Venlafaxine's therapeutic reference range in the treatment of depression revised: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor venlafaxine is among the most prescribed antidepressant drugs worldwide and, according to guidelines, its dose titration should be guided by drug-level monitoring of its active moiety (AM) which consists of venlafaxine (VEN) plus active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV). This indication of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), however, assumes a clear concentration/effect relationship for a drug, which for VEN has not been systematically explored yet. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the relationship between blood levels, efficacy, and adverse reactions in order to suggest an optimal target concentration range for VEN oral formulations for the treatment of depression. METHODS: Four databases (MEDLINE (PubMed), PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched in March 2022 for relevant articles according to a previously published protocol. Reviewers independently screened references and performed data extraction and critical appraisal. RESULTS: High-quality randomized controlled trials investigating concentration/efficacy relationships and studies using a placebo lead-in phase were not found. Sixty-eight articles, consisting mostly of naturalistic TDM studies or small noncontrolled studies, met the eligibility criteria. Of them, five cohort studies reported a positive correlation between blood levels and antidepressant effects after VEN treatment. Our meta-analyses showed (i) higher AM and (ii) higher ODV concentrations in patients responding to VEN treatment when compared to non-responders (n = 360, k = 5). AM concentration-dependent occurrence of tremor was reported in one study. We found a linear relationship between daily dose and AM concentration within guideline recommended doses (75-225 mg/day). The population-based concentration ranges (25-75% interquartile) among 11 studies (n = 3200) using flexible dosing were (i) 225-450 ng/ml for the AM and (ii) 144-302 ng/ml for ODV. One PET study reported an occupancy of 80% serotonin transporters for ODV serum levels above 85 ng/ml. Based on our findings, we propose a therapeutic reference range for AM of 140-600 ng/ml. CONCLUSION: VEN TDM within a range of 140 to 600 ng/ml (AM) will increase the probability of response in nonresponders. A titration within the proposed reference range is recommended in case of non-response at lower drug concentrations as a consequence of VEN's dual mechanism of action via combined serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. Drug titration towards higher concentrations will, however, increase the risk for ADRs, in particular with supratherapeutic drug concentrations.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of fezolinetant with hormone and nonhormone therapies for treatment of vasomotor symptoms due to menopause.

IMPORTANCE: The neurokinin 3 receptor antagonist fezolinetant 45 mg/d significantly reduced frequency/severity of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) of menopause compared with placebo in two phase 3 randomized controlled trials. Its efficacy relative to available therapies is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare efficacy with fezolinetant 45 mg and hormone therapy (HT) and non-HT for VMS in postmenopausal women. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Using OvidSP, we systematically searched multiple databases for phase 3 or 4 randomized controlled trials in postmenopausal women with ≥7 moderate to severe VMS per day or ≥50 VMS per week published/presented in English through June 25, 2021. Mean change in frequency and severity of moderate to severe VMS from baseline to week 12 and proportion of women with ≥75% reduction in VMS frequency at week 12 were assessed using fixed-effect models. FINDINGS: The network meta-analysis included data from the pooled phase 3 fezolinetant trials plus 23 comparator publications across the outcomes analyzed (frequency, 19 [34 regimens]; severity, 6 [7 regimens]; ≥75% response, 9 [15 regimens]). Changes in VMS frequency did not differ significantly between fezolinetant 45 mg and any of the 27 HT regimens studied. Fezolinetant 45 mg reduced the frequency of moderate to severe VMS events per day significantly more than all non-HTs evaluated: paroxetine 7.5 mg (mean difference [95% credible interval {CrI}], 1.66 [0.63-2.71]), desvenlafaxine 50 to 200 mg (mean differences [95% CrI], 1.12 [0.10-2.13] to 2.16 [0.90-3.40]), and gabapentin ER 1800 mg (mean difference [95% CrI], 1.63 [0.48-2.81]), and significantly more than placebo (mean difference, 2.78 [95% CrI], 1.93-3.62]). Tibolone 2.5 mg (the only HT regimen evaluable for severity) significantly reduced VMS severity compared with fezolinetant 45 mg. Fezolinetant 45 mg significantly reduced VMS severity compared with desvenlafaxine 50 mg and placebo and did not differ significantly from higher desvenlafaxine doses or gabapentin ER 1800 mg. For ≥75% responder rates, fezolinetant 45 mg was less effective than tibolone 2.5 mg (not available in the United States) and conjugated estrogens 0.625 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg (available only as 0.45 mg/20 mg in the United States), did not differ significantly from other non-HT regimens studied and was superior to desvenlafaxine 50 mg and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The only HT regimens that showed significantly greater efficacy than fezolinetant 45 mg on any of the outcomes analyzed are not available in the United States. Fezolinetant 45 mg once daily was statistically significantly more effective than other non-HTs in reducing the frequency of moderate to severe VMS. RELEVANCE: These findings may inform decision making with regard to the individualized management of bothersome VMS due to menopause.

