Brain-derived neurotrophic factor association with amygdala response in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) has an essential role in synaptic plasticity and neurogenesis. BDNF mediates amygdala-dependent learning for both aversive and appetitive emotional memories. The expression of BDNF in limbic regions is posited to contribute the development of depression, and amygdala responsivity is a potential marker of depressive state. METHODS: The present study examined the relationship between platelet BDNF levels and amygdala volume and function in major depressive disorder (MDD). Participants were 23 MDD (mean age 38.9 years) and 23 healthy controls (mean age 38.8 years). All participants were recruited from the community. MDD participants were in a current depressive episode of moderate severity and medication-free. Amygdala responses were acquired during a functional MRI task of implicit emotional processing with sad facial expressions. RESULTS: Significant correlation was observed between platelet BDNF levels and left amygdala responses, but no significant correlations were found with right amygdala responses or with amygdala volumes. LIMITATIONS: Interactions with neuroprotective as well as neurotoxic metabolites in the kyneurenine pathway were not examined. CONCLUSIONS: Relationship between BDNF levels and amygdala responsivity to emotionally salient stimuli in MDD could reflect the importance of BDNF in amygdala-dependent learning with clinical implications for potential pathways for treatment.

What Lies Beneath the Face Value of a BOX WARNING: A Deeper Look at Brodalumab.

Brodalumab, a fully human antibody of the interleukin-17 receptor, is highly effective in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. However, based on safety signals identified in clinical trials, brodalumab carries a boxed warning regarding possible risks of suicidal ideation and behavior (SIB). The validity of this link remains controversial, especially in the context of the psoriasis population as well as clinical trial data from other recently approved treatments. Herein, we critically examine the association between brodalumab and SIB. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(8 Suppl):s29-34.

Other race effect on amygdala response during affective facial processing in major depression.

OBJECTIVE: The other race effect, also known as own race bias, refers to the enhanced ability to recognize faces belonging to one's own race relative to faces from another race. The other race effect is associated with increased amygdala response in healthy individuals. The amygdala is a key node in emotion processing which shows impaired functioning in depression and has been proposed to be a marker of depressive state. We investigated the impact of the other race effect on amygdala responses in depression. METHODS: Participants were 30 individuals with major depression (mean age 39.4 years) and 23 healthy individuals (mean age: 38.8 years) recruited from the community. Participants were Asian, Black/African American and Caucasian. During a functional MRI scan, participants viewed Caucasian faces which displayed a range of sad expressions. A region of interest analysis of left and right amygdala responses was performed. RESULTS: Increased bilateral amygdala responses were observed in response to the Caucasian face stimuli in participants who were Asian or Black/African American as compared to Caucasian participants in both healthy individuals and individuals with major depression. There was no significant group by race interaction effect. CONCLUSIONS: Increased amygdala responses associated with the other race effect were evident in both individuals with major depression and in healthy participants. Increased amygdala responses with the other race effect is a potential confound of the neural correlates of facial processing in healthy participants and in mental health disorders. The implications of the other race effect on impairments in interpersonal functioning in depression require further investigation.

Psychiatric adverse events during treatment with brodalumab: Analysis of psoriasis clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with psoriasis are at increased risk for psychiatric comorbidities, including suicidal ideation and behavior (SIB). OBJECTIVE: To distinguish between the underlying risk and potential for treatment-induced psychiatric adverse events in patients with psoriasis being treated with brodalumab, a fully human anti-interleukin 17 receptor A monoclonal antibody. METHODS: Data were evaluated from a placebo-controlled, phase 2 clinical trial; the open-label, long-term extension of the phase 2 clinical trial; and three phase 3, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials (AMAGINE-1, AMAGINE-2, and AMAGINE-3) and their open-label, long-term extensions of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. RESULTS: The analysis included 4464 patients with 9161.8 patient-years of brodalumab exposure. The follow-up time-adjusted incidence rates of SIB events were comparable between the brodalumab and ustekinumab groups throughout the 52-week controlled phases (0.20 vs 0.60 per 100 patient-years). In the brodalumab group, 4 completed suicides were reported, 1 of which was later adjudicated as indeterminate; all patients had underlying psychiatric disorders or stressors. LIMITATIONS: There was no comparator arm past week 52. Controlled study periods were not powered to detect differences in rare events such as suicide. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison with controls and the timing of events do not indicate a causal relationship between SIB and brodalumab treatment.

