Pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression

Prevalence and risk factors for psychotic symptoms in young, first-episode and drug-naïve patients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common psychiatric disorder worldwide. Psychotic depression has been reported to be frequently under-diagnosed due to poor recognition of psychotic features. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to reveal the rate and risk factors of psychotic symptoms in young, drug-naïve patients with major depressive disorder at the time of their first episode.

METHODS

A total of 917 patients were recruited and divided into psychotic and non-psychotic subgroups based on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) positive subscale score. Anxiety symptoms and depressive symptoms were measured by the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) and the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), respectively. Several biochemical indicators such as total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), fasting blood glucose (FBG), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), free triiodothyronine (FT3), and free thyroxine (FT4) were also measured.

RESULTS

The rate of psychotic symptoms among young adult MDD patients was 9.1%. There were significant differences in TSH (p<0.001), FBG (p<0.001), TC (p<0.0001), TG (p = 0.001), HDL-C (p = 0.049), LDL-C (p = 0.010), diastolic blood pressure (DP) (p<0.001), systolic blood pressure (SP) (p<0.001), and HAMD total score (p<0.001) between young MDD patients with and without psychotic depression. HAMD, TSH, TC, and severe anxiety were independently associated with psychotic symptoms in young adult MDD patients. In addition, among young MDD patients, the rate of suicide attempts in the psychotic subgroup was much higher than in the non-psychotic subgroup (45.8% vs. 16.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that psychotic symptoms are common in young MDD patients. Several clinical variables and biochemical indicators are associated with the occurrence of psychotic symptoms in young MDD patients.

Antidepressant and antipsychotic treatment of Psychotic Major Depression in a British mental healthcare setting

BACKGROUND

Evidence from treatment trials shows that the most effective pharmacological treatment for Psychotic Major Depression (PMD) is combined antidepressant and antipsychotic pharmacotherapy.

AIM

This study investigates the use of antidepressant and antipsychotic treatment for PMD in clinical practice and examines how treatment profiles correlate with demographic and clinical symptoms.

METHOD

Anonymised electronic health records of 2,837 individuals with PMD were followed up for 12-months post-diagnosis in a historic open cohort design. The use of antidepressants and antipsychotics, alone or in combination, were described using frequency statistics. Demographic and clinical characteristics associated with each treatment were assessed using logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Antidepressant and antipsychotic combination pharmacotherapy was the most used treatment for PMD with 69.9% users, compared to antidepressant monotherapy (10.9%) and antipsychotic monotherapy (10.3%). The remaining 8.9% of individuals did not receive antidepressant or antipsychotic treatment. The presence of delusions was strongly associated with the use of antipsychotics, both alone (odds ratio =3.99, 95% confidence intervals = 2.72-5.83, p<.001) and in combination with antidepressants (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 2.09-3.67, p<.001), rather than antidepressant treatment alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined antidepressant and antipsychotic pharmacotherapy is the most common treatment of PMD in clinical practice, showing that clinical practice is in line with evidence from treatment research.

A Machine-Learning-Algorithm-Based Prediction Model for Psychotic Symptoms in Patients with Depressive Disorder

Psychotic symptoms are rarely concurrent with the clinical manifestations of depression. Additionally, whether psychotic major depression is a subtype of major depression or a clinical syndrome distinct from non-psychotic major depression remains controversial. Using data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, we developed a machine-learning-algorithm-based prediction model for concurrent psychotic symptoms in patients with depressive disorders. The advantages of machine learning algorithms include the easy identification of trends and patterns, handling of multi-dimensional and multi-faceted data, and wide application. Among 1171 patients with depressive disorders, those with psychotic symptoms were characterized by significantly higher rates of depressed mood, loss of interest and enjoyment, reduced energy and diminished activity, reduced self-esteem and self-confidence, ideas of guilt and unworthiness, psychomotor agitation or retardation, disturbed sleep, diminished appetite, and greater proportions of moderate and severe degrees of depression compared to patients without psychotic symptoms. The area under the curve was 0.823. The overall accuracy was 0.931 (95% confidence interval: 0.897–0.956). Severe depression (degree of depression) was the most important variable in the prediction model, followed by diminished appetite, subthreshold (degree of depression), ideas or acts of self-harm or suicide, outpatient status, age, psychomotor retardation or agitation, and others. In conclusion, the machine-learning-based model predicted concurrent psychotic symptoms in patients with major depression in connection with the “severity psychosis” hypothesis.