Head-To-Head Comparison of Vortioxetine Versus Desvenlafaxine in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder With Partial Response to SSRI Therapy: Results of the VIVRE Study.

Objective: To compare the efficacy of vortioxetine and the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) desvenlafaxine in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) experiencing partial response to initial treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI).Methods: This randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group, 8-week study of vortioxetine (10 or 20 mg/d; n = 309) versus desvenlafaxine (50 mg/d: n = 293) was conducted from June 2020 to February 2022 in adults with a DSM-5 diagnosis of MDD who experienced partial response to SSRI monotherapy. The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline to week 8 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Differences between groups were analyzed using mixed models for repeated measures.Results: Non-inferiority of vortioxetine versus desvenlafaxine was established in terms of mean change from baseline to week 8 in MADRS total score; however, a numeric advantage was observed in favor of vortioxetine (difference, -0.47 MADRS points [95% CI, -1.61 to 0.67]; P = .420). At week 8, significantly more vortioxetine-treated than desvenlafaxine-treated patients had achieved symptomatic and functional remission (ie, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale [CGI-S] score ≤ 2) (32.5% vs 24.8%, respectively; odds ratio = 1.48 [95% CI, 1.03 to 2.15]; P = .034). Vortioxetine-treated patients also experienced significantly greater improvements in daily and social functioning assessed by the Functioning Assessment Short Test (P = .009 and .045 vs desvenlafaxine, respectively) and reported significantly greater satisfaction with their medication assessed by the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (P = .044). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 46.1% and 39.6% of patients in the vortioxetine and desvenlafaxine groups, respectively; these were mostly mild or moderate in intensity (> 98% of all TEAEs in each group).Conclusions: Compared with the SNRI desvenlafaxine, vortioxetine was associated with significantly higher rates of CGI-S remission, better daily and social functioning, and greater treatment satisfaction in patients with MDD and partial response to SSRIs. These findings support the use of vortioxetine before SNRIs in the treatment algorithm in patients with MDD.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04448431.

A randomized controlled trial of desvenlafaxine-induced structural brain changes in the treatment of persistent depressive disorder.

The anatomical changes that antidepressant medications induce in the brain and through which they exert their therapeutic effects remain largely unknown. We randomized 61 patients with Persistent Depressive Disorder (PDD) to receive either desvenlafaxine or placebo in a 12-week trial and acquired anatomical MRI scans in 42 of those patients at baseline before randomization and immediately at the end of the trial. We also acquired MRIs once in 39 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. We assessed whether the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, desvenlafaxine, differentially changed cortical thickness during the trial compared with placebo. Patients relative to controls at baseline had thinner cortices across the brain. Although baseline thickness was not associated with symptom severity, thicker baseline cortices predicted greater reduction in symptom severity in those treated with desvenlafaxine but not placebo. We did not detect significant treatment-by-time effects on cortical thickness. These findings suggest that baseline thickness may serve as predictive biomarkers for treatment response to desvenlafaxine. The absence of treatment-by-time effects may be attributable either to use of insufficient desvenlafaxine dosing, a lack of desvenlafaxine efficacy in treating PDD, or the short trial duration.

Antidepressants for the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder in the maintenance phase: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

A systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety of antidepressants to treat adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) in the maintenance phase. This study searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases and included only double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with an enrichment design: patients were stabilized on the antidepressant of interest during the open-label study and then randomized to receive the same antidepressant or placebo. The outcomes were the 6-month relapse rate (primary outcome, efficacy), all-cause discontinuation (acceptability), discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability), and the incidence of individual adverse events. The risk ratio with a 95% credible interval was calculated. The meta-analysis comprised 34 studies (n = 9384, mean age = 43.80 years, and %females = 68.10%) on 20 antidepressants (agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, tianeptine, venlafaxine, vilazodone, and vortioxetine) and a placebo. In terms of the 6-month relapse rate, amitriptyline, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, tianeptine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine outperformed placebo. Compared to placebo, desvenlafaxine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine had lower all-cause discontinuation; however, sertraline had a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Compared to placebo, venlafaxine was associated with a lower incidence of dizziness, while desvenlafaxine, sertraline, and vortioxetine were associated with a higher incidence of nausea/vomiting. In conclusion, desvenlafaxine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine had reasonable efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability in the treatment of adults with stable MDD.