Effects of antidepressant therapy on neural components of verbal working memory in depression.

Impairments in verbal working memory are evident in major depression. Verbal working memory is comprised of the components of encoding, maintenance and retrieval. Whether the neural impairments are expressed in specific components, and how pharmacological therapy could modify the neural correlates are not well understood. We investigated the neural correlates of verbal working memory components in depression using the Sternberg task in a longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study. Serial scans were acquired in 23 patients (mean age 39.8 years) during an acute depressive episode and following 12 weeks of pharmacological therapy with duloxetine and in 22 matched healthy controls (mean age 39.1 years) at the same time points. A significant group by time interaction was evident during the long maintenance phase, extending from the left middle frontal to the middle temporal and caudate regions, in which there was reduced activation in healthy participants at the follow -up scan but there were no changes in patients. Persistent neural engagement during the maintenance phase following treatment was revealed in major depression. The findings emphasize that impairments in verbal working memory may be initiated in the maintenance phase in major depression in order to sustain performance. Further research with larger sample size and using randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind studies are required to confirm our results.

Is the Noradrenergic Symptom Cluster a Valid Construct in Adjunctive Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder?

OBJECTIVE: To identify symptoms potentially representative of a noradrenergic symptom cluster as possible predictors of response to the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (NRI) edivoxetine when used as monotherapy or adjunctive treatment in patients with DSM-IV-TR major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Pooled data from 4 adjunctive treatment trials (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor [SSRI] + edivoxetine 6-18 mg/d vs SSRI + placebo; N = 2,066) and data from 1 monotherapy trial (edivoxetine 6-18 mg/d versus placebo; N = 495) were used to identify predictors of response related to noradrenergic symptoms using a resampling-based ensemble tree method. The trials were conducted from 2008 to 2013. RESULTS: In the pooled adjunctive trials, no subgroup was identified that demonstrated a greater edivoxetine-placebo treatment difference than the overall patient cohort. In the edivoxetine monotherapy trial, no subgroup showing greater mean edivoxetine-placebo differences on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale versus the overall patient cohort was identified; a subgroup (67%) with high b​aseline Massachusetts General Hospital Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (CPFQ) total score (≥ 28) showed statistically significantly (P = .02) greater mean edivoxetine-placebo differences on the Sheehan Disability Scale versus the overall patient cohort, and subgroups with baseline CPFQ total score ≥ 28 (65%), CPFQ cognition dimension score ≥ 16 (63%), or CPFQ physical dimension score ≥ 13 (59%) showed statistically significantly (P ≤ .025) greater mean edivoxetine-placebo differences on the CPFQ total score versus the overall patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: While we could not identify symptoms predictive of response to the selective NRI edivoxetine used as adjunctive treatment, impaired cognition and physical symptoms may predict greater improvement during monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00840034, NCT01173601, NCT01187407, NCT01185340, NCT00795821.

Treatment discontinuation and tolerability as a function of dose and titration of duloxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder.

