Effects of Patient Preferences on Outcomes in the Predictors of Remission in Depression to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) Study

Does treatment preference affect outcome in a randomized trial of a mindfulness intervention versus cognitive behaviour therapy for social anxiety disorder?

Research suggests that treatment preference may affect outcome of randomized clinical trials, but few studies have assessed treatment preference in trials comparing different types of psychosocial interventions. This study used secondary data analysis to evaluate the impact of treatment preference in a randomized trial of a mindfulness-based intervention adapted for social anxiety disorder (MBI-SAD) versus cognitive behaviour group therapy (CBGT). Ninety-seven participants who met DSM-5 criteria for SAD were randomized. Prior to randomization, twice as many participants expressed a preference for the MBI-SAD over CBGT. However, being allocated or not to one's preferred treatment had no impact on treatment response. Additionally, with the exception of perception of treatment credibility, treatment matching had no impact on treatment-related variables, including treatment initiation, session attendance, homework compliance, satisfaction with treatment and perception that treatment met expectations. In sum, despite the greater preference for the mindfulness intervention in this sample of participants with SAD, we found little evidence of preference effects on our study outcomes. Findings should be viewed as preliminary and require replication.

Impact of childhood maltreatment on outcomes of antidepressant medication in chronic and/or recurrent depression

BACKGROUND

While childhood maltreatment (CMT) is associated with higher rates of chronicity and recurrence in depression, whether CMT results in poorer outcomes with antidepressant medication remains unclear.

METHODS

We performed secondary analyses with data from the large, representative, multisite trial Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED). CO-MED was a randomized, single-blinded, placebo-controlled study with 665 individuals (663 assessed for CMT) with chronic and/or recurrent Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). CMT was determined by a brief self-reported questionnaire assessing the four types of CMT defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: sexual abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, and neglect. Repeated measures and logistic regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

Individuals with CMT did not have a differential improvement of depressive symptoms when compared to those without CMT (adjusted p=.203 for continuous analysis; adjusted p=.320 for remission rates). Neither type of antidepressant medication (adjusted p=.302) nor the age at which CMT occurred (adjusted p=.509) affected depressive symptom outcomes. There was no difference in functional improvement between individuals with and without CMT (adjusted p=.228). A history of CMT was associated with greater antidepressant side effects (p=.009).

LIMITATIONS

This study investigated treatment-seeking individuals with chronic and/or recurrent MDD. Intensity and duration of CMT were not assessed.

CONCLUSION

In a sample of treatment-seeking outpatients with chronic and/or recurrent MDD, a history of CMT was not associated with differential symptomatic or functional response to pharmacological treatment. However, those with CMT reported greater antidepressant side effect burden.

Predictors of preference for cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and yoga interventions among older adults

The purpose of this study was to examine factors that influence a person's choice of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) or yoga, the stability of these preferences, and the impact of preference on engagement and process measures. We conducted a randomized preference trial of CBT and yoga in 500 adults ≥60 years with symptoms of worry. Participants reported their intervention preference, strength of preference, and factors impacting preference. Engagement in the intervention (session completion and dropout rates) was assessed. Process measures included satisfaction with the intervention, therapeutic alliance, and intervention expectancy. Neither intervention preference (48% and 52% chose CBT and yoga, respectively) nor strength of preference differed significantly between the two preference trial groups. Intervention expectancies at baseline among those in the preference trial were approximately 4.5 units (40-point scale) higher for their preferred intervention (p < .0001 within each group). A principal component analysis of factors influencing preference identified three constructs. Using logistic regression, components focused on attitudes about CBT or yoga were predictive of ultimate preference (odds ratio = 11.5, 95% C.I.6.3-21.0 per 1SD difference in component 1 for choosing CBT; odds ratio = 7.8, 95% CI4.3-13.9 per 1SD difference in component 2 for choosing yoga). There were no significant differences between the randomized and preference trials on intervention adherence, completion of assessments, intervention satisfaction, or working alliance. Receiving a preferred treatment had no significant effects on intervention outcomes through participant engagement or process measures. When options are limited, providers may have confidence in offering the most readily available non-pharmacological treatments.

Alterations in acylcarnitines, amines, and lipids inform about the mechanism of action of citalopram/escitalopram in major depression

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the first-line treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), yet their mechanisms of action are not fully understood and their therapeutic benefit varies among individuals. We used a targeted metabolomics approach utilizing a panel of 180 metabolites to gain insights into mechanisms of action and response to citalopram/escitalopram. Plasma samples from 136 participants with MDD enrolled into the Mayo Pharmacogenomics Research Network Antidepressant Medication Pharmacogenomic Study (PGRN-AMPS) were profiled at baseline and after 8 weeks of treatment. After treatment, we saw increased levels of short-chain acylcarnitines and decreased levels of medium-chain and long-chain acylcarnitines, suggesting an SSRI effect on β-oxidation and mitochondrial function. Amines-including arginine, proline, and methionine sulfoxide-were upregulated while serotonin and sarcosine were downregulated, suggesting an SSRI effect on urea cycle, one-carbon metabolism, and serotonin uptake. Eighteen lipids within the phosphatidylcholine (PC aa and ae) classes were upregulated. Changes in several lipid and amine levels correlated with changes in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores (HRSD₁₇). Differences in metabolic profiles at baseline and post-treatment were noted between participants who remitted (HRSD₁₇≤ 7) and those who gained no meaningful benefits (<30% reduction in HRSD₁₇). Remitters exhibited (a) higher baseline levels of C3, C5, alpha-aminoadipic acid, sarcosine, and serotonin; and (b) higher week-8 levels of PC aa C34:1, PC aa C34:2, PC aa C36:2, and PC aa C36:4. These findings suggest that mitochondrial energetics-including acylcarnitine metabolism, transport, and its link to β-oxidation-and lipid membrane remodeling may play roles in SSRI treatment response.

Treatment Differences in Primary and Specialty Settings in Veterans with Major Depression

INTRODUCTION

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) supports the nation's largest primary care-mental health integration (PC-MHI) collaborative care model to increase treatment of mild to moderate common mental disorders in primary care (PC) and refer more severe-complex cases to specialty mental health (SMH) settings. It is unclear how this treatment assignment works in practice.

METHODS

Patients (n = 2610) who sought incident episode VHA treatment for depression completed a baseline self-report questionnaire about depression severity-complexity. Administrative data were used to determine settings and types of treatment during the next 30 days.

RESULTS

Thirty-four percent (34.2%) of depressed patients received treatment in PC settings, 65.8% in SMH settings. PC patients had less severe and fewer comorbid depressive episodes. Patients with lowest severity and/or complexity were most likely to receive PC antidepressant medication treatment; those with highest severity and/or complexity were most likely to receive combined treatment in SMH settings. Assignment of patients across settings and types of treatment was stronger than found in previous civilian studies but less pronounced than expected (cross-validated AUC = 0.50-0.68).

DISCUSSION

By expanding access to evidence-based treatments, VHA's PC-MHI increases consistency of treatment assignment. Reasons for assignment being less pronounced than expected and implications for treatment response will require continued study.

The role of comorbid anxiety in exercise and depression trials: Secondary analysis of the SMILE-II randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To explore the anxiolytic effects of a 4-month randomized, placebo-controlled trial of exercise and antidepressant medication in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), and to examine the potential modifying effects of anxiety in treating depressive symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this secondary analysis of the SMILE-II trial, 148 sedentary adults with MDD were randomized to: (a) supervised exercise, (b) home-based exercise, (c) sertraline, or (d) placebo control. Symptoms of state anxiety measured by the Spielberger Anxiety Inventory were examined before and after 4 months of treatment. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Analyses were carried out using general linear models.

RESULTS

Compared to placebo controls, the exercise and sertraline groups had lower state anxiety scores (standardized difference = 0.3 [95% CI = -0.6, -0.04]; p = 0.02) after treatment. Higher pretreatment state anxiety was associated with poorer depression outcomes in the active treatments compared to placebo controls for both the HAMD (p = .004) and BDI-II (p = .02).