Pharmacological treatment of major depressive disorder according to severity in psychiatric inpatients: results from the AMSP pharmacovigilance program from 2001-2017

The International Classification of Diseases (10^th Version) categorizes major depressive disorder (MDD) according to severity. Guidelines provide recommendations for the treatment of MDD according to severity. Aim of this study was to assess real-life utilization of psychotropic drugs based on severity of MDD in psychiatric inpatients. Drug utilization data from the program “Drug Safety in Psychiatry” (German: Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie, AMSP) were analyzed according to the severity of MDD. From 2001 to 2017, 43,868 psychiatric inpatients with MDD were treated in participating hospitals. Most patients were treated with ≥ 1 antidepressant drug (ADD; 85.8% of patients with moderate MDD, 89.8% of patients with severe MDD, and 87.9% of patients with psychotic MDD). More severely depressed patients were more often treated with selective serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and mirtazapine and less often with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (p < 0.001 each). Use of antipsychotic drugs (APDs), especially second-generation APDs, increased significantly with severity (37.0%, 47.9%, 84.1%; p < 0.001 each). APD + ADD was the most used combination (32.8%, 43.6%, 74.4%), followed by two ADDs (26.3%, 29.3%, 24.9%). Use of lithium was minimal (3.3%, 6.1% ,7.1%). The number of psychotropic drugs increased with severity of MDD—patients with psychotic MDD had the highest utilization of psychotropic drugs (93.4%, 96.5%, 98.7%; p < 0.001). ADD monotherapy was observed to a lesser extent, even in patients with non-severe MDD (23.2%, 17.1%, 4.4%). Findings reveal substantial discrepancies between guideline recommendations and real-life drug utilization, indicating that guidelines may insufficiently consider clinical needs within the psychiatric inpatient setting.

Efficacy and acceptability of next step treatment strategies in adults with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder: protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

For major depression, a one-size-fits-all treatment does not exist. Patients enter a 'trial-and-change' algorithm in which effective therapies are subsequently applied. Unfortunately, an empirically based order of treatments has not yet been determined. There is a magnitude of different treatment strategies while clinical trials only compare a small number of these. Network meta-analyses (NMA) might offer a solution, but so far have been limited in scope and did not account for possible differences in population characteristics that arise with increasing levels of treatment-resistance, potentially violating the transitivity assumption. We; therefore, present a protocol for a systematic review and NMA aiming at summarising and ranking treatments for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) while covering a broad range of therapeutic options and accounting for possible differences in population characteristics at increasing levels of treatment-resistance.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Randomised controlled trials will be included that compared next-step pharmacological, neuromodulation or psychological treatments for treatment-resistant depression (TRD; ie, failure to respond to ≥1 adequate antidepressant drug trial(s) in the current episode) to each other or to a control condition. Primary outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to (efficacy) and dropped out of (acceptability) the allocated treatment. A random effects NMA will be conducted, synthesising the evidence for each outcome and determining the differential efficacy of treatments. Heterogeneity in treatment nodes will be reduced by considering alternative geometries of the network structure and by conducting a meta-regression examining different levels of TRD. Local and global methods will be applied to evaluate consistency. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework will be used to assess risk of bias and certainty.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not require ethical approval.

The moderation of maternal parenting on the association of trauma, dissociation, and psychosis in depressive inpatients

BACKGROUND

The effect of dissociation and parenting style on the relationship between psychological trauma and psychotic symptoms has not previously been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a moderated mediation model to assess whether the association between psychological trauma and psychotic symptoms is mediated by dissociation and moderated by parental maltreatment.

METHODS

Inpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar depression (BP) were recruited. Self-reported and clinical rating scales were used to measure the level of dissociation, psychotic symptoms, history of psychological trauma and parental maltreatment. The PROCESS macro in SPSS was used to estimate path coefficients and adequacy of the moderated mediation model. High betrayal trauma (HBT), low betrayal trauma (LBT), paternal maltreatment, and maternal maltreatment were alternatively entered into the conceptual model to test the adequacy.