PURPOSE: We sought to better understand how dose and titration with duloxetine treatment may impact tolerability and treatment discontinuation in patients with major depressive disorder. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We investigated Phase III duloxetine trials. Group 1 was a single placebo-controlled study with a 20 mg initial dose and a slow titration to 40 and 60 mg. Group 2 was a single study with a 40 mg initial dose and final "active" doses of 40 and 60 mg (5 mg control group), with 1-week titration. Group 3 consisted of eight placebo-controlled studies with starting doses of 40, 60, and 80 mg/day with minimal titration (final dose 40-120 mg/day). Tolerability was measured by rate of discontinuation due to adverse events (DCAE). RESULTS: The DCAE in Group 1 were 3.6% in the 60 mg group, 3.3% in the 40 mg group, and 3.2% in the placebo group. In Group 2, the DCAE were 15.0% in the 60 mg group, 8.1% in the 40 mg group, and 4.9% in the 5 mg group. In Group 3, the DCAE were 9.7% and 4.2% in the duloxetine and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that starting dose and titration may have impacted tolerability and treatment discontinuation. A lower starting dose of duloxetine and slower titration may contribute to improving treatment tolerability for patients with major depressive disorder.

Comparison of antidepressant classes and the risk and time course of suicide attempts in adults: propensity matched, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Placebo-controlled clinical trials have led to concern over possible increased risk of suicide-related events in some populations exposed to antidepressants. AIMS: To evaluate the risk of suicide attempts by antidepressant drug class and the presence or absence of depression. METHOD: A retrospective propensity-matched new-user cohort study was used to compare participants with incident depression classified by antidepressant treatment with each other and with the general population. RESULTS: Among the treated group, the suicide attempt rate peaked in the month prior to diagnosis then decreased steadily over the next 6 months. Among the pharmacologically untreated group, the highest rate was seen in the second month after diagnosis. Cohorts with depression had significantly higher suicide attempt risk than the general population, but the treated group did not differ significantly from the untreated group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on antidepressants did not have significantly higher risk compared with untreated patients. No significant differences were observed for patients treated with individual serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or by class (SSRI v. SNRI cohorts).

Impact of non-remission of depression on costs and resource utilization: from the COmorbidities and symptoms of DEpression (CODE) study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the economic impact of sustained non-remission of depression on the total annual all-cause healthcare costs of patients with a history of depression. METHODS: Adults with ≥2 claims with depression diagnosis codes from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database were invited to participate in this retrospective/prospective fixed-cohort repeated-measures study. Patients with scores >5 at initial survey and 6 month assessment on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) were considered to be in 'sustained non-remission', while those with scores ≤5 at both assessments were considered to be in 'sustained remission'. Patients also completed self-report instruments to assess pain, fatigue, anxiety, sleep difficulty, and other health and wellness domains. Survey data were linked to patient claims (12 month pre- and post-initial-survey periods). After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics using propensity scores, post-survey costs and resource utilization were compared between remission and non-remission groups using non-parametric bootstrapping methods. RESULTS: Of the 640 patients who met inclusion criteria, 140 (21.9%) were in sustained remission and 348 (54.5%) never achieved remission. Using propensity-score adjusted costs, sustained non-remission of depression was associated with higher annual healthcare expenditures of >$2300 per patient ($14,627 vs. $12,313, p = 0.0010) compared to remitted patients. Higher costs were associated with greater resource utilization and increased medication use. Non-remitters were prescribed more medications than remitters, including antidepressants and second-generation antipsychotics. Although length of antidepressant exposure over 12 months was similar, remitters were more likely to be adherent to antidepressants. Non-remission was associated with anxiety, pain, fatigue, sleep disruption, diabetes, anemia, obesity, and heavy drinking. CONCLUSION: Failing to achieve remission of depression was associated with increased costs and greater resource utilization. Clinicians should strive to achieve sustained remission in patients with depression. Study limitations included reliance on claims data for initial identification of cohort and high rate of attrition in the analytic sample.