Using Machine Learning to Predict Remission in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder Treated With Desvenlafaxine.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common and burdensome condition that has low rates of treatment success for each individual treatment. This means that many patients require several medication switches to achieve remission; selecting an effective antidepressant is typically a sequential trial-and-error process. Machine learning techniques may be able to learn models that can predict whether a specific patient will respond to a given treatment, before it is administered. This study uses baseline clinical data to create a machine-learned model that accurately predicts remission status for a patient after desvenlafaxine (DVS) treatment. METHODS: We applied machine learning algorithms to data from 3,399 MDD patients (90% of the 3,776 subjects in 11 phase-III/IV clinical trials, each described using 92 features), to produce a model that uses 26 of these features to predict symptom remission, defined as an 8-week Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score of 7 or below. We evaluated that learned model on the remaining held-out 10% of the data (n = 377). RESULTS: Our resulting classifier, a trained linear support vector machine, had a holdout set accuracy of 69.0%, significantly greater than the probability of classifying a patient correctly by chance. We demonstrate that this learning process is stable by repeatedly sampling part of the training dataset and running the learner on this sample, then evaluating the learned model on the held-out instances of the training set; these runs had an average accuracy of 67.0% ± 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Our model, based on 26 clinical features, proved sufficient to predict DVS remission significantly better than chance. This may allow more accurate use of DVS without waiting 8 weeks to determine treatment outcome, and may serve as a first step toward changing psychiatric care by incorporating clinical assistive technologies using machine-learned models.

Desvenlafaxina para el tratamiento de la depresión moderada a severa en pacientes con cáncer de mama usuarias de Tamoxifeno / Desvenlafaxine for the treatment of moderate to severe depression in patients with breast cancer who use Tamoxifen