RESULTS

A total of 91 patients (59 with MDD and 32 with BP) were recruited, with a mean age of 40.59 ± 7.5 years. After testing with different variables, the moderated mediation model showed that the association between LBT and psychotic symptoms was mediated by dissociation and moderated by maternal maltreatment. A higher level of maternal maltreatment enhanced the effect of LBT on dissociation.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare workers should be aware of the risk of developing psychotic symptoms among depressive patients with a history of LBT and maternal maltreatment.

Pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression

BACKGROUND

Evidence is limited regarding the most effective pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression: monotherapy with an antidepressant, monotherapy with an antipsychotic, another treatment (e.g. mifepristone), or combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and last updated in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

1. To compare the clinical efficacy of pharmacological treatments for patients with an acute psychotic depression: antidepressant monotherapy, antipsychotic monotherapy, mifepristone monotherapy, and the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus placebo and/or each other. 2. To assess whether differences in response to treatment in the current episode are related to non-response to prior treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

A search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR); Ovid MEDLINE (1950-); Embase (1974-); and PsycINFO (1960-) was conducted on 21 February 2020. Reference lists of all included studies and related reviews were screened and key study authors contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with acute major depression with psychotic features, as well as RCTs consisting of participants with acute major depression with or without psychotic features, that reported separately on the subgroup of participants with psychotic features.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in the included studies, according to criteria from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data were entered into RevMan 5.1. We used intention-to-treat data. Primary outcomes were clinical response for efficacy and overall dropout rate for harm/tolerance. Secondary outcome were remission of depression, change from baseline severity score, quality of life, and dropout rate due to adverse effects. For dichotomous efficacy outcomes (i.e. response and overall dropout), risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.  Regarding the primary outcome of harm, only overall dropout rates were available for all studies. If the study did not report any of the response criteria as defined above, remission as defined here could be used as an alternative. For continuously distributed outcomes, it was not possible to extract data from the RCTs.  MAIN RESULTS: The search identified 3947 abstracts, but only 12 RCTs with a total of 929 participants could be included in the review. Because of clinical heterogeneity, few meta-analyses were possible. The main outcome was reduction in severity (response) of depression, not of psychosis. For depression response, we found no evidence of a difference between antidepressant and placebo (RR 8.40, 95% CI 0.50 to 142.27; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or between antipsychotic and placebo (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.73; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found no evidence of a difference in overall dropouts with antidepressant (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.51; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.08; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No evidence suggests a difference in depression response (RR 2.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 6.82; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or overall dropouts (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.18 to 18.02; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) between antidepressant and antipsychotic. For depression response, low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests that the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic may be more effective than antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.38; participants = 447, studies = 4), more effective than antidepressant monotherapy (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.80; participants = 245, studies = 5), and more effective than placebo (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.82; participants = 148, studies = 2). Very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in overall dropouts between the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.01; participants = 447, studies = 4), antidepressant monotherapy (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.50; participants = 245, studies = 5), or placebo alone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; participants = 148, studies = 2). No study measured change in depression severity from baseline, quality of life, or dropouts due to adverse events. We found no RCTs with mifepristone that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Risk of bias is considerable: we noted differences between studies with regards to diagnosis, uncertainties around randomisation and allocation concealment, treatment interventions (pharmacological differences between various antidepressants and antipsychotics), and outcome criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychotic depression is heavily under-studied, limiting confidence in the conclusions drawn. Some evidence indicates that combination therapy with an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic is more effective than either treatment alone or placebo. Evidence is limited for treatment with an antidepressant alone or with an antipsychotic alone. Evidence for efficacy of mifepristone is lacking.

Key considerations in the pharmacological management of treatment-resistant depression

Introduction: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is a complex, multifactorial, and biologically heterogeneous disorder with debilitating outcomes. Understanding individual reasons why patients do not respond to treatment is necessary for improving clinical recommendations regarding medication regimens, augmentation strategies, and alternative treatments.Areas covered: This manuscript reviews evidence-based treatment strategies for the clinical management of TRD. Current developments in the field and potential future recommendations for personalized treatment of TRD are also discussed.Expert opinion: Treatment guidelines for TRD are limited by the heterogeneous nature of the disorder. Furthermore, current strategies reflect this heterogeneity by emphasizing disease characteristics as well as drug trial response or failure. Developing robust biomarkers that could one day be integrated into clinical practice has the potential to advance specific treatment targets and ultimately improve treatment and remission outcomes.

High neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio upon admission is associated with better response in psychotic depression

Recent evidence relates the inflammatory system to the aetiology and evolution of mood disorders. The Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) is an affordable and reproducible biomarker of inflammation. The aim of the study is to retrospectively evaluate the association between NLR and response to treatment in 50 patients aged over 50 with a diagnosis of Psychotic Depression (PD) who were admitted to an acute psychiatric unit between 2010 and 2018. They were stratified according to sex and treatment received: antidepressants, antipsychotics and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). The NLR was collected on admission and the clinical response was quantified by the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale. In the simple linear regression, high NLR upon admission was associated with better clinical response during hospitalization as measured by GAF. When stratifying the patients, this association was maintained in women, in patients who received antidepressant treatment with tricyclics and SNRIs, antipsychotic treatment with olanzapine/quetiapine and those who did not receive ECT. NLR is an accessible biomarker in clinical practice, and in PD patients it could guide the therapeutic strategy and be a predictor of response.

Relapse following bitemporal and high-dose right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy for major depression

OBJECTIVE

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an effective acute treatment for severe and/or medication-resistant depression but maintaining remission following completion of a course remains a clinical challenge.

METHODS

EFFECT-Dep Trial (ISRCTN23577151) participants with a DSM-IV major depressive episode who met remission criteria after a randomly assigned course of twice-weekly brief-pulse bitemporal (1.5 × seizure threshold) or high-dose (6 × seizure threshold) right unilateral ECT were monitored for relapse for 12 months. In line with the pragmatic trial design, all patients received treatment-as-usual individualised pharmacotherapy during and after ECT; no remitter received continuation ECT.

RESULTS

Of 61 remitters, 24 (39.3%) relapsed, one (1.6%) withdrew from the study while in remission and the remaining 36 (59.0%) stayed well for a year. Most relapses occurred within the first six months, resulting in a cumulative six-month relapse rate of 31.1%. In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, older age (p = 0.039) and psychotic features at pre-ECT baseline (p = 0.037) were associated with a more favourable long-term prognosis while a greater number of previous depressive episodes (p = 0.028) and bipolar II (but not bipolar I) diagnosis (p = 0.030) were associated with a worse long-term outcome. Electrode placement and medication resistance prior to ECT had no effect on relapse. Adjusting for covariates, fewer patients treated with lithium relapsed in the overall group (p = 0.008) and in the unipolar depression subgroup (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Long-term outcome following high-dose right unilateral ECT does not differ from bitemporal ECT. Prognosis is particularly favourable in older adults, psychotic depression and patients maintained on lithium.

Association of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and white blood cell count with response to pharmacotherapy in unipolar psychotic depression: An exploratory analysis

Background

Low-grade inflammation occurs in a subgroup of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and may be associated with response to antidepressant medications. The Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) and total White Blood cell Count (WBC) are markers of systemic inflammation which have not been investigated as predictors for outcome to pharmacotherapy in unipolar depression yet. Moreover, the association between inflammation and treatment response has not been studied in unipolar Psychotic Depression (PD). We conducted an exploratory analysis to examine the prognostic significance of NLR and WBC in pharmacotherapy of PD.

Methods

Baseline NLR and WBC were examined in their association with response to seven weeks of treatment with antidepressants (venlafaxine or imipramine) and the combination of an antidepressant with an antipsychotic (venlafaxine plus quetiapine) in 87 patients with PD. Logistic regression models were adjusted for age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), depression severity, duration of the current episode and number of previous depressive episodes. Secondary outcomes were remission of depression and disappearance of psychotic symptoms.

Results

Higher NLR was associated with increased response to pharmacotherapy (Exp(B) 1.66, 95 ​% CI 1.03–2.66, p ​= ​0.036), but not with remission of depression or disappearance of psychotic symptoms. WBC was not associated with any of the outcome measures.

Conclusion

NLR may be a novel, inexpensive and widely available biomarker associated with response to pharmacotherapy in PD. The association between white blood cell measures and treatment outcome should be further investigated for different types of antidepressants in PD and in non-psychotic MDD.

Pharmacotherapy, drug-drug interactions and potentially inappropriate medication in depressive disorders

Introduction

The aim of this study was to describe the number and type of drugs used to treat depressive disorders in inpatient psychiatry and to analyse the determinants of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDI) and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM).