Multimodal functional and structural neuroimaging investigation of major depressive disorder following treatment with duloxetine.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal neuroimaging studies of major depressive disorder (MDD) have most commonly assessed the effects of antidepressants from the serotonin reuptake inhibitor class and usually reporting a single measure. Multimodal neuroimaging assessments were acquired from MDD patients during an acute depressive episode with serial measures during a 12-week treatment with the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) duloxetine. METHODS: Participants were medication-free MDD patients (n = 32; mean age 40.2 years) in an acute depressive episode and healthy controls matched for age, gender, and IQ (n = 25; mean age 38.8 years). MDD patients received treatment with duloxetine 60 mg daily for 12 weeks with an optional dose increase to 120 mg daily after 8 weeks. All participants had serial imaging at weeks 0, 1, 8, and 12 on a 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner. Neuroimaging tasks included emotional facial processing, negative attentional bias (emotional Stroop), resting state functional MRI and structural MRI. RESULTS: A significant group by time interaction was identified in the anterior default mode network in which MDD patients showed increased connectivity with treatment, while there were no significant changes in healthy participants. In the emotional Stroop task, increased posterior cingulate activation in MDD patients normalized following treatment. No significant group by time effects were observed for happy or sad facial processing, including in amygdala responsiveness, or in regional cerebral volumes. Reduced baseline resting state connectivity within the orbitofrontal component of the default mode network was predictive of clinical response. An early increase in hippocampal volume was predictive of clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline resting state functional connectivity was predictive of subsequent clinical response. Complementary effects of treatment were observed from the functional neuroimaging correlates of affective facial expressions, negative attentional bias, and resting state. No significant effects were observed in affective facial processing, while the interaction effect in negative attentional bias and individual group effects in resting state connectivity could be related to the SNRI class of antidepressant medication. The specificity of the observed effects to SNRI pharmacological treatments requires further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01051466 ).

Efficacy comparison of duloxetine and SSRIs at doses approved in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Approved doses of antidepressants in Japan are usually lower than those in the USA and European Union, but to date meta-analyses comparing antidepressants have all used the higher doses approved in the USA and European Union and often have used indirect comparisons. The purpose of this study was to conduct an integrated database analysis of patient level data to compare the effects of duloxetine with those of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) at the doses approved in Japan. METHODS: Pooled data were analyzed from four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that compared duloxetine at the dose range approved in Japan (40-60 mg/day) with other SSRIs (paroxetine 20 mg/day or escitalopram 10 mg/day) and placebo in patients with major depressive disorder. In total, 1,694 patients were included in the analysis (duloxetine, n=688; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, n=690; placebo, n=316). The primary outcome measure was the mean change from baseline at week 8 in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD17) total and subscale scores. RESULTS: Duloxetine and both selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were superior to placebo in HAMD17 total score at week 8 in both the all-randomized group and the more severe subgroup (HAMD17 total scores ≥19). Duloxetine was superior to SSRIs in improving the HAMD17 Retardation subscale score (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]): all-randomized group, -0.33 [-0.60, -0.07], P=0.015; severe subgroup, -0.45 [-0.83, -0.07], P=0.020). CONCLUSION: Within the dose range approved in Japan for patients with major depressive disorder, duloxetine and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors demonstrated comparable overall efficacy, with a possible advantage for duloxetine in improving loss of energy and interest. To the best of our knowledge, this analysis is unique not only in evaluating dosages specific to Japan, but also in using individual patient data and the same endpoint across studies to allow for strictly direct head-to-head data comparisons as opposed to pooling direct and indirect comparisons.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of edivoxetine as an adjunctive treatment for patients with major depressive disorder who are partial responders to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment.