INTRODUCCIÓN: En Perú, la prevalencia de la depresión en mujeres con cáncer de mama (estadío I o II) ha sido reportada en un rango de 21.9% a 25.6%, y por niveles en un 16.9% para síntomas leves, 6.3% moderado y 2.4% severo. El tratamiento antidepresivo usado en primera línea, como los Inhibidores selectivos de la recaptación de serotonina, inhiben la CYP2D6 en diferentes grados. Los nuevos agentes antidepresivos han mostrado un mejor perfil en su prescripción conjunta. Algunos recomiendan evitar fármacos como la paroxetina y fluoxetina para el tratamiento conjunto. La literatura sugiere que los antidepresivos más seguros son la Venlafaxina, Desvenlafaxina y Mirtazapina. CUADRO CLÍNICO: El tratamiento de la depresión, preferentemente moderada a severa, de primera línea es el uso de IRSS, así como nuevos agentes que han mostrado menor efecto adverso y mayor eficacia. En mujeres, el uso del Tamoxifeno puede inducir síntomas propios de la menopausia y se ha reportado eficacia de antidepresivos como la Venlafaxina para el tratamiento de los sofocos en conjunto con el Tamoxifeno. La coprescripción de la Desvenlafaxina y el Tamoxifeno se ha sugerido por su baja concentración en el plasma, aunque la evidencia no sea suficiente. TECNOLOGÍA SANITARIA: La Desvenlafaxina es el principal metabolito activo de la Venlafaxina, es un antidepresivo de la clase de los inhibidores de la recaptación de serotonina y norepinefrina. La desvenlafaxina inhibe la recaptación de neurotransmisores en los transportadores de serotonina, noradrenalina y dopamina. La Desvenlafaxina inhibe los transportadores de serotonina y con una afinidad 10 veces superior a la de los transportadores de noradrenalina y los transportadores de dopamina con la menor afinidad. Se puede utilizar para el tratamiento de depresión mayor en adultos y síntomas como el sofoco en mujeres pre y pos menopáusicas. Está formulado como un comprimido de liberación prolongada. OBJETIVO: Evaluar la eficacia y seguridad, así como documentos relacionados a la decisión de cobertura de la Desvenlafaxina en pacientes con cáncer de mama comparado a otros antidepresivos. METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en las bases de datos bibliográficas: MEDLINE (PubMed), LILACS, Cochrane Library, así como en buscadores genéricos de Internet incluyendo Google Scholar. Así también, se hizo una búsqueda en agencias que realizan evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC). RESULTADOS: Se identificó un ensayo clínico abierto y dos GPC. No se encontraron ETS o Evaluaciones económicas en la región. CONCLUSIONES: La evidencia en relación a la interacción de la Desvenlafaxina y el uso del Tamoxifeno concomitante es insuficiente. Un único estudio de tipo farmacocinético, con el uso concomitante, no alteró la concentración minima, reciente y máxima de la Desvenlafaxina. Las guías de práctica clínica identificadas, en general, recomiendan el uso (o coprescripción) de la Desvenlafaxina en mujeres con cáncer de mama usuarias de Tamoxifeno por su nivel de eficacia semejante a otros Inhibidores de Recaptación de Noradrenalina y la baja concentración en plasma del endoxifeno. El nivel de concentración mínima reportada se sugiere como un parámetro, farmacocinético y farmacodinámico, a favor al momento de tomar la decisión de la elección del fármaco y su posología. Las guías de práctica clínica identificadas, en general, recomiendan el uso (o coprescripción) de la Desvenlafaxina en mujeres con cáncer de mama usuarias de Tamoxifeno por su nivel de eficacia semejante a otros Inhibidores de recaptación de Noradrenalina y la baja concentración en plasma del endoxifeno. Cuando sea posible, se recomienda el uso de Citalopram, Escitalopram, Venlafaxina y Desvenlafaxina, dosis bajas de Sertralina o Mirtazapina como antidepresivos de primera línea. Finalmente y de modo general, se recomienda no usar antidepresivos de forma rutinaria para el tratamiento de depresión leve o subclínica, más bien considerar el nivel de severidad, principalmente en el tratamiento de la depresión severa.

Adherence to Desvenlafaxine Versus Usual Care and Its Impact on Health Outcomes: A Comparative Real-world Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Low adherence to treatment is associated with poorer clinical outcome and greater healthcare resources utilization (HRU). Limited data are available on the extent of adherence to each individual antidepressant. The goal of this study was to compare the adherence rate to desvenlafaxine versus usual care with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and/or other serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI), in subjects with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Retrospective, multi-centric, observational study including 574 outpatients with MDD. Data were collected from mental and primary care centers. Adherence, persistence, effectiveness, and HRU was evaluated through multivariate regression models. RESULTS: At 12-months, adjusted adherence rate was higher with desvenlafaxine versus SNRI/SSRI, 67.9% versus 59.9% (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.07-2.59, p = 0.024). Remission rate was numerically higher with desvenlafaxine versus SNRI/SSRI, 55.9% versus 50.1% (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.93-1.98, p = 0.118), as well as treatment response, 76.5% in desvenlafaxine group versus 70.8% in SNRI/SSRI group (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.82-1.90, p = 0.300). Medical visits use was higher in SNRI/SSRI than in desvenlafaxine group [9.8 (4.8) versus 9.1 (6.0), p = 0.019]. CONCLUSIONS: Desvenlafaxine is significantly associated with a higher adherence rate at 12 months compared to usual care based on SSRI or other SNRI. This suggests that desvenlafaxine could improve disease management having a positive impact on disease-associated costs.

