranylcypromine, and isocarboxazid) in modern psychiatric practice. The guide is for all clinicians, including those who may not be experienced MAOI prescribers. It discusses indications, drug-drug interactions, side-effect management, and the safety of various augmentation strategies. There is a clear and broad consensus (more than 70 international expert endorsers), based on 6 decades of experience, for the recommendations herein exposited. They are based on empirical evidence and expert opinion-this guide is presented as a new specialist-consensus standard. The guide provides practical clinical advice, and is the basis for the rational use of these drugs, particularly because it improves and updates knowledge, and corrects the various misconceptions that have hitherto been prominent in the literature, partly due to insufficient knowledge of pharmacology. The guide suggests that MAOIs should always be considered in cases of treatment-resistant depression (including those melancholic in nature), and prior to electroconvulsive therapy-while taking into account of patient preference. In selected cases, they may be considered earlier in the treatment algorithm than has previously been customary, and should not be regarded as drugs of last resort; they may prove decisively effective when many other treatments have failed. The guide clarifies key points on the concomitant use of incorrectly proscribed drugs such as methylphenidate and some tricyclic antidepressants. It also illustrates the straightforward "bridging" methods that may be used to transition simply and safely from other antidepressants to MAOIs.

The efficacy of antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy for adult acute-phase depression: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) are both recommended interventions in depression treatment guidelines based on literature reviews and meta-analyses. However, 'conventional' meta-analyses comparing their efficacy are limited by their reliance on reported study-level information and a narrow focus on depression outcome measures assessed at treatment completion. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, considered the gold standard in evidence synthesis, can improve the quality of the analyses when compared with conventional meta-analysis. AIMS: We describe the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antidepressants and IPT for adult acute-phase depression across a range of outcome measures, including depressive symptom severity as well as functioning and well-being, at both post-treatment and follow-up (PROSPERO: CRD42020219891). METHOD: We will conduct a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify randomised clinical trials comparing antidepressants and IPT in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression. We will invite the authors of these studies to share the participant-level data of their trials. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted using mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects at post-treatment and follow-up for all outcome measures that are assessed in at least two studies. CONCLUSIONS: This will be the first IPD meta-analysis examining antidepressants versus IPT efficacy. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by comparing the short- and long-term effects of two widely used interventions across a range of outcome measures using state-of-the-art statistical techniques.

Discontinuation of antidepressant medication after mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for recurrent depression: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and maintenance antidepressant medication (mADM) both reduce the risk of relapse in recurrent depression, but their combination has not been studied. AIMS: To investigate whether MBCT with discontinuation of mADM is non-inferior to MBCT+mADM. METHOD: A multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT00928980). Adults with recurrent depression in remission, using mADM for 6 months or longer (n= 249), were randomly allocated to either discontinue (n= 128) or continue (n= 121) mADM after MBCT. The primary outcome was depressive relapse/recurrence within 15 months. A confidence interval approach with a margin of 25% was used to test non-inferiority. Key secondary outcomes were time to relapse/recurrence and depression severity. RESULTS: The difference in relapse/recurrence rates exceeded the non-inferiority margin and time to relapse/recurrence was significantly shorter after discontinuation of mADM. There were only minor differences in depression severity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest an increased risk of relapse/recurrence in patients withdrawing from mADM after MBCT.

Adding mindfulness-based cognitive therapy to maintenance antidepressant medication for prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depressive disorder: Randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and maintenance antidepressant medication (mADM) both reduce the risk of relapse in recurrent depression, but their combination has not been studied. Our aim was to investigate whether the addition of MBCT to mADM is a more effective prevention strategy than mADM alone. METHODS: This study is one of two multicenter randomised trials comparing the combination of MBCT and mADM to either intervention on its own. In the current trial, recurrently depressed patients in remission who had been using mADM for 6 months or longer (n=68), were randomly allocated to either MBCT+mADM (n=33) or mADM alone (n=35). Primary outcome was depressive relapse/recurrence within 15 months. Key secondary outcomes were time to relapse/recurrence and depression severity. Analyses were based on intention-to-treat. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups on any of the outcome measures. LIMITATIONS: The current study included patients who had recovered from depression with mADM and who preferred the certainty of continuing medication to the possibility of participating in MBCT. Lower expectations of mindfulness in the current trial, compared with the parallel trial, may have caused selection bias. In addition, recruitment was hampered by the increasing availability of MBCT in the Netherlands, and even about a quarter of participants included in the trial who were allocated to the control group chose to get MBCT elsewhere. CONCLUSIONS: For this selection of recurrently depressed patients in remission and using mADM for 6 months or longer, MBCT did not further reduce their risk for relapse/recurrence or their (residual) depressive symptoms.