BACKGROUND: This phase 2 study examined the efficacy and tolerability of edivoxetine, a highly selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, as an adjunctive treatment for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who have a partial response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) treatment. METHODS: Study design consisted of double-blind, 10-week therapy of adjunctive edivoxetine (6-18 mg once daily) or adjunctive placebo with SSRI. Inclusion/entry criteria included partial response to current SSRI by investigator opinion and a GRID 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD17) total score ≥16. The primary efficacy measure was the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) and vital signs. RESULTS: For the primary evaluable population (n=63 for adjunctive edivoxetine and n=68 for adjunctive placebo), the treatment groups did not differ significantly on the primary outcome of change from baseline to week 8 in the MADRS total score; the effect size of edivoxetine treatment was 0.26. Significant treatment differences, favoring adjunctive edivoxetine (p≤.05), were shown for improvements in role functioning and the functional impact of fatigue. For the adjunctive edivoxetine randomized group (N=111), the most frequent TEAEs were hyperhidrosis (7.2%), nausea (7.2%), erectile dysfunction (6.3%) and testicular pain (6.3%). Hemodynamic changes were observed in blood pressure and pulse rate between treatment groups. LIMITATIONS: Study was underpowered for an alpha 2-sided 0.05 significance level for the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with MDD who had a partial response to SSRIs, adjunctive edivoxetine treatment was not statistically superior to adjunctive placebo on the primary outcome measure. However, pending further study, improved functioning and remission rate suggest a potential role for edivoxetine for patients with depression.

Clinical and functional outcomes of patients who experience partial response to citalopram: secondary analysis of STAR*D.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed the public STAR*D database to better characterize the baseline clinical characteristics and functional outcomes of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who experienced partial response in order to better understand the burden associated with this outcome. METHOD: Patients (n=2,876) received treatment with citalopram. The last available Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms (QIDS-SR) from the 12-week treatment period was used to assign subjects to one of three groups: remitters QIDS-SR≤5; non-responders QIDS-SR >5 and <25% reduction from baseline; and partial responders QIDS-SR >5 and ≥25% reduction from baseline. Baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were compared across groups, as well as functional outcomes at Level 1 exit. RESULTS. Of the 2,876 patients, 943 patients (33%) were classified as remitters, 1069 (37%) as partial responders, and 854 (30%) as non-responders. The groups differed on a number of pre-treatment course of illness variables and comorbidities. In addition, remitters, partial responders, and non-responders all separated on posttreatment quality of life and functional outcomes at Level 1 exit. CONCLUSION: Partial responders demonstrated significant functional impairment at Level 1 exit, differing significantly from the patients who remitted on quality of life, mental and physical functioning, and social and work-related impairment. Adjusted outcomes showed similar differences. Differences in baseline rates of suicidality, comorbidity, and atypical presentations of depression were also observed between outcome groups. Given the substantial clinical and economic burden associated with functional impairment in depression, the need to fully treat partially responding patients to achieve depression remission and restoration of functioning is highlighted by this work.

The relationship between change in apathy and changes in cognition and functional outcomes in currently non-depressed SSRI-treated patients with major depressive disorder.

AIMS: Apathy in the context of treated major depressive disorder (MDD) is a frequently observed phenomenon in clinical practice. This study aimed to assess the validity of the Rothschild Scale for Antidepressant Tachyphylaxis® (RSAT) and the Massachusetts General Hospital Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (CPFQ) for measuring apathy, and to assess the relationship between apathy and possible contributing factors, in patients with MDD and residual apathy in the absence of depressed mood. METHODS: The underlying structure and validity of the RSAT and CPFQ were assessed via factor analysis and correlation with the Apathy Evaluation Scale-Clinician rated version (AES-C) in 483 patients who had previously responded to treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. The relationship between apathy and contributing variables was investigated via structural equation modeling. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and the RSAT, CPFQ, and AES-C. RESULTS: The RSAT and CPFQ were validated with the AES-C with respect to energy and motivation. The latent variable "Energy and Interest", based on the energy, motivation, and interest items (RSAT and CPFQ), was a major contributing factor to apathy. Improvements in function (SDS) were significantly correlated with, and predicted by, improvements in apathy and cognitive and physical functioning (assessed by the RSAT, CPFQ, and AES-C). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses provide further information on apathy and its assessment in the context of treated MDD. A better understanding of apathy will aid further investigation of this phenomenon and, ultimately, determination of the most appropriate approach for its clinical management.