Trajectories of Function and Symptom Change in Desvenlafaxine Clinical Trials: Toward Personalized Treatment for Depression.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity has been documented in trajectories of symptom change during antidepressant treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). It is unclear whether distinct trajectories of change exist for functioning during antidepressant treatment. METHODS/PROCEDURES: This analysis explored distinct trajectories of functioning in MDD and tested whether they corresponded to trajectories of symptom change. Data were from 4317 patients and were pooled from 9 randomized placebo-controlled trials. Growth mixture modeling was used to identify trajectories of Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) for placebo- and desvenlafaxine-treated patients. FINDINGS/RESULTS: Three trajectories were identified for symptoms (HRSD) in patients receiving placebo (mean reduction baseline to week 8, -18.4 [most favorable] to -2.6 points [least favorable]). Four HRSD trajectories were identified for patients receiving desvenlafaxine (mean reduction from baseline to week 8, -17.2 [most favorable] to -2.6 points [least favorable]). Four trajectories were identified for functioning (SDS) in patients receiving placebo (mean reduction baseline to week 8, -13.6 [most favorable] to -0.8 points [least favorable]), and 3 for desvenlafaxine (-12.8 to -1.4 points, respectively). Percentages of agreement between most favorable HRSD and SDS trajectories were 75% (placebo) and 85% (desvenlafaxine), and for least favorable trajectories were 88% (placebo) and 80% (desvenlafaxine). IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: Distinct trajectories of change based on symptoms and functioning were identified among patients with MDD receiving desvenlafaxine and among patients with MDD receiving placebo. Differentiating subpopulations of patients has the potential to provide a more personalized treatment of patients with MDD.ClinicalTrials.govIdentifiers: NCT00072774; NCT00277823; NCT00300378; NCT00384033; NCT00798707; NCT00863798; NCT01121484; NCT00824291; NCT01432457.

New generation antidepressants for depression in children and adolescents: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorders have a significant impact on children and adolescents, including on educational and vocational outcomes, interpersonal relationships, and physical and mental health and well-being. There is an association between major depressive disorder and suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide. Antidepressant medication is used in moderate to severe depression; there is now a range of newer generations of these medications. OBJECTIVES: To investigate, via network meta-analysis (NMA), the comparative effectiveness and safety of different newer generation antidepressants in children and adolescents with a diagnosed major depressive disorder (MDD) in terms of depression, functioning, suicide-related outcomes and other adverse outcomes. The impact of age, treatment duration, baseline severity, and pharmaceutical industry funding was investigated on clinician-rated depression (CDRS-R) and suicide-related outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR)), together with Ovid Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO till March 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of six to 18 year olds of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed major depressive disorder were included. Trials that compared the effectiveness of newer generation antidepressants with each other or with a placebo were included. Newer generation antidepressants included: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; norepinephrine dopamine reuptake inhibitors; norepinephrine dopamine disinhibitors (NDDIs); and tetracyclic antidepressants (TeCAs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data as Odds Ratios (ORs), and continuous data as Mean Difference (MD) for the following outcomes: depression symptom severity (clinician rated), response or remission of depression symptoms, depression symptom severity (self-rated), functioning, suicide related outcomes and overall adverse outcomes. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted in a frequentist framework using multivariate meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA). We used "informative statements" to standardise the interpretation and description of the results. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were included. There were no data for the two primary outcomes (depressive disorder established via clinical diagnostic interview and suicide), therefore, the results comprise only secondary outcomes. Most antidepressants may be associated with a "small and unimportant" reduction in depression symptoms on the CDRS-R scale (range 17 to 113) compared with placebo (high certainty evidence: paroxetine: MD -1.43, 95% CI -3.90, 1.04; vilazodone: MD -0.84, 95% CI -3.03, 1.35; desvenlafaxine MD -0.07, 95% CI -3.51, 3.36; moderate certainty evidence: sertraline: MD -3.51, 95% CI -6.99, -0.04; fluoxetine: MD -2.84, 95% CI -4.12, -1.56; escitalopram: MD -2.62, 95% CI -5.29, 0.04; low certainty evidence: duloxetine: MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.03, -0.37; vortioxetine: MD 0.60, 95% CI -2.52, 3.72; very low certainty evidence for comparisons between other antidepressants and placebo). There were "small and unimportant" differences between most antidepressants in reduction of depression symptoms (high- or moderate-certainty evidence). Results were similar across other outcomes of benefit. In most studies risk of self-harm or suicide was an exclusion criterion for the study. Proportions of suicide-related outcomes were low for most included studies and 95% confidence intervals were wide for all comparisons. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of mirtazapine (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.03, 8.04), duloxetine (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.72, 1.82), vilazodone (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.68, 1.48), desvenlafaxine (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59, 1.52), citalopram (OR 1.72, 95% CI 0.76, 3.87) or vortioxetine (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.29, 8.60) on suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo. There is low certainty evidence that escitalopram may "at least slightly" reduce odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.43, 1.84). There is low certainty evidence that fluoxetine (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87, 1.86), paroxetine (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.85, 3.86), sertraline (OR 3.03, 95% CI 0.60, 15.22), and venlafaxine (OR 13.84, 95% CI 1.79, 106.90) may "at least slightly" increase odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo. There is moderate certainty evidence that venlafaxine probably results in an "at least slightly" increased odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with desvenlafaxine (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01, 0.56) and escitalopram (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01, 0.56). There was very low certainty evidence regarding other comparisons between antidepressants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, methodological shortcomings of the randomised trials make it difficult to interpret the findings with regard to the efficacy and safety of newer antidepressant medications. Findings suggest that most newer antidepressants may reduce depression symptoms in a small and unimportant way compared with placebo. Furthermore, there are likely to be small and unimportant differences in the reduction of depression symptoms between the majority of antidepressants. However, our findings reflect the average effects of the antidepressants, and given depression is a heterogeneous condition, some individuals may experience a greater response. Guideline developers and others making recommendations might therefore consider whether a recommendation for the use of newer generation antidepressants is warranted for some individuals in some circumstances. Our findings suggest sertraline, escitalopram, duloxetine, as well as fluoxetine (which is currently the only treatment recommended for first-line prescribing) could be considered as a first option. Children and adolescents considered at risk of suicide were frequently excluded from trials, so that we cannot be confident about the effects of these medications for these individuals. If an antidepressant is being considered for an individual, this should be done in consultation with the child/adolescent and their family/caregivers and it remains critical to ensure close monitoring of treatment effects and suicide-related outcomes (combined suicidal ideation and suicide attempt) in those treated with newer generation antidepressants, given findings that some of these medications may be associated with greater odds of these events. Consideration of psychotherapy, particularly cognitive behavioural therapy, as per guideline recommendations, remains important.