CONCLUSION

Aerobic exercise as well as sertraline reduced symptoms of state anxiety in patients with MDD. Higher levels of pretreatment anxiety attenuated the effects of the interventions on depressive symptoms, however, especially among exercisers. Patients with MDD with higher comorbid state anxiety appear to be less likely to benefit from exercise interventions in reducing depression and thus may require supplemental treatment with special attention to anxiety.

Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Pharmaco-Omics: Mechanisms and Prediction

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are a standard of care for the pharmacotherapy of patients suffering from Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). However, only one-half to two-thirds of MDD patients respond to SSRI therapy. Recently, a "multiple omics" research strategy was applied to identify genetic differences between patients who did and did not respond to SSRI therapy. As a first step, plasma metabolites were assayed using samples from the 803 patients in the PGRN-AMPS SSRI MDD trial. The metabolomics data were then used to "inform" genomics by performing a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for plasma concentrations of the metabolite most highly associated with clinical response, serotonin (5-HT). Two genome-wide or near genome-wide significant single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) signals were identified, one that mapped near the TSPAN5 gene and another across the ERICH3 gene, both genes that are highly expressed in the brain. Knocking down TSPAN5 and ERICH3 resulted in decreased 5-HT concentrations in neuroblastoma cell culture media and decreased expression of enzymes involved in 5-HT biosynthesis and metabolism. Functional genomic studies demonstrated that ERICH3 was involved in clathrin-mediated vesicle formation and TSPAN5 was an ethanol-responsive gene that may be a marker for response to acamprosate pharmacotherapy of alcohol use disorder (AUD), a neuropsychiatric disorder highly co-morbid with MDD. In parallel studies, kynurenine was the plasma metabolite most highly associated with MDD symptom severity and application of a metabolomics-informed pharmacogenomics approach identified DEFB1 and AHR as genes associated with variation in plasma kynurenine levels. Both genes also contributed to kynurenine-related inflammatory pathways. Finally, a multiply replicated predictive algorithm for SSRI clinical response with a balanced predictive accuracy of 76% (compared with 56% for clinical data alone) was developed by including the SNPs in TSPAN5, ERICH3, DEFB1 and AHR. In summary, application of a multiple omics research strategy that used metabolomics to inform genomics, followed by functional genomic studies, identified novel genes that influenced monoamine biology and made it possible to develop a predictive algorithm for SSRI clinical outcomes in MDD. A similar pharmaco-omic research strategy might be broadly applicable for the study of other neuropsychiatric diseases and their drug therapy.

Single-cell molecular profiling of all three components of the HPA axis reveals adrenal ABCB1 as a regulator of stress adaptation

Chronic activation and dysregulation of the neuroendocrine stress response have severe physiological and psychological consequences, including the development of metabolic and stress-related psychiatric disorders. We provide the first unbiased, cell type-specific, molecular characterization of all three components of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, under baseline and chronic stress conditions. Among others, we identified a previously unreported subpopulation of Abcb1b+ cells involved in stress adaptation in the adrenal gland. We validated our findings in a mouse stress model, adrenal tissues from patients with Cushing's syndrome, adrenocortical cell lines, and peripheral cortisol and genotyping data from depressed patients. This extensive dataset provides a valuable resource for researchers and clinicians interested in the organism's nervous and endocrine responses to stress and the interplay between these tissues. Our findings raise the possibility that modulating ABCB1 function may be important in the development of treatment strategies for patients suffering from metabolic and stress-related psychiatric disorders.

ERICH3: vesicular association and antidepressant treatment response

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are standard of care for major depressive disorder (MDD) pharmacotherapy, but only approximately half of these patients remit on SSRI therapy. Our previous genome-wide association study identified a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) signal across the glutamate-rich 3 (ERICH3) gene that was nearly genome-wide significantly associated with plasma serotonin (5-HT) concentrations, which were themselves associated with SSRI response for MDD patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic PGRN-AMPS SSRI trial. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis which demonstrated that those SNPs were significantly associated with SSRI treatment outcomes in four independent MDD trials. However, the function of ERICH3 and molecular mechanism(s) by which it might be associated with plasma 5-HT concentrations and SSRI clinical response remained unclear. Therefore, we characterized the human ERICH3 gene functionally and identified ERICH3 mRNA transcripts and protein isoforms that are highly expressed in central nervous system cells. Coimmunoprecipitation identified a series of ERICH3 interacting proteins including clathrin heavy chain which are known to play a role in vesicular function. Immunofluorescence showed ERICH3 colocalization with 5-HT in vesicle-like structures, and ERICH3 knock-out dramatically decreased 5-HT staining in SK-N-SH cells as well as 5-HT concentrations in the culture media and cell lysates without changing the expression of 5-HT synthesizing or metabolizing enzymes. Finally, immunofluorescence also showed ERICH3 colocalization with dopamine in human iPSC-derived neurons. These results suggest that ERICH3 may play a significant role in vesicular function in serotonergic and other neuronal cell types, which might help explain its association with antidepressant treatment response.

Stressors and chemical imbalances: Beliefs about the causes of depression in an acute psychiatric treatment sample

BACKGROUND

Public perceptions of mental illness are increasingly construed in neurobiological and genetic terms. Accumulating evidence suggests there are some unintended consequences of these explanations, including reduced optimism for recovery among individuals with depression. However, little is known about how these beliefs relate to treatment process and outcomes in a psychiatric treatment setting, a gap this study aimed to fill.

METHODS

We examined etiological beliefs about depression in a sample of patients (N = 279) seeking acute treatment in a behaviorally-based therapy program at a psychiatric hospital and examined relations with treatment expectations and outcomes.

RESULTS

We found that although psychosocial explanations of depression were most popular, biogenetic beliefs, particularly the belief that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance, were prevalent in this sample. Further, the chemical imbalance belief related to poorer treatment expectations. This relationship was moderated by symptoms of depression, with more depressed individuals showing a stronger relationship between chemical imbalance beliefs and lower treatment expectations. Finally, the chemical imbalance belief predicted more depressive symptoms after the treatment program ended for a 2-week measure of depression (but not for a 24-hour measure of depression), controlling for psychiatric symptoms at admission, inpatient hospitalizations, and treatment expectations.

LIMITATIONS

The sample was homogenous in terms of race and ethnicity and we did not assess how patients came to their beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, the results illustrate the correlates and possible impacts of etiological beliefs in a real-world clinical setting and invite a critical discussion about predominant messages about the etiology of depression.

The Influence of Three Modes of Human Support on Attrition and Adherence to a Web- and Mobile App-Based Mental Health Promotion Intervention in a Nonclinical Cohort: Randomized Comparative Study

Background

The escalating prevalence of mental health disorders necessitates a greater focus on web- and mobile app–based mental health promotion initiatives for nonclinical groups. However, knowledge is scant regarding the influence of human support on attrition and adherence and participant preferences for support in nonclinical settings.

Objective

This study aimed to compare the influence of 3 modes of human support on attrition and adherence to a digital mental health intervention for a nonclinical cohort. It evaluated user preferences for support and assessed whether adherence and outcomes were enhanced when participants received their preferred support mode.

Methods

Subjects participated in a 10-week digital mental health promotion intervention and were randomized into 3 comparative groups: standard group with automated emails (S), standard plus personalized SMS (S+pSMS), and standard plus weekly videoconferencing support (S+VCS). Adherence was measured by the number of video lessons viewed, points achieved for weekly experiential challenge activities, and the total number of weeks that participants recorded a score for challenges. In the postquestionnaire, participants ranked their preferred human support mode from 1 to 4 (S, S+pSMS, S+VCS, S+pSMS & VCS combined). Stratified analysis was conducted for those who received their first preference. Preintervention and postintervention questionnaires assessed well-being measures (ie, mental health, vitality, depression, anxiety, stress, life satisfaction, and flourishing).