Relationship between major depressive disorder and associated painful physical symptoms: analysis of data from two pooled placebo-controlled, randomized studies of duloxetine.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between painful physical symptoms (PPS) and outcomes in major depressive disorder (MDD). Post-hoc analysis of two identically designed 8-week trials compared the efficacy of 60 mg/day duloxetine (N=523) with that of placebo (N=532) in treating PPS associated with MDD. The Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain score, and the Sheehan Disability Scale global functional impairment score assessed depression symptoms, pain, and functioning, respectively. Remission was defined as a MADRS score of 10 or less, and the BPI response subgroup was defined as a 50% or greater reduction from baseline. Path analyses assessed relationships among variables. Duloxetine-treated patients who had a 50% or greater reduction in BPI score at endpoint had higher rates of remission. Path analysis indicated that 16% of likelihood of remission in depression symptoms was because of the direct effect of treatment, 41% because of pain reduction, and 43% because of functional improvement. Path analysis also indicated that 51% of improvement in functioning was attributed to pain improvement and 43% to mood improvement. Results demonstrate that improvement in pain and mood contributes to functional improvement, and pain reduction and functional improvement increase the likelihood of remission of depressive symptoms with duloxetine treatment in patients with both MDD and PPS at baseline.

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor in generalized anxiety disorder: results from a duloxetine clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) has been implicated in the pathophysiology of depression and anxiety, but has not been examined systematically in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The objective of this study was to examine the relationship between baseline BDNF level and treatment response in patients with GAD. METHODS: Patients (N=168) were from China, met criteria for DSM-IV GAD, had a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Anxiety (HADS-A) subscale score ≥10, and a Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) global functioning total score ≥12 at baseline. Study design was double-blind therapy for 15 weeks with duloxetine 60-120 mg or placebo. Efficacy measures included the HADS-A and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) total score. Change from baseline to endpoint for BDNF by treatment group was analyzed using ANCOVA models with baseline BDNF level as a covariate. RESULTS: No significant association was found between baseline plasma BDNF levels and anxiety illness severity. Patients who received duloxetine (n=88) had a significantly greater mean increase in plasma BDNF level (957.80 picograms/ml) compared with patients who received placebo (n=80; 469.93 pg/mL) (P=.007). Patients who met response and remission criteria (with either treatment) had greater mean increases in BDNF at endpoint from baseline (P≤.05) but when compared with nonresponders and nonremitters, respectively, the differences in mean increase were not statistically significant between groups. CONCLUSIONS: BDNF levels significantly increased with duloxetine treatment for GAD, but response and remission outcomes were not clearly related to an increase in plasma BDNF level.

Comprehensive review of factors implicated in the heterogeneity of response in depression.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity in overall response and outcomes to pharmacological treatment has been reported in several depression studies but with few sources that integrate these results. The goal of this study was to review the literature and attempt to identify nongenetic factors potentially predictive of overall response to depression treatments. METHODS: A comprehensive review of the literature from the last 10 years was performed using three key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane). All relevant studies that met the inclusion criteria were selected and scored for their levels of evidence using the NICE scoring method. A subjective assessment of the strength of evidence for each factor was performed using predefined criteria. RESULTS: Our broad search yielded 76 articles relevant to treatment heterogeneity. Sociodemographic factors, disease characteristics, and comorbidities were the most heavily researched areas. Some of the factors associated with more favorable overall response include being married, other social support, and low levels of baseline depressive symptoms. Evidence relating to baseline disease severity as a factor predictive of antidepressant response was particularly convincing among the factors reviewed. The presence of comorbid anxiety and pain contributed to worse antidepressant treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Several factors either predictive of or associated with overall response to antidepressant treatment have been identified. Inclusion of factors predictive of response in the design of future trials may help tailor treatments to depression patients presenting to the average clinical practice, resulting in improved outcomes.

Apathy in currently nondepressed patients treated with a SSRI for a major depressive episode: outcomes following randomized switch to either duloxetine or escitalopram.