Methods

Our study was part of a larger pharmacovigilance project funded by the German Innovation Funds. It included all inpatients with a main diagnosis in the group of depressive episodes (F32, ICD-10) or recurrent depressive disorders (F33) discharged from eight psychiatric hospitals in Germany between 1 October 2017 and 30 September 2018 or between 1 January and 31 December 2019.

Results

The study included 14,418 inpatient cases. The mean number of drugs per day was 3.7 (psychotropic drugs = 1.7; others = 2.0). Thirty-one percent of cases received at least five drugs simultaneously (polypharmacy). Almost one half of all cases received a combination of multiple antidepressant drugs (24.8%, 95% CI 24.1%–25.5%) or a treatment with antidepressant drugs augmented by antipsychotic drugs (21.9%, 95% CI 21.3%–22.6%). The most frequently used antidepressants were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, followed by serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and tetracyclic antidepressants. In multivariate analyses, cases with recurrent depressive disorders and cases with severe depression were more likely to receive a combination of multiple antidepressant drugs (Odds ratio recurrent depressive disorder: 1.56, 95% CI 1.41–1.70, severe depression 1.33, 95% CI 1.18–1.48). The risk of any pDDI and PIM in elderly patients increased substantially with each additional drug (Odds Ratio: pDDI 1.32, 95% CI: 1.27–1.38, PIM 1.18, 95% CI: 1.14–1.22) and severity of disease (Odds Ratio per point on CGI-Scale: pDDI 1.29, 95% CI: 1.11–1.46, PIM 1.27, 95% CI: 1.11–1.44), respectively.

Conclusion

This study identified potential sources and determinants of safety risks in pharmacotherapy of depressive disorders and provided additional data which were previously unavailable. Most inpatients with depressive disorders receive multiple psychotropic and non-psychotropic drugs and pDDI and PIM are relatively frequent. Patients with a high number of different drugs must be intensively monitored in the management of their individual drug-related risk-benefit profiles.

Cross-cultural evaluation of the French version of the Delusion Assessment Scale (DAS) and Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS)

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder with psychotic features (MDDPsy), compared to nonpsychotic MDD, involves an increased risk of suicide and failure to achieve treatment response. Symptom scales can be useful to assess patients with MDDPsy. The aim of the present study was to validate French versions of the Delusion Assessment Scale (DAS) and Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS).

METHODS

One hundred patients were included. The scales were filled out by psychiatrists. Data from participants who accepted a second interview were used for inter-judge reliability. The scalability and psychometric properties of both scales were assessed.

RESULTS

Data from 94 patients were used. Owing to low score variability between patients, the predefined threshold for scalability (≥0.40) was not reached for both scales. Factorial analysis of the DAS identified five factors, different from those of the original version. Five factors were also identified in the PDAS, of which two comprised items from the HDRS and the other three items from the BPRS. Floor and ceiling effects were observed in both scales, due in part to the construction of certain subscales. Unlike the PDAS, the DAS had good internal consistency. Multiple correlations were observed between the DAS dimensions but none between those of the PDAS. Both scales showed good inter-judge reliability. Convergent validity analyses showed correlations with HDRS, BPRS and CGI.

LIMITATIONS

Inter-judge reliability was calculated from a relatively small number of volunteers.

CONCLUSIONS

The good psychometric properties of the French versions of the DAS and PDAS could help in assessing MDDPsy, in particular its psychotic features, and hence improve response to treatment and prognosis.

The clinical characterization of the adult patient with depression aimed at personalization of management