Results

Interested individuals (N=605) enrolled on a website and were randomized into 3 groups (S, n=201; S+pSMS, n=202; S+VCS, n=201). Prior to completing the prequestionnaire, a total of 24.3% (147/605) dropped out. Dropout attrition between groups was significantly different (P=.009): 21.9% (44/201) withdrew from the S group, 19.3% (39/202) from the S+pSMS group, and 31.6% (64/202) from the S+VCS group. The remaining 75.7% (458/605) registered and completed the prequestionnaire (S, n=157; S+pSMS, n=163; S+VCS, n=138). Of the registered participants, 30.1% (138/458) failed to complete the postquestionnaire (S, n=54; S+pSMS, n=49; S+VCS, n=35), but there were no between-group differences (P=.24). For the 69.9% (320/458; S, n=103; S+pSMS, n=114; S+VCS, n=103) who completed the postquestionnaire, no between-group differences in adherence were observed for mean number of videos watched (P=.42); mean challenge scores recorded (P=.71); or the number of weeks that challenge scores were logged (P=.66). A total of 56 participants (17.5%, 56/320) received their first preference in human support (S, n=22; S+pSMS, n=26; S+VCS, n=8). No differences were observed between those who received their first preference and those who did not with regard to video adherence (P=.91); challenge score adherence (P=.27); or any of the well-being measures including, mental health (P=.86), vitality (P=.98), depression (P=.09), anxiety (P=.64), stress (P=.55), life satisfaction (P=.50), and flourishing (P=.47).

Conclusions

Early dropout attrition may have been influenced by dissatisfaction with the allocated support mode. Human support mode did not impact adherence to the intervention, and receiving the preferred support style did not result in greater adherence or better outcomes.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): 12619001009101; http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12619001009101.aspx

The State of Our Understanding of the Pathophysiology and Optimal Treatment of Depression: Glass Half Full or Half Empty?

Major depressive disorder is a remarkably common and often severe psychiatric disorder associated with high levels of morbidity and mortality. Patients with major depression are prone to several comorbid psychiatric conditions, including posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and substance use disorders, and medical conditions, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, stroke, cancer, which, coupled with the risk of suicide, result in a shortened life expectancy. The goal of this review is to provide an overview of our current understanding of major depression, from pathophysiology to treatment. In spite of decades of research, relatively little is known about its pathogenesis, other than that risk is largely defined by a combination of ill-defined genetic and environmental factors. Although we know that female sex, a history of childhood maltreatment, and family history as well as more recent stressors are risk factors, precisely how these environmental influences interact with genetic vulnerability remains obscure. In recent years, considerable advances have been made in beginning to understand the genetic substrates that underlie disease vulnerability, and the interaction of genes, early-life adversity, and the epigenome in influencing gene expression is now being intensively studied. The role of inflammation and other immune system dysfunction in the pathogenesis of major depression is also being intensively investigated. Brain imaging studies have provided a firmer understanding of the circuitry involved in major depression, providing potential new therapeutic targets. Despite a broad armamentarium for major depression, including antidepressants, evidence-based psychotherapies, nonpharmacological somatic treatments, and a host of augmentation strategies, a sizable percentage of patients remain nonresponsive or poorly responsive to available treatments. Investigational agents with novel mechanisms of action are under active study. Personalized medicine in psychiatry provides the hope of escape from the current standard trial-and-error approach to treatment, moving to a more refined method that augurs a new era for patients and clinicians alike.

The Bidirectional Relationship of Depression and Inflammation: Double Trouble

Depression represents the number one cause of disability worldwide and is often fatal. Inflammatory processes have been implicated in the pathophysiology of depression. It is now well established that dysregulation of both the innate and adaptive immune systems occur in depressed patients and hinder favorable prognosis, including antidepressant responses. In this review, we describe how the immune system regulates mood and the potential causes of the dysregulated inflammatory responses in depressed patients. However, the proportion of never-treated major depressive disorder (MDD) patients who exhibit inflammation remains to be clarified, as the heterogeneity in inflammation findings may stem in part from examining MDD patients with varied interventions. Inflammation is likely a critical disease modifier, promoting susceptibility to depression. Controlling inflammation might provide an overall therapeutic benefit, regardless of whether it is secondary to early life trauma, a more acute stress response, microbiome alterations, a genetic diathesis, or a combination of these and other factors.

Psychotherapy or medication for depression? Using individual symptom meta-analyses to derive a Symptom-Oriented Therapy (SOrT) metric for a personalised psychiatry

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant medication (ADM) and psychotherapy are effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). It is unclear, however, if treatments differ in their effectiveness at the symptom level and whether symptom information can be utilised to inform treatment allocation. The present study synthesises comparative effectiveness information from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ADM versus psychotherapy for MDD at the symptom level and develops and tests the Symptom-Oriented Therapy (SOrT) metric for precision treatment allocation.

METHODS

First, we conducted systematic review and meta-analyses of RCTs comparing ADM and psychotherapy at the individual symptom level. We searched PubMed Medline, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, a database specific for psychotherapy RCTs, and looked for unpublished RCTs. Random-effects meta-analyses were applied on sum-scores and for individual symptoms for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) measures. Second, we computed the SOrT metric, which combines meta-analytic effect sizes with patients' symptom profiles. The SOrT metric was evaluated using data from the Munich Antidepressant Response Signature (MARS) study (n = 407) and the Emory Predictors of Remission in Depression to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study (n = 234).

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 38 RCTs for qualitative inclusion, 27 and 19 for quantitative inclusion at the sum-score level, and 9 and 4 for quantitative inclusion on individual symptom level for the HAM-D and BDI, respectively. Neither meta-analytic strategy revealed significant differences in the effectiveness of ADM and psychotherapy across the two depression measures. The SOrT metric did not show meaningful associations with other clinical variables in the MARS sample, and there was no indication of utility of the metric for better treatment allocation from PReDICT data.

CONCLUSIONS

This registered report showed no differences of ADM and psychotherapy for the treatment of MDD at sum-score and symptom levels. Symptom-based metrics such as the proposed SOrT metric do not inform allocation to these treatments, but predictive value of symptom information requires further testing for other treatment comparisons.

Personalized Psychotherapy for Outpatients with Major Depression and Anxiety Disorders: Transdiagnostic Versus Diagnosis-Specific Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

Background

Only about half of all patients with anxiety disorders or major depression respond to cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), even though this is an evidence-based treatment. Personalized treatment offers an approach to increase the number of patients who respond to therapy. The aim of this study was to examine predictors and moderators of (differential) treatment outcomes in transdiagnostic versus diagnosis-specific group CBT.

Methods

A sample of 291 patients from three different mental health clinics in Denmark was randomized to either transdiagnostic or diagnosis-specific group CBT. The study outcome was the regression slope of the individual patient's repeated scores on the WHO-5 Well-being Index. Pre-treatment variables were identified as moderators or predictors through a two-step variable selection approach.

Results

While the two-step approach failed to identify any moderators, four predictors were found: level of positive affect, duration of disorder, the detachment personality trait, and the coping strategy of cognitive reappraisal. A prognostic index was constructed, but did not seem to be robust across treatment sites.

Conclusions

Our findings give insufficient evidence to support a recommendation of either transdiagnostic or diagnosis-specific CBT for a given patient or to predict the response to the applied group therapies.

Personality Assessment and Psychotherapy Preferences: Congruence between Client Personality and Therapist Personality Preferences

Consideration of client preferences has been emphasized as important to therapeutic outcomes, such as treatment engagement and retention. Although studies have investigated several client and therapist characteristics associated with client preferences, few have considered whether people have preferences regarding a potential therapist's personality. The current study extended prior research on client preferences by examining the influence of participants' Big Five personality traits on preferences for therapist personality characteristics utilizing latent profile analysis. We expected congruence between client personality traits and preferred psychotherapist personality traits. In both undergraduate and community samples, results indicated that participants generally prefer a psychotherapist with personality characteristics similar to their own. Our findings establish the presence of preferences based on personality factors and have implications for future research directions and the role of personality assessment in routine clinical practice.