Desvenlafaxine in the treatment of major depression: an updated overview.

Introduction: Major depressive disorder (MDD) remains one of the most prevalent mental health conditions. It is a chronic, relapsing condition and despite multiple treatment options, many patients fail to achieve remission of symptoms. Inadequacy of treatment has stimulated the search for agents with significant therapeutic advantages.Areas covered: This review examines literature concerning the use of desvenlafaxine in the treatment of MDD published since a previous analysis in this journal in 2014. Published papers were identified via a PubMed and Web of Science search and excluded congress presentations. Results from clinical trials in MDD, systematic reviews, and post hoc analyses in patient subgroups, are reviewed.Expert opinion: Desvenlafaxine was an effective antidepressant with favorable safety and tolerability in adults. Efficacy was demonstrated in the subgroup of peri- and post-menopausal women with MDD but not in children and adolescents. There is a relatively low potential for drug-drug interactions due to its metabolic profile. Hepatic impairment does not significantly alter dose requirements, whereas severe renal disease requires some adjustments of dose. Desvenlafaxine maybe suitable in patients with comorbid physical illnesses. Desvenlafaxine can be a first line consideration for the treatment of cases of MDD uncomplicated by medical comorbidities.

The network structure of core depressive symptom-domains in major depressive disorder following antidepressant treatment: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Network analysis (NA) conceptualizes psychiatric disorders as complex dynamic systems of mutually interacting symptoms. Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous clinical condition, and very few studies to date have assessed putative changes in its psychopathological network structure in response to antidepressant (AD) treatment. METHODS: In this randomized trial with adult depressed outpatients (n = 151), we estimated Gaussian graphical models among nine core MDD symptom-domains before and after 8 weeks of treatment with either escitalopram or desvenlafaxine. Networks were examined with the measures of cross-sectional and longitudinal structure and connectivity, centrality and predictability as well as stability and accuracy. RESULTS: At baseline, the most connected MDD symptom-domains were fatigue-cognitive disturbance, whereas at week 8 they were depressed mood-suicidality. Overall, the most central MDD symptom-domains at baseline and week 8 were, respectively, fatigue and depressed mood; in contrast, the most peripheral symptom-domain across both timepoints was appetite/weight disturbance. Furthermore, the psychopathological network at week 8 was significantly more interconnected than at baseline, and they were also structurally dissimilar. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the utility of focusing on the dynamic interaction between depressive symptoms to better understand how the treatment with ADs unfolds over time. In addition, depressed mood, fatigue, and cognitive/psychomotor disturbance seem to be central MDD symptoms that may be viable targets for novel, focused therapeutic interventions.