Depression is widely acknowledged to be a heterogeneous entity, and the need to further characterize the individual patient who has received this diagnosis in order to personalize the management plan has been repeatedly emphasized. However, the research evidence that should guide this personalization is at present fragmentary, and the selection of treatment is usually based on the clinician's and/or the patient's preference and on safety issues, in a trial-and-error fashion, paying little attention to the particular features of the specific case. This may be one of the reasons why the majority of patients with a diagnosis of depression do not achieve remission with the first treatment they receive. The predominant pessimism about the actual feasibility of the personalization of treatment of depression in routine clinical practice has recently been tempered by some secondary analyses of databases from clinical trials, using approaches such as individual patient data meta-analysis and machine learning, which indicate that some variables may indeed contribute to the identification of patients who are likely to respond differently to various antidepressant drugs or to antidepressant medication vs. specific psychotherapies. The need to develop decision support tools guiding the personalization of treatment of depression has been recently reaffirmed, and the point made that these tools should be developed through large observational studies using a comprehensive battery of self-report and clinical measures. The present paper aims to describe systematically the salient domains that should be considered in this effort to personalize depression treatment. For each domain, the available research evidence is summarized, and the relevant assessment instruments are reviewed, with special attention to their suitability for use in routine clinical practice, also in view of their possible inclusion in the above-mentioned comprehensive battery of measures. The main unmet needs that research should address in this area are emphasized. Where the available evidence allows providing the clinician with specific advice that can already be used today to make the management of depression more personalized, this advice is highlighted. Indeed, some sections of the paper, such as those on neurocognition and on physical comorbidities, indicate that the modern management of depression is becoming increasingly complex, with several components other than simply the choice of an antidepressant and/or a psychotherapy, some of which can already be reliably personalized.

Pharmacological treatment of depression: A systematic review comparing clinical practice guideline recommendations

Depression affects over 300 million individuals worldwide and is responsible for most of the 800,000 annual suicides. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for treatment of depression, founded on scientific evidence, are essential to improve patient care. However, economic and sociocultural factors may influence CPG elaboration, potentially leading to divergences in their recommendations. Consequently, we analyzed pharmacological recommendations for the treatment of depression from the most relevant CPGs. We included four CPGs with scores ≥ 80% for Domain 3 (rigor of development) on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation and two other commonly used CPGs. The recommendations, their strengths, and the level of evidence were extracted from each CPG by two independent researchers and grouped as follows: (1) general recommendations for the pharmacological treatment for depression (suicide risk, acute treatment, continuation and maintenance phases, and treatment discontinuation); (2) treatment of non-responsive or partially responsive patients; and (3) treatment for subtypes of depression (chronic, psychotic, catatonic, melancholic, seasonal, somatic, mixed, and atypical). Only 50% of CPGs included recommendations for the risk of suicide associated with pharmacotherapy. All CPGs included serotonin selective reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) as first-line treatment; however, one CPG also included agomelatine, milnacipran, and mianserin as first-line alternatives. Recommendations for depression subtypes (catatonic, atypical, melancholic) were included in three CPGs. The strength of recommendation and level of evidence clearly differed among CPGs, especially regarding treatment augmentation strategies. We conclude that, although CPGs converged in some recommendations (e.g., SSRIs as first-line treatment), they diverged in cardinal topics including the absence of recommendations regarding the risk of suicide associated with pharmacotherapy. Consequently, the recommendations listed in a specific CPG should be followed with caution.

Effect of Continuing Olanzapine vs Placebo on Relapse Among Patients With Psychotic Depression in Remission: The STOP-PD II Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Psychotic depression is a severely disabling and potentially lethal disorder. Little is known about the efficacy and tolerability of continuing antipsychotic medication for patients with psychotic depression in remission.

Objective

To determine the clinical effects of continuing antipsychotic medication once an episode of psychotic depression has responded to combination treatment with an antidepressant and antipsychotic agent.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Thirty-six week randomized clinical trial conducted at 4 academic medical centers. Patients aged 18 years or older had an episode of psychotic depression acutely treated with sertraline plus olanzapine for up to 12 weeks and met criteria for remission of psychosis and remission or near-remission of depressive symptoms for 8 weeks before entering the clinical trial. The study was conducted from November 2011 to June 2017, and the final date of follow-up was June 13, 2017.

Interventions

Participants were randomized either to continue olanzapine (n = 64) or switch from olanzapine to placebo (n = 62). All participants continued sertraline.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was risk of relapse. Main secondary outcomes were change in weight, waist circumference, lipids, serum glucose, and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c).

Results

Among 126 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 55.3 years [14.9 years]; 78 women [61.9%]), 114 (90.5%) completed the trial. At the time of randomization, the median dosage of sertraline was 150 mg/d (interquartile range [IQR], 150-200 mg/d) and the median dosage of olanzapine was 15 mg/d (IQR, 10-20 mg/d). Thirteen participants (20.3%) randomized to olanzapine and 34 (54.8%) to placebo experienced a relapse (hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.48; P < .001). The effect of olanzapine on the daily rate of anthropometric and metabolic measures significantly differed from placebo for weight (0.13 lb; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.15), waist circumference (0.009 inches; 95% CI, 0.004 to 0.014), and total cholesterol (0.29 mg/dL; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.45) but was not significantly different for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.04 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.10), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-0.01 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.01), triglyceride (-0.153 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.306 to 0.004), glucose (-0.02 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.08), or HbA1c levels (-0.0002 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.0021 to 0.0016).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients with psychotic depression in remission, continuing sertraline plus olanzapine compared with sertraline plus placebo reduced the risk of relapse over 36 weeks. This benefit needs to be balanced against potential adverse effects of olanzapine, including weight gain.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01427608.