Concordance between clinician-rated and patient reported outcome measures of depressive symptoms in treatment resistant depression

BACKGROUND

Calls to implement measurement-based care (MBC) in psychiatry are increasing. A recent Cochrane meta-analysis concluded that there is insufficient evidence that routine application of patient reported outcomes (PROs) improves treatment outcomes for common psychiatric disorders. There is a particular paucity of this information in patients with treatment resistant depression (TRD).

METHODS

A TRD sample (n = 302) and a treatment-naïve sample with major depression (n = 344) were assessed for the level of agreement in depression severity between two PROs (the Beck Depression Inventory, BDI, and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-report, QIDS-SR) and two Clinician Rated (CRs) measures (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, HDRS, and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS).

RESULTS

Correlations between CR and PRO total scores in the TRD sample ranged from 0.57 (HDRS-QIDS-SR) to 0.68 (MADRS-BDI), reflecting a moderate-to-strong relationship between assessment tools. Correlations in the treatment naïve sample were non-significantly lower for most comparisons, ranging from 0.51 (HDRS-QIDS-SR) to 0.64 (MADRS-BDI). Few predictors of discordance between CRs and PROs were identified, though chronicity of the current episode in treatment-naïve patients was associated with greater agreement.

LIMITATIONS

Inter-rater reliability of the clinician interviews was conducted separately within the two studies so we could not determine the reliability between the two groups of raters used in the studies.

CONCLUSION

Findings generally supported acceptably high levels of agreement between patient and clinician ratings of baseline depression severity. More work is needed to determine the extent to which PROs can improve outcomes in MBC for depression and, more specifically, TRD.

Association of Patient Treatment Preference With Dropout and Clinical Outcomes in Adult Psychosocial Mental Health Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Receiving a preferred treatment has previously been associated with lower dropout rates and better clinical outcomes, but this scenario has not been investigated specifically for psychosocial interventions for patients with a mental health diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of patient treatment preference with dropout and clinical outcomes in adult psychosocial mental health interventions via a systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Nice HDAS (Healthcare Databases Advanced Search), Google Scholar, BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine), Semantic Scholar, and OpenGrey were searched from inception to July 20, 2018, and updated on June 10, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were eligible if they (1) were a randomized clinical trial; (2) involved participants older than 18 years; (3) involved participants with mental health diagnoses; (4) reported data from a group of participants who received their preferred treatment and a group who received their nonpreferred treatment or who were not given a choice; and (5) offered at least 1 psychosocial intervention.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two researchers extracted study data for attendance, dropout, and clinical outcomes independently. Both assessed the risk of bias according to the Cochrane tool. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The following 7 outcomes were examined: attendance, dropout, therapeutic alliance, depression and anxiety outcomes, global outcomes, treatment satisfaction, and remission.

RESULTS

A total of 7341 articles were identified, with 34 eligible for inclusion. Twenty-nine articles were included in the meta-analyses comprising 5294 participants. Receiving a preferred psychosocial mental health treatment had a medium positive association with dropout rates (relative risk, 0.62; 0.48-0.80; P < .001; I2 = 44.6%) and therapeutic alliance (Cohen d = 0.48; 0.15-0.82; P = .01; I2 = 20.4%). There was no evidence of a significant association with other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This is the first review, to our knowledge, examining the association of receiving a preferred psychosocial mental health treatment with both engagement and outcomes for patients with a mental health diagnosis. Patients with mental health diagnoses who received their preferred treatment demonstrated a lower dropout rate from treatment and higher therapeutic alliance scores. These findings underline the need to accommodate patient preference in mental health services to maximize treatment uptake and reduce financial costs of premature dropout and disengagement.

Somatic symptoms in treatment-naïve Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients with major depression

BACKGROUND

Somatic complaints are a major driver of health care costs among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Some epidemiologic and clinical data suggest that Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients with MDD endorse higher levels of somatic symptoms than non-Hispanic White patients.

METHODS

Somatic symptoms in 102 Hispanic, 61 non-Hispanic Black, and 156 non-Hispanic White patients with treatment-naïve MDD were evaluated using the somatic symptom subscale of the Hamilton anxiety rating scale (HAM-A). The other seven items of the HAM-A comprise the psychic anxiety subscale, which was also evaluated across ethnicities.

RESULTS

Hispanic patients reported significantly greater levels of somatic symptoms than non-Hispanic patients, but levels of psychic anxiety symptoms did not differ by ethnicity. Levels of somatic symptoms did not significantly differ between Black and White non-Hispanic patients. Within the Hispanic sample, somatic symptom levels were higher only among those who were evaluated in Spanish; Hispanics who spoke English showed no significant differences versus non-Hispanics.

CONCLUSIONS

In this medically healthy sample of patients with MDD, monolingual Spanish-speaking Hispanic patients endorsed high levels of somatic symptoms. Clinicians should be mindful that the depressive experience may manifest somatically and be judicious in determining when additional medical work-up is warranted for somatic complaints.

A network meta-analysis of the effects of psychotherapies, pharmacotherapies and their combination in the treatment of adult depression

No network meta-analysis has examined the relative effects of psychotherapies, pharmacotherapies and their combination in the treatment of adult depression, while this is a very important clinical issue. We conducted systematic searches in bibliographical databases to identify randomized trials in which a psychotherapy and a pharmacotherapy for the acute or long-term treatment of depression were compared with each other, or in which the combination of a psychotherapy and a pharmacotherapy was compared with either one alone. The main outcome was treatment response (50% improvement between baseline and endpoint). Remission and acceptability (defined as study drop-out for any reason) were also examined. Possible moderators that were assessed included chronic and treatment-resistant depression and baseline severity of depression. Data were pooled as relative risk (RR) using a random-effects model. A total of 101 studies with 11,910 patients were included. Depression in most studies was moderate to severe. In the network meta-analysis, combined treatment was more effective than psychotherapy alone (RR=1.27; 95% CI: 1.14-1.39) and pharmacotherapy alone (RR=1.25; 95% CI: 1.14-1.37) in achieving response at the end of treatment. No significant difference was found between psychotherapy alone and pharmacotherapy alone (RR=0.99; 95% CI: 0.92-1.08). Similar results were found for remission. Combined treatment (RR=1.23; 95% CI: 1.05-1.45) and psychotherapy alone (RR=1.17; 95% CI: 1.02-1.32) were more acceptable than pharmacotherapy. Results were similar for chronic and treatment-resistant depression. The combination of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy seems to be the best choice for patients with moderate depression. More research is needed on long-term effects of treatments (including cost-effectiveness), on the impact of specific pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches, and on the effects in specific populations of patients.

A difference degree test for comparing brain networks

Recently, there has been a proliferation of methods investigating functional connectivity as a biomarker for mental disorders. Typical approaches include massive univariate testing at each edge or comparisons of network metrics to identify differing topological features. Limitations of these methods include low statistical power due to the large number of comparisons and difficulty attributing overall differences in networks to local variation. We propose a method to capture the difference degree, which is the number of edges incident to each region in the difference network. Our difference degree test (DDT) is a two-step procedure for identifying brain regions incident to a significant number of differentially weighted edges (DWEs). First, we select a data-adaptive threshold which identifies the DWEs followed by a statistical test for the number of DWEs incident to each brain region. We achieve this by generating an appropriate set of null networks which are matched on the first and second moments of the observed difference network using the Hirschberger-Qi-Steuer algorithm. This formulation permits separation of the network's true topology from the nuisance topology induced by the correlation measure that alters interregional connectivity in ways unrelated to brain function. In simulations, the proposed approach outperforms competing methods in detecting differentially connected regions of interest. Application of DDT to a major depressive disorder dataset leads to the identification of brain regions in the default mode network commonly implicated in this ruminative disorder.