The effectiveness of the cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy for chronic depression: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It is widely agreed that chronic depression is difficult to treat, knowledge about optimal treatment approaches is emerging. METHOD: A multisite randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing the cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP), a psychotherapy model developed specifically to treat chronic depression (n = 67) with care as usual (CAU; evidence-based treatments, n = 72) over a period of 52 weeks, with 23 sessions on average, in 3 outpatient clinics in the Netherlands. In both arms algorithm-based pharmacotherapy was provided. Patients (aged 18-65) met criteria for a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder with diagnostic specifiers (chronic, without interepisode recovery) or with co-occurring dysthymic disorder indicating a chronic course. The Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) Self-Report was used as the primary outcome measure. Mixed-effects linear regression analysis was used to compare the changes on the IDS scores between CBASP and CAU. The IDS was administered before treatment, and after 8, 16, 32 and 52 weeks. RESULTS: At week 52, patients assigned to CBASP had a greater reduction of depressive symptoms compared to patients assigned to CAU (t = -2.00, p = 0.05). However, CBASP and CAU did not differ from each other on the IDS after 8 weeks (t = 0.49, p = 0.63), 16 weeks (t = -0.03, p = 0.98) and 32 weeks (t = -0.17, p = 0.86) of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This trial shows that CBASP is at least as effective as standard evidence-based treatments for chronic depression. In the long run, CBASP appears to have an added effect.

[Depressive disorders in ethnic minorities in the doctor's office]. / Depressie bij allochtonen in de spreekkamer.

Doctors often find the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric disorders in non-Western ethnic minorities difficult. Not only do language and culture form barriers to understanding, the symptoms of these disorders can be expressed in unfamiliar ways. We describe three cases that illustrate how the clinical presentation of depression in ethnic minorities living in the Netherlands can differ from that of Dutch patients. While the core symptoms of depressive disorder are similar, ethnic minority patients exhibit somatic symptoms more frequently. On average, they also have more severe symptoms, more psychiatric comorbidity such as anxiety and psychosis; the illness is also more often complicated by a multitude of social problems. Improving the diagnosis and treatment of depression in ethnic minorities requires knowledge and the exploration of potential differences in symptom presentation and the patient's explanatory models of mental illness. Patients and physicians also need to discuss their mutual expectations, in order to reach a consensus about treatment goals.

Preventing relapse in recurrent depression using mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, antidepressant medication or the combination: trial design and protocol of the MOMENT study.

BACKGROUND: Depression is a common psychiatric disorder characterized by a high rate of relapse and recurrence. The most commonly used strategy to prevent relapse/recurrence is maintenance treatment with antidepressant medication (mADM). Recently, it has been shown that Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) is at least as effective as mADM in reducing the relapse/recurrence risk. However, it is not yet known whether combination treatment of MBCT and mADM is more effective than either of these treatments alone. Given the fact that most patients have a preference for either mADM or for MBCT, the aim of the present study is to answer the following questions. First, what is the effectiveness of MBCT in addition to mADM? Second, how large is the risk of relapse/recurrence in patients withdrawing from mADM after participating in MBCT, compared to those who continue to use mADM after MBCT? METHODS/DESIGN: Two parallel-group, multi-center randomized controlled trials are conducted. Adult patients with a history of depression (3 or more episodes), currently either in full or partial remission and currently treated with mADM (6 months or longer) are recruited. In the first trial, we compare mADM on its own with mADM plus MBCT. In the second trial, we compare MBCT on its own, including tapering of mADM, with mADM plus MBCT. Follow-up assessments are administered at 3-month intervals for 15 months. Primary outcome is relapse/recurrence. Secondary outcomes are time to, duration and severity of relapse/recurrence, quality of life, personality, several process variables, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. DISCUSSION: Taking into account patient preferences, this study will provide information about a) the clinical and cost-effectiveness of mADM only compared with mADM plus MBCT, in patients with a preference for mADM, and b) the clinical and cost-effectiveness of withdrawing from mADM after MBCT, compared with mADM plus MBCT, in patients with a preference for MBCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00928980.