Prevalence of Psychotropic Polypharmacy and Associated Healthcare Resource Utilization during Initial Phase of Care among Adults with Cancer in USA

BACKGROUND

The use of psychotropic medications is not uncommon among patients with newly diagnosed cancer. However, the impact of psychotropic polypharmacy on healthcare utilization during the initial phase of cancer care is largely unknown.

METHODS

We used a claims database to identify adults with incident breast, prostate, lung, and colorectal cancers diagnosed during 2011-12. Psychotropic polypharmacy was defined as concurrent use of two or more psychotropic medication classes for at least 90 days. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify significant predictors of psychotropic polypharmacy. Multivariable Poisson and negative binomial regressions were used to assess the associations between psychotropic polypharmacy and healthcare utilization.

RESULTS

Among 5604 patients included in the study, 52.6% had breast cancer, 30.6% had prostate cancer, 11.4% had colorectal cancer, and 5.5% had lung cancer. During the year following incident cancer diagnosis, psychotropic polypharmacy was reported in 7.4% of patients, with the highest prevalence among patients with lung cancer (14.4%). Compared with patients without psychotropic polypharmacy during the initial phase of care, patients with newly diagnosed cancer with psychotropic polypharmacy had a 30% higher rate of physician office visits, an 18% higher rate of hospitalization, and a 30% higher rate of outpatient visits. The rate of emergency room visits was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Psychotropic polypharmacy during the initial phase of cancer care was associated with significantly increased healthcare resource utilization, and the proportion of patients receiving psychotropic polypharmacy differed by type of cancer.

IMPACT

Findings emphasize the importance of evidence-based psychotropic prescribing and close surveillance of events causing increased healthcare utilization among patients with cancer receiving psychotropic polypharmacy.

Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in treatment-resistant psychotic depression

Dopamine receptor antagonists can be effective in psychotic depression but response is not assured. Visual hallucinations may arise from a dysregulation of brain cholinergic systems and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) can treat such hallucinations in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). AChEIs have been used in schizophrenia with some success but their efficacy and tolerability in psychotic depression is unclear. This striking case illustrates AChEIs specifically targeting multimodal hallucinations in treatment-resistant depression. To our knowledge it is the first case report to do so. It highlights the value of delineating psychopathology when considering novel interventions. This case also shows the idiosyncratic nature of side effects and the importance of pursuing different drugs within class.

A randomized clinical trial comparing two two-phase treatment strategies for in-patients with severe depression

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of two antidepressant treatment strategies in severely depressed in-patients, that is, imipramine vs. venlafaxine, both with subsequent lithium addition in non-responders.

METHOD

In-patients (n = 88) with major depressive disorder were randomized to 7-week treatment with imipramine or venlafaxine (phase I). All non-responders (n = 44) received 4-week plasma level-targeted dose lithium addition (phase II). Efficacy was evaluated after 11 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Analyzing phases I and II combined, non-inferiority was established and the difference in the proportion of responders (HAM-D score reduction ≥50%) by the end of phase II demonstrated the venlafaxine-lithium treatment strategy to be significantly superior to the imipramine-lithium treatment strategy (77% vs. 52%) (χ² (1) = 6.03; P = 0.01). Regarding remission (HAM-D score ≤ 7), 15 of 44 (34%) patients in the imipramine-lithium treatment group were remitters compared to 22 of 44 (50%) patients in the venlafaxine-lithium treatment group, a non-significant difference. Patients in the venlafaxine-lithium treatment group had a non-significant larger mean HAM-D score reduction compared with patients in the imipramine-lithium treatment group (16.1 vs. 13.5 points, respectively; Cohen's d = 0.30).