Apathy in the context of treated major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common but understudied symptom. This multicenter, double-blind, randomized study investigated whether switching from a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) to a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), compared with switching to another SSRI, improved apathy symptoms in patients who had been treated with a SSRI for MDD for ≥ 3 months, were no longer depressed (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] total score ≤ 15), and continued to have apathy (Apathy Evaluation Scale--Clinician rated version [AES-C] total score >30). Following 8 weeks of treatment, both the duloxetine (SNRI, 244 patients) and escitalopram (SSRI, 239 patients) groups significantly improved from baseline on the AES-C total score (least squares mean change [standard error]: duloxetine -13.9 [0.54]; escitalopram -13.5 [0.54], both P < 0.001), and on the secondary apathy, depression, and functional outcomes. There were no significant differences between the two groups on any measure, including AES-C total score (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]: -0.4 [-1.87 to 1.10], P = 0.612; primary objective). There was a significant within-group improvement in apathy in the subgroup who received escitalopram before and during the study. There were few differences in safety between the two groups. This study did not support the hypothesis that switching from a SSRI to a SNRI has a beneficial effect on apathy symptoms. However, given the study limitations, it is possible that more specific targeting of the noradrenergic pathway would be of benefit.

Assessment of depressive symptoms and functional outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder treated with duloxetine versus placebo: primary outcomes from two trials conducted under the same protocol.

OBJECTIVE: Return of functional ability is a central goal in the treatment of major depressive disorder. We conducted two trials with the same protocol that was designed to assess functioning after 8 Weeks of treatment with duloxetine. METHODS: The a priori primary outcome was improvement in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) item 7 (work/activities). Secondary outcomes included improvement in depressive symptoms assessed by the HAMD Maier subscale, and improvement in functioning assessed by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and the Social Adaptation Self-evaluation Scale (SASS). Patients were randomly assigned to duloxetine 60 mg/day (Trial I, n = 257; Trial II, n = 261) or placebo (Trial I, n = 127; Trial II, n = 131). Changes from baseline were analyzed using a mixed-effects model repeated measures approach. RESULTS: At Week 8, duloxetine was superior to placebo in improving HAMD work/activities (p < 0.001) in Trial II, but not Trial I (p = 0.051), and Maier scores (p < 0.01) in both trials. At Week 12, duloxetine was superior to placebo on improving SASS scores in both trials, and the SDS in Trial II. CONCLUSION: Treatment with duloxetine was associated with significant improvement in depressive symptoms compared with placebo, but improvement in HAMD work/activities was inconsistent at 8 weeks.

A pragmatic 12-week, randomized trial of duloxetine versus generic selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors in the treatment of adult outpatients in a moderate-to-severe depressive episode.

Some evidence suggests that medications that modulate both serotonin and norepinephrine may be more effective than selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in severe major depressive disorder (MDD). This prospective pragmatic trial tests this hypothesis. Patients with severe MDD were randomly assigned to either duloxetine (a serotonin and norepinephrine-reuptake inhibitor) or physicians' choice of four generic SSRIs. Nonblinded, flexibly dosed treatment was used to mimic clinical practice. To address potential investigator bias, the patient-reported Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR) was used as the primary efficacy outcome measure. A total of 750 outpatients (19.2%, African descent; 14.8%, Hispanic) were randomized. The primary outcome, remission at week 12 by QIDS-SR, was numerically greater for duloxetine compared with SSRIs (36 vs. 32%), but this difference was not statistically significant. Mean changes in secondary outcomes were significantly superior in favor of duloxetine for the Hamilton Depression Scale-17 item, the Brief Pain Inventory, and the Sheehan Disability Scale. Remission superiority on the QIDS-SR was not achieved. Significantly greater benefit for duloxetine compared with SSRIs was demonstrated on measures of pain and functioning. Study demographics suggest a more generalizable racial and ethnic population than is typical in randomized clinical trials.