Integrating Patients' Expectations into the Management of Their Depression: Report of a Symposium at the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology Congress

A symposium held at the 31st European College of Neuropsychopharmacology congress in October 2018 in Barcelona, Spain discussed patients' expectations of treatment of their depression and how these can be integrated into patient management. Since treatment non-compliance is a major problem in patients suffering from depression, it is important to identify patients' expectations to improve treatment compliance and in turn efficacy. Currently, there is no established protocol for choosing the right antidepressant therapy, and physicians need to tailor the choice based on the type of depression, its predominant symptoms, medical and psychiatric history of patients, and their previous response to, and adverse events with, treatment. Treatment strategies also need to be adapted to each patient's personality/persona and their personal beliefs, and patients need to be aware of the potential for drug-associated adverse events such as emotional blunting, sexual dysfunction and loss of functional outcomes, as the expectation of these events may limit their impact on treatment discontinuation. Also, placebo effects remain frequent with treatment, and there is currently no agreed method for predicting response to therapy. Of the available methods to determine treatment response, pharmacogenetic testing has limited value while functional imaging may be valuable, but is not practical in routine clinical practice. Online cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) represents a new option in the clinical management of patients with depression, particularly for patients who may not be able to access direct interaction with a psychotherapist because of the severity of their condition, their geographic location or socioeconomic situation. Online CBT can act as an adjunct to drug treatment and face-to-face psychotherapy, rather than as the sole form of treatment to aid in identifying a patient's needs, thus meeting the treatment gap and improving compliance and efficacy.Funding: Servier.

Pilot Study of Metabolomic Clusters as State Markers of Major Depression and Outcomes to CBT Treatment

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common and disabling syndrome with multiple etiologies that is defined by clinically elicited signs and symptoms. In hopes of developing a list of candidate biological measures that reflect and relate closely to the severity of depressive symptoms, so-called “state-dependent” biomarkers of depression, this pilot study explored the biochemical underpinnings of treatment response to cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in medication-free MDD outpatients. Plasma samples were collected at baseline and week 12 from a subset of MDD patients (N = 26) who completed a course of CBT treatment as part of the Predictors of Remission in Depression to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study. Targeted metabolomic profiling using the AbsoluteIDQ^® p180 Kit and LC-MS identified eight “co-expressed” metabolomic modules. Of these eight, three were significantly associated with change in depressive symptoms over the course of the 12-weeks. Metabolites found to be most strongly correlated with change in depressive symptoms were branched chain amino acids, acylcarnitines, methionine sulfoxide, and α-aminoadipic acid (negative correlations with symptom change) as well as several lipids, particularly the phosphatidlylcholines (positive correlation). These results implicate disturbed bioenergetics as an important state marker in the pathobiology of MDD. Exploratory analyses contrasting remitters to CBT versus those who failed the treatment further suggest these metabolites may serve as mediators of recovery during CBT treatment. Larger studies examining metabolomic change patterns in patients treated with pharmacotherapy or psychotherapy will be necessary to elucidate the biological underpinnings of MDD and the -specific biologies of treatment response.

Recall accuracy for the symptoms of a major depressive episode among clinical trial participants

For patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), approaches to treatment differ for those with a single versus recurrent episodes. Based on studies of community samples, however, accuracy is low for identifying past episodes. Recall accuracy among clinical samples with a well-defined major depressive episode (MDE) has not been examined previously. We evaluated episode recall accuracy in 79 MDD patients in follow-up of the Predictors of Remission in Depression to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study at 12- and 24-month time-points after starting treatment. Using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, patients were asked to recall whether they had been experiencing the nine criterion symptoms of an MDE at the time of their intake assessment. Accuracy of recall for the index MDE was high, with 95% of patients at month 12 and 85% at month 24 recalling sufficient symptoms to meet the diagnostic criteria. Recall accuracy for specific symptoms varied considerably, from >90% for dysphoria and anhedonia, to 55% for psychomotor and weight/appetite changes. For the thoughts of death/suicide criterion, patients with erroneous recall were significantly more likely to recall having had the symptom at the intake evaluation (though they had denied it at the time) than vice versa (p < .007). Patients who have participated in a clinical trial are likely to recall accurately a past MDE up to two years prior. Optimal vigilance for suicidal ideation for treatment-naïve patients should include a combination of self-report and clinician assessments.

Effect of Treatment Preference in Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A significant limitation of the traditional randomized controlled trials is that strong preferences for (or against) one treatment may influence outcomes and/or willingness to receive treatment. Several trial designs incorporating patient preference have been introduced to examine the effect of treatment preference separately from the effects of individual interventions. In the current study, we summarized results from studies using doubly randomized preference trial (DRPT) or fully randomized preference trial (FRPT) designs and examined the effect of treatment preference on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies using DRPT or FRPT design were identified using electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar between January 1989 and November 2018. All studies included in this meta-analysis were examined to determine the extent to which giving patients their preferred treatment option influenced clinical outcomes. The following data were extracted from included studies: study characteristics, sample size, study duration, follow-up, patient characteristics, and clinical outcomes. We further appraised risk of bias for the included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

The search identified 374 potentially relevant articles, of which 27 clinical trials utilized a DRPT or FRPT design and were included in the final analysis. Overall, patients who were allocated to their preferred treatment intervention were more likely to achieve better clinical outcomes [effect size (ES) = 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10-0.26]. Subgroup analysis also found that mental health as well as pain and functional disorders moderated the preference effect (ES = 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.36, and ES = 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.15, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Matching patients to preferred interventions has previously been shown to promote outcomes such as satisfaction and treatment adherence. Our analysis of current evidence showed that allowing patients to choose their preferred treatment resulted in better clinical outcomes in mental health and pain than giving them a treatment that is not preferred. These results underline the importance of incorporating patient preference when making treatment decisions.

A Structured Approach to Detecting and Treating Depression in Primary Care: VitalSign6 Project

PURPOSE

This report describes outcomes of an ongoing quality-improvement project (VitalSign6) in a large US metropolitan area to improve recognition, treatment, and outcomes of depressed patients in 16 primary care clinics (6 charity clinics, 6 federally qualified health care centers, 2 private clinics serving low-income populations, and 2 private clinics serving patients with either Medicare or private insurance).

METHODS

Inclusion in this retrospective analysis was restricted to the first 25,000 patients (aged ≥12 years) screened with the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) in the aforementioned quality-improvement project. Further evaluations with self-reports and clinician assessments were recorded for those with positive screen (PHQ-2 >2). Data collected from August 2014 though November 2016 were available at 3 levels: (1) initial PHQ-2 (n = 25,000), (2) positive screen (n = 4,325), and (3) clinician-diagnosed depressive disorder with 18 or more weeks of enrollment (n = 2,160).

RESULTS

Overall, 17.3% (4,325/25,000) of patients screened positive for depression. Of positive screens, 56.1% (2,426/4,325) had clinician-diagnosed depressive disorder. Of those enrolled for 18 or more weeks, 64.8% were started on measurement-based pharmacotherapy and 8.9% referred externally. Of the 1,400 patients started on pharmacotherapy, 45.5%, 30.2%, 12.6%, and 11.6% had 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more follow-up visits, respectively. Remission rates were 20.3% (86/423), 31.6% (56/177), and 41.7% (68/163) for those with 1, 2, and 3 or more follow-up visits, respectively. Baseline characteristics associated with higher attrition were: non-white, positive drug-abuse screen, lower depression/anxiety symptom severity, and younger age.

CONCLUSION

Although remission rates are high in those with 3 or more follow-up visits after routine screening and treatment of depression, attrition from care is a significant issue adversely affecting outcomes.

Translational machine learning for psychiatric neuroimaging

Despite its initial promise, neuroimaging has not been widely translated into clinical psychiatry to assist in the prediction of diagnoses, prognoses, and optimal therapeutic strategies. Machine learning approaches may enhance the translational potential of neuroimaging because they specifically focus on overcoming biases by optimizing the generalizability of pipelines that measure complex brain patterns to predict targets at a single-subject level. This article introduces some fundamentals of a translational machine learning approach before selectively reviewing literature to-date. Promising initial results are then balanced by the description of limitations that should be considered in order to interpret existing research and maximize the possibility of future translation. Future directions are then presented in order to inspire further research and progress the field towards clinical translation.