CONCLUSION

The venlafaxine-lithium treatment strategy can be considered a valuable alternative for the imipramine-lithium treatment strategy in the treatment of severely depressed in-patients.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2016 Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Adults with Major Depressive Disorder: Section 3. Pharmacological Treatments

BACKGROUND

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) conducted a revision of the 2009 guidelines by updating the evidence and recommendations. The scope of the 2016 guidelines remains the management of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults, with a target audience of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals.

METHODS

Using the question-answer format, we conducted a systematic literature search focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Evidence was graded using CANMAT-defined criteria for level of evidence. Recommendations for lines of treatment were based on the quality of evidence and clinical expert consensus. "Pharmacological Treatments" is the third of six sections of the 2016 guidelines. With little new information on older medications, treatment recommendations focus on second-generation antidepressants.

RESULTS

Evidence-informed responses are given for 21 questions under 4 broad categories: 1) principles of pharmacological management, including individualized assessment of patient and medication factors for antidepressant selection, regular and frequent monitoring, and assessing clinical and functional outcomes with measurement-based care; 2) comparative aspects of antidepressant medications based on efficacy, tolerability, and safety, including summaries of newly approved drugs since 2009; 3) practical approaches to pharmacological management, including drug-drug interactions and maintenance recommendations; and 4) managing inadequate response and treatment resistance, with a focus on switching antidepressants, applying adjunctive treatments, and new and emerging agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based pharmacological treatments are available for first-line treatment of MDD and for management of inadequate response. However, given the limitations of the evidence base, pharmacological management of MDD still depends on tailoring treatments to the patient.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: protocol for a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Many antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network meta-analyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not require ethical approval.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42012002291.

[Delusional depression : Diagnostics, phenomenology and therapy]

Depressive delusion is the key symptom of psychotic depression also known as major depressive disorder with psychotic features (ICD-10: F 32.3). Delusional topics are limited to guilt, impoverishment and hypochondria. Kurt Schneider described these as being the three primordial fears of human beings. Psychotic depression is distinguished by the particular severity and frequency of the episodes of illness as well as by increased suicidal tendencies. Although one in five patients with a major depression experiences psychotic symptoms, this condition is all too easily overlooked and the appropriate therapy is not initiated. Here we use case histories to illustrate some of the obstacles to diagnosis arising from the difficulty of identifying delusions hidden in a person's experience of depression, life history and personality. A targeted active exploration of these difficulties is significant taking into account the observable symptoms and not only the subjectively experienced symptoms. A phenomenological approach is chosen to explore the matter of depressive delusion and to investigate the interaction of delusion and affect and the special importance of anxiety for the genesis of delusion. In accordance with the current treatment recommendations and against this background, it is proposed that the pharmacological strategy should be supplemented by the use of benzodiazepines more often than has it has been in the past.

SSRI-antipsychotic combination in psychotic depression: sertraline pharmacokinetics in the presence of olanzapine, a brief report from the STOP-PD study

OBJECTIVE

We recently reported an unexpected interaction between olanzapine and sertraline in a population being treated for psychotic depression. Contrary to knowledge of cytochrome p450 interactions sertraline increased apparent clearance of olanzapine by 30%. Here we examined the pharmacokinetics of sertraline in the same population. Existing studies suggest that sertraline apparent clearance is significantly increased in male subjects and suggested an age/sex interaction.

METHODS

We studied subjects undergoing combination of sertraline/olanzapine treatment for psychotic depression in the Study of the Pharmacotherapy of Psychotic Depression. Nonlinear mixed effect modelling software was used to examine the sertraline pharmacokinetics, evaluating age, sex, race, and olanzapine exposure as covariates.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven subjects (median age 62 years, 28 male subjects, 11 African-Americans) provided 138 samples for sertraline concentration. Olanzapine exposure had a 14.8-fold range. A one compartment model with combined residual error described the sertraline concentration data adequately. Half-life and sex effect on sertraline apparent clearance (males averaging 50% higher (p < 0.005); 96.6 l/h vs 64.8 in female subjects) were similar to previous reports. No other covariate (age, race or olanzapine exposure) had a significant impact on apparent clearance, and no age/sex interaction emerged.

CONCLUSION

Sertraline pharmacokinetics were similar to historical descriptions in populations not taking antipsychotics. Unlike our unexpected finding that sertraline increases olanzapine apparent clearance, olanzapine exposure had no impact on sertraline pharmacokinetics. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.