Exploring the utility of RDoC in differentiating effectiveness amongst antidepressants: A systematic review using proposed psychometrics as the unit of analysis for the Negative Valence Systems domain.

BACKGROUND: RDoC conceptualises psychopathology as neurobiologically-rooted behavioural psychological "constructs" that span dimensionally from normality to pathology, but its clinical utility remains controversial. AIM: To explore RDoC's potential clinical utility by examining antidepressant effectiveness through Negative Valence Systems (NVS) domain constructs. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted on Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO for antidepressant trials that included psychometric instruments assessed by Watson, Stanton & Clark (2017) to represent NVS constructs of Acute Threat, Potential Threat and Loss. RESULTS: 221 citations were identified; 13 were included in qualitative synthesis, none for quantitative analysis. All suffered from significant bias risks. 9 antidepressants were investigated, most within 1 construct, and most were found to be effective. Paroxetine, citalopram and fluvoxamine were found to be effective for Acute Threat, fluoxetine, desvenlafaxine and sertraline for Potential Threat, and sertraline, fluvoxamine, fluoxetine and desvenlafaxine effective for Loss. Nefazodone was found to be ineffective for acute fear. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence supports RDoC NVS constructs' clinical utility in assessing antidepressant effectiveness, but lack of discriminant validity between Potential Threat and Loss supports their recombination into a single Distress construct. Finding of effectiveness within "normal" construct levels support the utility of a dimensional approach. Testable hypotheses were generated that can further test RDoC's clinical utility.

The Influence of Combined CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 Genotypes on Venlafaxine and O-Desmethylvenlafaxine Concentrations in a Large Patient Cohort.

PURPOSE: The antidepressant venlafaxine is largely O-desmethylated by CYP2D6, whereas CYP2C19 mediates an alternative metabolic route of venlafaxine through N-desmethylation. The aim of this study was to investigate the combined effect of genotype-predicted CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 phenotypes on serum concentrations of venlafaxine and metabolites in a large patient population. METHODS: Patients were retrospectively included from a therapeutic drug monitoring service at Diakonhjemmet Hospital in Oslo (Norway) between January 01, 2007, and December 31, 2017. The study population was divided into different phenotype subgroups according to the combinations of CYP2D6/CYP2C19 phenotypes; intermediate metabolizers (IMs), poor metabolizers (PMs) and ultrarapid metabolizers, and compared using combined normal metabolizers (NMs) as reference. FINDINGS: The dose-adjusted serum concentration of venlafaxine was 4- and 13-fold increased in combined CYP2D6 IM/CYP2C19 PMs and combined PMs, respectively, compared with combined NMs (P < 0.001). The sum concentration of venlafaxine + ODV (pharmacological active moiety) was increased 1.9 and 3.6-fold, respectively, in the same phenotype groups. Furthermore, the dose-adjusted active moiety exposure was similar in combined IMs as combined CYP2D6 PM/CYP2C19 NMs. CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 phenotypes explained 46% of the interindividual variability in dose-adjusted venlafaxine serum concentrations, whereas CYP2D6 alone explained 24%. CONCLUSIONS: The combined CYP2D6/CYP2C19 phenotype has a significant impact on serum concentrations of venlafaxine and also on the active moiety of venlafaxine + ODV, than CYP2D6 alone. In clinical practice, it is therefore important to take into account phenotype variabilities of both enzymes when assessing the risk of dose-dependent adverse effects during venlafaxine treatment.

Neural and molecular correlates of psychological pain during major depression, and its link with suicidal ideas.

OBJECTIVES: Psychological pain increases the risk of suicidal ideas and acts, and represents a potential therapeutic target. However, the mechanisms of mental pain remain unclear. Here, we assessed the peripheral transcriptomic and central neural correlates of mental pain during a depressive episode. METHODS: 172 adult un-medicated depressed patients were recruited. Leucocytes were extracted for RNA quantification at baseline (T0) and after 8 weeks (T8) of an antidepressant treatment. Ninety-nine genes of the cortisol, immune, opioid, serotonergic, and kynurenine systems were a priori selected, and 41 were sufficiently expressed to be analyzed. At both T0 and T8, mean level of mental pain over the last 15 days was measured with a visual analog scale. A subset of 38 patients was additionally scanned with Magnetic Resonance Imaging at T0. Resting-state sequences of 4 networks (default-mode, basal ganglia, central executive, salience) were examined. RESULTS: Mean psychological pain scores significantly decreased between T0 and T8. At conservative p-corrected levels, T0 mental pain was significantly correlated with 11 brain clusters encompassing the prefrontal, parietal, and temporal cortices, the striatum, and the cerebellum. There was no direct association between peripheral gene expression and mean mental pain at any time points or in terms of temporal changes. However, expressions of 5HTR2B at p-corrected levels, and 5HTR3A, TPH1, and OPRL1 were correlated with the activity of several identified brain clusters at T0. Finally, while suicidal ideas and mental pain were correlated, the neural and molecular correlates of suicidal ideas were not the same. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the serotonergic and nociceptin systems are associated with the activity of a cortico-subcortical brain network underlying the perception of mental pain during depression. Mental pain may be a necessary but insufficient condition for the emergence of suicidal ideation during depression.