Benefits of Sequentially Adding Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy or Antidepressant Medication for Adults With Nonremitting Depression

OBJECTIVE

Adults with major depressive disorder frequently do not achieve remission with an initial treatment. Addition of psychotherapy for patients who do not achieve remission with antidepressant medication alone can target residual symptoms and protect against recurrence, but the utility of adding antidepressant medication after nonremission with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has received little study. The authors aimed to evaluate the acute and long-term outcomes resulting from both sequences of combination treatments.

METHODS

Previously untreated adults with major depression who were randomly assigned to receive escitalopram, duloxetine, or CBT monotherapy and completed 12 weeks of treatment without achieving remission entered an additional 12 weeks of combination treatment. For patients who did not achieve remission with CBT, escitalopram was added (CBT plus medication group) to their treatment, and for those who did not achieve remission with an antidepressant, CBT was added (medication plus CBT group) to their treatment. Patients who responded to the combination treatment entered an 18-month follow-up phase to assess risk of recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients who did not achieve remission with a monotherapy entered combination treatment (41 who responded to monotherapy but did not achieve remission and 71 who did not respond to monotherapy). Overall, remission rates after subsequent combination therapy were significantly higher among patients who responded to monotherapy but did not achieve remission (61%) than among patients who did not respond to monotherapy (41%). Among patients who responded to monotherapy but did not achieve remission, the remission rate in the CBT plus medication group (89%) was higher than in the medication plus CBT group (53%). However, among patients whose depression did not respond to monotherapy, rates of response and remission were similar between the treatment arms. Higher levels of anxiety, both prior to monotherapy and prior to beginning combination treatment, predicted poorer outcomes for both treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The order in which CBT and antidepressant medication were sequentially combined did not appear to affect outcomes. Addition of an antidepressant is an effective approach to treating residual symptoms for patients who do not achieve remission with CBT, as is adding CBT after antidepressant monotherapy. Patients who do not respond to one treatment modality warrant consideration for addition of the alternative modality.

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of panic disorder, social anxiety disorder and generalised anxiety disorder

Objective:

To provide practical clinical guidance for the treatment of adults with panic disorder, social anxiety disorder and generalised anxiety disorder in Australia and New Zealand.

Method:

Relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials were identified by searching PsycINFO, Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases. Additional relevant studies were identified from reference lists of identified articles, grey literature and literature known to the working group. Evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations were formulated by synthesising the evidence from efficacy studies, considering effectiveness in routine practice, accessibility and availability of treatment options in Australia and New Zealand, fidelity, acceptability to patients, safety and costs. The draft guidelines were reviewed by expert and clinical advisors, key stakeholders, professional bodies, and specialist groups with interest and expertise in anxiety disorders.

Results:

The guidelines recommend a pragmatic approach beginning with psychoeducation and advice on lifestyle factors, followed by initial treatment selected in collaboration with the patient from evidence-based options, taking into account symptom severity, patient preference, accessibility and cost. Recommended initial treatment options for all three anxiety disorders are cognitive–behavioural therapy (face-to-face or delivered by computer, tablet or smartphone application), pharmacotherapy (a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor together with advice about graded exposure to anxiety triggers), or the combination of cognitive–behavioural therapy and pharmacotherapy.

Conclusion:

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of panic disorder, social anxiety disorder and generalised anxiety disorder provide up-to-date guidance and advice on the management of these disorders for use by health professionals in Australia and New Zealand.

Response rate profiles for major depressive disorder: Characterizing early response and longitudinal nonresponse

BACKGROUND

Definition of response is critical when seeking to establish valid predictors of treatment success. However, response at the end of study or endpoint only provides one view of the overall clinical picture that is relevant in testing for predictors. The current study employed a classification technique designed to group subjects based on their rate of change over time, while simultaneously addressing the issue of controlling for baseline severity.

METHODS

A set of latent class trajectory analyses, incorporating baseline level of symptoms, were performed on a sample of 344 depressed patients from a clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of cognitive behavior therapy and two antidepressant medications (escitalopram and duloxetine) in patients with major depressive disorder.

RESULTS

Although very few demographic and illness-related features were associated with response rate profiles, the aggregated effect of candidate genetic variants previously identified in large pharmacogenetic studies and meta-analyses showed a significant association with early remission as well as nonresponse. These same genetic scores showed a less compelling relationship with endpoint response categories. In addition, consistent nonresponse throughout the study treatment period was shown to occur in different subjects than endpoint nonresponse, which was verified by follow-up augmentation treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

When defining groups based on the rate of change, controlling for baseline depression severity may help to identify the clinically relevant distinctions of early response on one end and consistent nonresponse on the other.

Mapping depression rating scale phenotypes onto research domain criteria (RDoC) to inform biological research in mood disorders

BACKGROUND

Substantial research progress can be achieved if available clinical datasets can be mapped to the National Institute of Mental Health Research-Domain-Criteria (RDoC) constructs. This mapping would allow investigators to both explore more narrowly defined clinical phenotypes and the relationship of these phenotypes to biological markers and clinical outcomes approximating RDoC criteria.

METHODS

Using expert review and consensus, we defined four major depression phenotypes based on specific RDoC constructs. Having matched these constructs to individual items from the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, we identified subjects meeting criteria for each of these phenotypes from two large clinical trials of patients treated for major depression. In a post hoc analysis, we evaluated the overall treatment response based on the phenotypes: Core Depression (CD), Anxiety (ANX), and Neurovegetative Symptoms of Melancholia (NVSM) and Atypical Depression (NVSAD).

RESULTS

The phenotypes were prevalent (range 10.5-52.4%, 50% reduction range 51.9-82.9%) and tracked with overall treatment response. Although the CD phenotype was associated with lower rates of remission in both cohorts, this was mainly driven by baseline symptom severity. However, when controlling for baseline severity, patients with the ANX phenotype had a significantly lower rate of remission.

LIMITATIONS

The lack of replication between the studies of the phenotypes' treatment prediction value reflects important variability across studies that may limit generalizability.

CONCLUSION

Further work evaluating biological markers associated with these phenotypes is needed for further RDoC concept development.

Treatment credibility, expectancy, and preference: Prediction of treatment engagement and outcome in a randomized clinical trial of hatha yoga vs. health education as adjunct treatments for depression

BACKGROUND

Hatha yoga may be helpful for alleviating depression symptoms. The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether treatment program preference, credibility, or expectancy predict engagement in depression interventions (yoga or a control class) or depression symptom severity over time.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of hatha yoga vs. a health education control group for treatment of depression. Depressed participants (n = 122) attended up to 20 classes over a period of 10 weeks, and then completed additional assessments after 3 and 6 months. We assessed treatment preference prior to randomization, and treatment credibility and expectancy after participants attended their first class. Treatment "concordance" indicated that treatment preference matched assigned treatment.

RESULTS

Treatment credibility, expectancy, and concordance were not associated with treatment engagement. Treatment expectancy moderated the association between treatment group and depression. Depression severity over time differed by expectancy level for the yoga group but not for the health education group. Controlling for baseline depression, participants in the yoga group with an average or high expectancy for improvement showed lower depression symptoms across the acute intervention and follow-up period than those with a low expectancy for improvement. There was a trend for a similar pattern for credibility. Concordance was not associated with treatment outcome.

LIMITATIONS

This is a secondary, post-hoc analysis and should be considered hypothesis-generating.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that expectancy improves the likelihood of success only for a intervention thought to actively target depression (yoga) and not a control intervention.

Web-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Blended With Face-to-Face Sessions for Major Depression: Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Meta-analyses of several randomized controlled trials have shown that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has comparable efficacy to antidepressant medication, but therapist availability and cost-effectiveness is a problem.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Web-based CBT blended with face-to-face sessions that reduce therapist time in patients with major depression who were unresponsive to antidepressant medications.