Long-term outcome of bipolar depressed patients receiving lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine in nonresponders: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a novel design.

OBJECTIVE: In two previous manuscripts, we described the efficacy of lamotrigine versus placebo as add-on to lithium (followed by the addition of paroxetine in nonresponders) in the short-term treatment of bipolar depression. In this paper we describe the long-term (68 weeks) outcome of that study. METHODS: A total of 124 bipolar depressed patients receiving lithium were randomized to addition of lamotrigine or placebo. After eight weeks, paroxetine was added to nonresponders for another eight weeks. Responders continued medication and were followed for up to 68 weeks or until a relapse or recurrence of a depressive or manic episode. RESULTS: After eight weeks, the addition of lamotrigine to lithium was significantly more efficacious than addition of placebo, while after addition of paroxetine in nonresponders both groups further improved with no significant difference between groups at week 16. During follow-up the efficacy of lamotrigine was maintained: time to relapse or recurrence was longer for the lamotrigine group [median time 10.0 months (confidence interval: 1.1-18.8)] versus the placebo group [3.5 months (confidence interval: 0.7-7.0)]. CONCLUSION: In patients with bipolar depression, despite continued use of lithium, addition of lamotrigine revealed a continued benefit compared to placebo throughout the entire study.

Treatment of depression in patients from ethnic minority groups in the Netherlands.

This article presents the results of a large efficacy study comparing different forms of therapy for major depressive disorder (MDD), including interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and pharmacotherapy. Patients were randomized to either IPT, IPT in combination with anti-depressant medication, IPT in combination with pill-placebo or medication only. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD). Patients were treated for 12 to 16 weeks. Ratings were performed at baseline, after 6 weeks of treatment and at the end of treatment. Ethnic minority patients (EMP) had higher scores on the HAMD than non-EMP for every rating period. However, the rate of improvement was the same for EMP and non-EMP. The higher mean scores of EMP on the HAMD could not be explained as solely due to higher scores on somatic items of the rating scales. The attrition rate in EMP (45.9%) was significantly higher than in non-EMP (24.4%), even in the structured treatment format studied. The results suggest that standard antidepressant therapy, be it medication, psychotherapy or both, may be effective for depressed minority patients but therapists should focus on enhancing adherence to treatment.

Efficacy and safety of lamotrigine as add-on treatment to lithium in bipolar depression: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Lamotrigine is one of the pharmacologic options for the treatment of bipolar depression but has only been studied as monotherapy. This study compared the acute effects of lamotrigine and placebo as add-on therapy to ongoing treatment with lithium in patients with bipolar depression. METHOD: Outpatients (N = 124) aged 18 years and older with a DSM-IV bipolar I or II disorder and a major depressive episode (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] score > or = 18 and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Version [CGI-BP] severity of depression score > or = 4) while receiving lithium treatment (0.6-1.2 mmol/L) were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with lamotrigine (titrated to 200 mg/d) or placebo. The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline in total score on the MADRS at week 8. Secondary outcome measures were response (defined as a reduction of > or = 50% on the MADRS and/or change of depression score on the CGI-BP of "much improved" or "very much improved" compared to baseline) and switch to mania or hypomania (defined as a CGI-BP severity of mania score of at least mildly ill at any visit). Patients were included in the study between August 2002 (Spain started in October 2003) and May 2005. RESULTS: Endpoint mean change from baseline MADRS total score was -15.38 (SE = 1.32) points for lamotrigine and -11.03 (SE = 1.36) points for placebo (t = -2.29, df = 104, p = .024). Significantly more patients responded to lamotrigine than to placebo on the MADRS (51.6% vs. 31.7%, p = .030), but not on the CGI-BP change of depression (64.1% vs. 49.2%, p = .105). Switch to mania or hypomania occurred in 5 patients (7.8%) receiving lamotrigine and 2 patients (3.3%) receiving placebo (p = .441). CONCLUSION: Lamotrigine was found effective and safe as add-on treatment to lithium in the acute treatment of bipolar depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00224510.