Adjunctive therapy with brexpiprazole improves treatment resistant complex post traumatic stress disorder in domestic family violence victims.

OBJECTIVE: Domestic family violence (FV) is a serious problem with serious impacts on mental health of victims. One such impact is post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and it can be resistant to treatment (treatment-resistant or TR). This article offers novel treatment. METHODS: Two treatment resistant case studies are described where adjunctive treatment with brexpiprazole was commenced. Possible theoretical considerations are presented to explain improvement. RESULTS: Adjunctive treatment with brexpiprazole was associated with significant improvement in FV subjective and objective measures, with enhanced response to trauma therapy. CONCLUSION: Brexpiprazole improved complex post traumatic stress disorder in FV victims and needs further evaluation.

Effects of desvenlafaxine versus placebo on MDD symptom clusters: A pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is characterized by the presence of at least five of nine specific symptoms that contribute to clinically significant functional impairment. This analysis examined the effect of desvenlafaxine (50 or 100 mg) versus placebo on symptom cluster scores and the association between early improvement in symptom clusters and symptomatic or functional remission at week 8. METHODS: Using data from nine double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of major depressive disorder (N=4317), the effect of desvenlafaxine 50 or 100 mg versus placebo on scores for symptom clusters based on 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression items was assessed using analysis of covariance. Association between early improvement in symptom clusters (⩾20% improvement from baseline at week 2) and symptomatic and functional remission (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score ⩽7; Sheehan Disability Scale score <7) at week 8 was analyzed using logistic regression. Symptom clusters based on Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale were also examined. RESULTS: Desvenlafaxine 50 or 100 mg was associated with significant improvement from baseline compared to placebo for all symptom clusters (p<0.001), except a sleep cluster for desvenlafaxine 100 mg. For all symptom clusters, early improvement was significantly associated with achievement of symptomatic and functional remission at week 8 for all treatment groups (p⩽0.0254). CONCLUSION: Early improvement in symptom clusters significantly predicts symptomatic or functional remission at week 8 in patients with depression receiving desvenlafaxine (50 or 100 mg) or placebo. Importantly, patients without early improvement were less likely to remit.

Predictors of functional response and remission with desvenlafaxine 50 mg and 100 mg: a pooled analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled studies in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The value of early functional improvement at week 2 for predicting subsequent functional outcomes at week 8 was assessed in a pooled analysis of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with desvenlafaxine (50 or 100 mg/d) or placebo. METHODS: Data were pooled from eight double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or 100 mg/d for the treatment of MDD. Optimal week-2 improvement thresholds in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score, which best predicted week-8 treatment success, were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Four definitions of treatment success were established: (1) functional response, (2) functional/depression response, (3) functional remission, and (4) functional/depression remission. Odds ratios (ORs) of early improvement for prediction (based on thresholds determined in the ROC analysis) of week-8 treatment success were computed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Functional early improvement thresholds of 17%-32% were predictive of week-8 treatment success across treatment groups and definitions of treatment success. Optimal thresholds were higher for more stringent definitions. Negative predictive value exceeded positive predictive value, indicating that failure to achieve early functional improvement was more informative about later treatment success than was the achievement of early functional improvement. Early change in SDS was a highly significant predictor of functional response/remission (ORs, 4.981-8.737; all p < 0.0001); the interaction between treatment and early functional improvement was not significant. CONCLUSION: Early improvement in SDS total score was predictive of functional outcomes for patients treated with desvenlafaxine 50 mg, desvenlafaxine 100 mg, or placebo.