Methods

A 12-week, assessor-masked, parallel-group, waiting- list controlled, randomized trial was conducted at 3 medical institutions in Tokyo. Outpatients aged 20-65 years with a primary diagnosis of major depression who were taking ≥1 antidepressant medications at an adequate dose for ≥6 weeks and had a 17-item GRID-Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) score of ≥14 were randomly assigned (1:1) to blended CBT or waiting-list groups using a computer allocation system, stratified by the study site with the minimization method, to balance age and baseline GRID-HAMD score. The CBT intervention was given in a combined format, comprising a Web-based program and 12 45-minute face-to-face sessions. Thus, across 12 weeks, a participant could receive up to 540 minutes of contact with a therapist, which is approximately two-thirds of the therapist contact time provided in the conventional CBT protocol, which typically provides 16 50-minute sessions. The primary outcome was the alleviation of depressive symptoms, as measured by a change in the total GRID-HAMD score from baseline (at randomization) to posttreatment (at 12 weeks). Moreover, in an exploratory analysis, we investigated whether the expected positive effects of the intervention were sustained during follow-up, 3 months after the posttreatment assessment. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, and the primary outcome was analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures.

Results

We randomized 40 participants to either blended CBT (n=20) or waiting-list (n=20) groups. All patients completed the 12-week treatment protocol and were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. Participants in the blended CBT group had significantly alleviated depressive symptoms at week 12, as shown by greater least squares mean changes in the GRID-HAMD score, than those in the waiting list group (−8.9 points vs −3.0 points; mean between-group difference=−5.95; 95% CI −9.53 to −2.37; P<.001). The follow-up effects within the blended CBT group, as measured by the GRID-HAMD score, were sustained at the 3-month follow-up (week 24) and posttreatment (week 12): posttreatment, 9.4 (SD 5.2), versus follow-up, 7.2 (SD 5.7); P=.009.

Conclusions

Although our findings warrant confirmation in larger and longer term studies with active controls, these suggest that a combined form of CBT is effective in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with major depression who are unresponsive to antidepressant medications.

Trial Registration

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry: UMIN000009242; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000010852 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation. org/729VkpyYL)

Defective Inflammatory Pathways in Never-Treated Depressed Patients Are Associated with Poor Treatment Response

Inflammation has been involved in the pathophysiology and treatment response of major depressive disorder (MDD). Plasma cytokine profiles of 171 treatment-naive MDD patients (none of the MDD patients received an adequate trial of antidepressants or evidence-based psychotherapy) and 64 healthy controls (HCs) were obtained. MDD patients exhibited elevated concentrations of 18 anti- and proinflammatory markers and decreased concentrations of 6 cytokines. Increased inflammasome protein expression was observed in MDD patients, indicative of an activated inflammatory response. The plasma of MDD patients was immunosuppressive on healthy donor peripheral blood mononuclear cells, inducing reduced activation of monocytes/dendritic cells and B cells and reduced T cell memory. Comparison between 33 non-responders and 71 responders at baseline and 12 weeks revealed that after treatment, anti-inflammatory cytokine levels increase in both groups, whereas 5 proinflammatory cytokine levels were stabilized in responders, but continued to increase in non-responders. MDD patients exhibit remodeling of their inflammatory landscape.

Temporal Profiles and Dose-Responsiveness of Side Effects with Escitalopram and Duloxetine in Treatment-Naïve Depressed Adults

Side effect profiles of antidepressants are relevant to treatment selection and adherence among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), but several clinically-relevant characteristics of side effects are poorly understood. We aimed to compare the side effect profiles of escitalopram and duloxetine, including frequencies, time to onset, duration, dose responsiveness, and impact on treatment outcomes. Side effects occurring in 211 treatment-naïve patients with MDD randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with flexibly-dosed escitalopram (10–20 mg/day) or duloxetine (30–60 mg/day) as part of the Predictors of Remission in Depression to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study were evaluated. Escitalopram- and duloxetine-treated patients experienced a similar mean number of overall side effects and did not differ in terms of the specific side effects observed or their temporal profile. Experiencing any side effect during the first 2 weeks of treatment was associated with increased likelihood of trial completion (86.7% vs. 73.7%, p = 0.045). Duloxetine-treated patients who experienced dry mouth were significantly more likely to achieve remission than those who did not (73.7% vs. 44.8%, p = 0.026). Side effects that resolved prior to a dose increase were unlikely to recur after the increase, but only about 45% of intolerable side effects that required a dose reduction resolved within 30 days of the reduction. At the doses used in this study, escitalopram and duloxetine have similar side effect profiles. Understanding characteristics of side effects beyond simple frequency rates may help prescribers make more informed medication decisions and support conversations with patients to improve treatment adherence.

A European Research Agenda for Somatic Symptom Disorders, Bodily Distress Disorders, and Functional Disorders: Results of an Estimate-Talk-Estimate Delphi Expert Study

Background: Somatic Symptom Disorders (SSD), Bodily Distress Disorders (BDD) and functional disorders (FD) are associated with high medical and societal costs and pose a substantial challenge to the population and health policy of Europe. To meet this challenge, a specific research agenda is needed as one of the cornerstones of sustainable mental health research and health policy for SSD, BDD, and FD in Europe. Aim: To identify the main challenges and research priorities concerning SSD, BDD, and FD from a European perspective. Methods: Delphi study conducted from July 2016 until October 2017 in 3 rounds with 3 workshop meetings and 3 online surveys, involving 75 experts and 21 European countries. EURONET-SOMA and the European Association of Psychosomatic Medicine (EAPM) hosted the meetings. Results: Eight research priorities were identified: (1) Assessment of diagnostic profiles relevant to course and treatment outcome. (2) Development and evaluation of new, effective interventions. (3) Validation studies on questionnaires or semi-structured interviews that assess chronic medical conditions in this context. (4) Research into patients preferences for diagnosis and treatment. (5) Development of new methodologic designs to identify and explore mediators and moderators of clinical course and treatment outcomes (6). Translational research exploring how psychological and somatic symptoms develop from somatic conditions and biological and behavioral pathogenic factors. (7) Development of new, effective interventions to personalize treatment. (8) Implementation studies of treatment interventions in different settings, such as primary care, occupational care, general hospital and specialty mental health settings. The general public and policymakers will benefit from the development of new, effective, personalized interventions for SSD, BDD, and FD, that will be enhanced by translational research, as well as from the outcomes of research into patient involvement, GP-patient communication, consultation-liaison models and implementation. Conclusion: Funding for this research agenda, targeting these challenges in coordinated research networks such as EURONET-SOMA and EAPM, and systematically allocating resources by policymakers to this critical area in mental and physical well-being is urgently needed to improve efficacy and impact for diagnosis and treatment of SSD, BDD, and FD across Europe.

Multiple-therapy-resistant major depressive disorder: a clinically important concept

Many novel therapeutic options for depression exist that are either not mentioned in clinical guidelines or recommended only for use in highly specialist services. The challenge faced by clinicians is when it might be appropriate to consider such 'non-standard' interventions. This analysis proposes a framework to aid this decision.Declaration of interestIn the past 3 years R.H.M.W. has received support for research, expenses to attend conferences and fees for lecturing and consultancy work (including attending advisory boards) from various pharmaceutical companies including Astra Zeneca, Cyberonics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LivaNova, Lundbeck, MyTomorrows, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, SPIMACO and Sunovion. D.M.B.C. has received fees from LivaNova for attending an advisory board. In the past 3 years A.J.C. has received fees for lecturing from Astra Zeneca and Lundbeck; fees for consulting from LivaNova, Janssen and Allergan; and research grant support from Lundbeck.In the past 3 years A.C. has received fees for lecturing from pharmaceutical companies namely Lundbeck and Sunovion. In the past 3 years A.L.M. has received support for attending seminars and fees for consultancy work (including advisory board) from Medtronic Inc and LivaNova. R.M. holds joint research grants with a number of digital companies that investigate devices for depression including Alpha-stim, Big White Wall, P1vital, Intel, Johnson and Johnson and Lundbeck through his mindTech and CLAHRC EM roles. M.S. is an associate at Blueriver Consulting providing intelligence to NHS organisations, pharmaceutical and devices companies. He has received honoraria for presentations and advisory boards with Lundbeck, Eli Lilly, URGO, AstraZeneca, Phillips and Sanofi and holds shares in Johnson and Johnson. In the past 3 years P.R.A.S. has received support for research, expenses to attend conferences and fees for lecturing and consultancy work (including attending an advisory board) from life sciences companies including Corcept Therapeutics, Indivior and LivaNova. In the past 3 years P.S.T. has received consultancy fees as an advisory board member from the following companies: Galen Limited, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd, myTomorrows and LivaNova. A.H.Y. has undertaken paid lectures and advisory boards for all major pharmaceutical companies with drugs used in affective and related disorders and LivaNova. He has received funding for investigator initiated studies from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck and Wyeth.