Treatment of chronically depressed patients: a multisite randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of 'Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy' (CBASP) for chronic depressions versus usual secondary care.

BACKGROUND: 'Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy' (CBASP) is a form of psychotherapy specifically developed for patients with chronic depression. In a study in the U.S., remarkable favorable effects of CBASP have been demonstrated. However, no other studies have as yet replicated these findings and CBASP has not been tested outside the United States. This protocol describes a randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of CBASP in the Netherlands. METHODS/DESIGN: The purpose of the present paper is to report the study protocol of a multisite randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of 'Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy' (CBASP) for chronic depression in the Netherlands. In this study, CBASP in combination with medication, will be tested versus usual secondary care in combination with medication. The aim is to recruit 160 patients from three mental health care organizations. Depressive symptoms will be assessed at baseline, after 8 weeks, 16 weeks, 32 weeks and 52 weeks, using the 28-item Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (IDS). Effect modification by co morbid anxiety, alcohol consumption, general and social functioning and working alliance will be tested. GEE analyses of covariance, controlling for baseline value and center will be used to estimate the overall treatment effectiveness (difference in IDS score) at post-treatment and follow up. The primary analysis will be by 'intention to treat' using double sided tests. An economic analysis will compare the two groups in terms of mean costs and cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. DISCUSSION: The study will provide an answer to the question whether the favorable effects of CBASP can be replicated outside the US. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Dutch Cochrane Center, NTR1090.

Combination treatment for acute depression is superior only when psychotherapy is added to medication.

BACKGROUND: Although several forms of effective therapy exist for outpatients suffering from major depressive disorder, many patients do not profit from treatment. Combining psychotherapy and medication may be an effective strategy. However, earlier studies have rarely found a clear advantage for the combination. Where an advantage was found, a possible placebo effect of adding 2 types of treatment could not be ruled out as cause for the superior effect of the combination. METHODS: A total of 353 patients were screened, of whom 193 were randomized over 4 conditions: nefazodone plus clinical management, interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), the combination of the two or the combination of IPT and pill-placebo. All patients suffered from major depressive disorder and had a score of at least 14 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale (HAMD). The patients were treated for 12-16 weeks. At baseline, at 6 weeks and on completion of treatment, ratings were performed by independent raters. The primary outcome measure was the HAMD, and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) the secondary outcome measure. RESULTS: Of the 193 patients included, 138 completed the trial. All treatments were effective. Using a random regression model, no differences between treatments were found on the HAMD. On the MADRS, however, the combination of medication with psychotherapy was more effective in reducing depressive symptoms compared to medication alone, but not to psychotherapy alone or IPT with pill-placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study yield support for the use of combining medication with psychotherapy instead of using medication only in the treatment of depressed outpatients. Combination treatment does not have an advantage over psychotherapy alone in the present study.

Severity and duration of depression, not personality factors, predict short term outcome in the treatment of major depression.

BACKGROUND: Prediction of treatment outcome has important clinical consequences. Personality factors have rarely been tested as predictors of acute outcome. Personality, demographic and illness-related characteristics were assessed at baseline for prediction of outcome of treatment in depressed out-patients. METHODS: One hundred and ninety-three patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) were enrolled in a 12 to 16 week trial. The treatment consisted of nefazodone, nefazodone in combination with interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), IPT in combination with placebo and IPT alone. Demographic and illness related variables were collected at baseline. Personality was assessed using the NEO-FFI. This instrument measures five dimensions of personality. A hierarchical logistic regression was carried out to test for significant predictors of remittance. Further a multiple regression analysis was used to investigate variables predictive of changes on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale as dependent variable. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed a significant relationship of outcome with severity, duration of index episode, and use of medical services (UMS). None of the personality variables was predictive of outcome. Regression analyses showed that these disease related variables each uniquely predicted outcome, but that personality factors did not significantly contribute to the prediction model. LIMITATIONS: The study was carried out in secondary and tertiary care centers and may not be generalizable to other populations. Personality dimensions were assessed with a self-report instrument and may be prone to bias. CONCLUSIONS: Severity and duration of the index episode, and to a lesser extent, UMS, and not personality factors, predict outcome in the short term treatment of MDD.