Differential change on depressive symptom factors with antidepressant medication and cognitive behavior therapy for major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous condition and individual patients are likely to be differentially responsive to specific treatments. In an exploratory factor analysis of three rating scales, the Genome-based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) trial identified three factors that were differentially associated with outcome to nortriptyline and escitalopram. However, this factor analysis has neither been replicated or applied to a psychotherapy treatment.

METHODS

We replicated the GENDEP analytic method in the Emory Predictors of Remission to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study. The 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and Beck Depression Inventory were administered to 306 MDD patients in the PReDICT study, which randomized previously untreated adults to 12 weeks of treatment with cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), escitalopram, or duloxetine. Utilizing Item Response Theory methodologies, factor scores were derived from the three scales and the efficacy of the three treatments was compared for the identified factor scores.

RESULTS

Four factors were identified: "Despair," "Mood and Interest," "Sleep," and "Appetite." These factors closely aligned with the factors identified in GENDEP. Compared to CBT, escitalopram and duloxetine produced more rapid but ultimately similar improvement on the Despair and Mood and Interest factors; no significant differences between treatments emerged on the other factors.

LIMITATIONS

The scales contained differing numbers of items pertaining to specific depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity of MDD can be parsed into a consistent factor structure, with the factors showing differential rapidity, but ultimately similar, improvement across treatments.

Follow-up of monotherapy remitters in the PReDICT study: Maintenance treatment outcomes and clinical predictors of recurrence

OBJECTIVE

This study followed remitted patients from a randomized controlled trial of adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). The aims were to describe rates of recurrence and to evaluate 3 clinical predictor domains.

METHOD

Ninety-four treatment-naïve patients (50% female; Mage = 38.1 years; 48.9% White; 30.9% Hispanic) with MDD who had remitted to 12-week monotherapy (escitalopram, duloxetine, or cognitive behavior therapy [CBT]) participated in a 21-month maintenance phase (i.e., continued medication or 3 possible CBT booster sessions per year). Recurrence was assessed quarterly, and the clinical predictors were the following: 2 measures of residual depressive symptoms, 1 measure of lifetime depressive episodes, and 2 measures of baseline anxiety. Survival analysis models evaluated recurrence rates, and regression models evaluated the predictors.

RESULTS

Among all patients, 15.5% experienced a recurrence, and the survival distributions did not statistically differ among treatments. Residual depressive symptoms on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale at the end of monotherapy were associated with increased risk for recurrence (hazard ratio = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI: 1.02, 1.67], Wald χ2 = 4.41, p = .036), and not having a comorbid anxiety disorder diagnosis at study baseline reduced the risk of recurrence (hazard ratio = .31, 95% CI [.10, .94], Wald χ2 = 4.28, p = .039).

CONCLUSIONS

The study supported the benefits of maintenance treatment for treatment-naïve patients who remitted to initial monotherapy; nevertheless, remitted patients with a comorbid anxiety disorder diagnosis at the beginning of treatment or residual depressive symptoms after initial treatment were at risk for poorer long-term outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record

The potential of predictive analytics to provide clinical decision support in depression treatment planning

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review progress developing clinical decision support tools for personalized treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD).

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the years, a variety of individual indicators ranging from biomarkers to clinical observations and self-report scales have been used to predict various aspects of differential MDD treatment response. Most of this work focused on predicting remission either with antidepressant medications versus psychotherapy, some antidepressant medications versus others, some psychotherapies versus others, and combination therapies versus monotherapies. However, to date, none of the individual predictors in these studies has been strong enough to guide optimal treatment selection for most patients. Interest consequently turned to decision support tools made up of multiple predictors, but the development of such tools has been hampered by small study sample sizes. Design recommendations are made here for future studies to address this problem.

SUMMARY

Recommendations include using large prospective observational studies followed by pragmatic trials rather than smaller, expensive controlled treatment trials for preliminary development of decision support tools; basing these tools on comprehensive batteries of inexpensive self-report and clinical predictors (e.g., self-administered performance-based neurocognitive tests) versus expensive biomarkers; and reserving biomarker assessments for targeted studies of patients not well classified by inexpensive predictor batteries.

Functional Connectivity of the Subcallosal Cingulate Cortex And Differential Outcomes to Treatment With Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy or Antidepressant Medication for Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article was to inform the first-line treatment choice between cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) or an antidepressant medication for treatment-naive adults with major depressive disorder by defining a neuroimaging biomarker that differentially identifies the outcomes of remission and treatment failure to these interventions.

METHOD

Functional MRI resting-state functional connectivity analyses using a bilateral subcallosal cingulate cortex (SCC) seed was applied to 122 patients from the Prediction of Remission to Individual and Combined Treatments (PReDICT) study who completed 12 weeks of randomized treatment with CBT or antidepressant medication. Of the 122 participants, 58 achieved remission (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D] score ≤7 at weeks 10 and 12), and 24 had treatment failure (<30% decrease from baseline in HAM-D score). A 2×2 analysis of variance using voxel-wise subsampling permutation tests compared the interaction of treatment and outcome. Receiver operating characteristic curves constructed using brain connectivity measures were used to determine possible classification rates for differential treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

The resting-state functional connectivity of the following three regions with the SCC was differentially associated with outcomes of remission and treatment failure to CBT and antidepressant medication and survived application of the subsample permutation tests: the left anterior ventrolateral prefrontal cortex/insula, the dorsal midbrain, and the left ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Using the summed SCC functional connectivity scores for these three regions, overall classification rates of 72%-78% for remission and 75%-89% for treatment failure was demonstrated. Positive summed functional connectivity was associated with remission with CBT and treatment failure with medication, whereas negative summed functional connectivity scores were associated with remission to medication and treatment failure with CBT.

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging-based depression subtypes defined using resting-state functional connectivity differentially identified an individual's probability of remission or treatment failure with first-line treatment options for major depression. This biomarker should be explored in future research through prospective testing and as a component of multivariate treatment prediction models.

Accurately identifying patients who are excellent candidates or unsuitable for a medication: a novel approach

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to determine whether a unique analytic approach - as a proof of concept - could identify individual depressed outpatients (using 30 baseline clinical and demographic variables) who are very likely (75% certain) to not benefit (NB) or to remit (R), accepting that without sufficient certainty, no prediction (NP) would be made.

METHODS

Patients from the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes trial treated with escitalopram (S-CIT) + placebo (n=212) or S-CIT + bupropion-SR (n=206) were analyzed separately to assess replicability. For each treatment, the elastic net was used to identify subsets of predictive baseline measures for R and NB, separately. Two different equations that estimate the likelihood of remission and no benefit were developed for each patient. The ratio of these two numbers characterized likely outcomes for each patient.

RESULTS

The two treatment cells had comparable rates of remission (40%) and no benefit (22%). In S-CIT + bupropion-SR, 11 were predicted NB of which 82% were correct; 26 were predicted R - 85% correct (169 had NP). For S-CIT + placebo, 13 were predicted NB - 69% correct; 44 were predicted R - 75% correct (155 were NP). Overall, 94/418 (22%) patients were identified with a meaningful degree of certainty (69%-85% correct). Different variable sets with some overlap were predictive of remission and no benefit within and across treatments, despite comparable outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In two separate analyses with two different treatments, this analytic approach - which is also applicable to pretreatment laboratory tests - identified a meaningful proportion (over 20%) of depressed patients for whom a treatment outcome was predicted with sufficient certainty that the clinician can elect to strongly recommend for or choose to avoid a particular treatment. Different persons seem to be remitting or not benefiting with these two different treatments.