Clinical value of early partial symptomatic improvement in the prediction of response and remission during short-term treatment trials in 3369 subjects with bipolar I or II depression

A diagnostic test to examine early improvement as a predictor of later response to lurasidone in bipolar depression

INTRODUCTION

Kato et al. reported results of a 6-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of lurasidone in adults with bipolar depression (BDep).

AIM

We performed a post hoc analysis using data from the lurasidone trial to predict later responses from early improvements.

METHODS

An early improvement was defined as a ≥20% reduction in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at Week 2; response was defined as a ≥50% reduction in MADRS total score at Week 6; symptomatic remission were defined as a score of ≤8 on MADRS total score at Week 6.

RESULTS

Both sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) were higher for the remission outcome than for the response outcome. The interpretation of sensitivity and NPV in the lurasidone group when remission is an outcome is as follows. It means (1) that, from all remitters at Week 6, 80.6% was identified as such at Week 2 on the basis of their early improvement and (2) that a patient showing non-improvement at 2 weeks had 93.5% probability of being a non-remitters at Week 6. However, the values of specificity for both response and remission in the lurasidone group were not high.

CONCLUSION

Patients who did not show an early response at Week 2 cannot be predicted with a high probability to also show poor improvement at Week 6. In fact, some patients who did not show early response at 2 weeks might have marked improvement at 6 weeks.

Efficacy of Quetiapine Monotherapy and Combination Therapy for Patients with Bipolar Depression with Mixed Features: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Effective pharmacotherapy of bipolar depression with mixed features defined by DSM-5 remains unclear in clinical treatment guidelines. Quetiapine (QTP) and valproate have potential treatment utility but are often inadequate as monotherapy. Meanwhile, the efficacy of combination therapies of QTP plus valproate or lithium have yet to be verified. Hence, we conducted a randomized controlled pilot study to evaluate the efficacy of QTP monotherapy in patients with bipolar depression with mixed features defined by DSM-5 and compared the combination therapy of QTP plus valproate (QTP + V) versus QTP plus lithium (QTP + L) for those patients who responded insufficiently to QTP monotherapy. Data was analyzed according to the intent-to-treat population. Generalized linear mixed model was performed by using "nlme" package in R software. A total 56 patients were enrolled, among which, 35 patients responded to QTP alone, and 11 and 10 patients were randomly assigned to QTP + V and QTP + L group, respectively. Nearly 60% enrolled patients responded to QTP monotherapy at the first two weeks treatment. No statistically significant difference in efficacy between QTP + V and QTP + L was observed. In conclusion, QTP monotherapy appeared to be efficacious in patients with bipolar depression with mixed features, and for those who responded insufficiently to QTP, combining with either valproate or lithium appeared to have positive effects.

Clinical, behavioral, and neural measures of reward processing correlate with escitalopram response in depression: a Canadian Biomarker Integration Network in Depression (CAN-BIND-1) Report

Anhedonia is thought to reflect deficits in reward processing that are associated with abnormal activity in mesocorticolimbic brain regions. It is expressed clinically as a deficit in the interest or pleasure in daily activities. More severe anhedonia in major depressive disorder (MDD) is a negative predictor of antidepressant response. It is unknown, however, whether the pathophysiology of anhedonia represents a viable avenue for identifying biological markers of antidepressant treatment response. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the relationships between reward processing and response to antidepressant treatment using clinical, behavioral, and functional neuroimaging measures. Eighty-seven participants in the first Canadian Biomarker Integration Network in Depression (CAN-BIND-1) protocol received 8 weeks of open-label escitalopram. Clinical correlates of reward processing were assessed at baseline using validated scales to measure anhedonia, and a monetary incentive delay (MID) task during functional neuroimaging was completed at baseline and after 2 weeks of treatment. Response to escitalopram was associated with significantly lower self-reported deficits in reward processing at baseline. Activity during the reward anticipation, but not the reward consumption, phase of the MID task was correlated with clinical response to escitalopram at week 8. Early (baseline to week 2) increases in frontostriatal connectivity during reward anticipation significantly correlated with reduction in depressive symptoms after 8 weeks of treatment. Escitalopram response is associated with clinical and neuroimaging correlates of reward processing. These results represent an important contribution towards identifying and integrating biological, behavioral, and clinical correlates of treatment response. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01655706.

Grant Report on SCH: Personalized Depression Treatment Supported by Mobile Sensor Analytics

We report on the newly started project "SCH: Personalized Depression Treatment Supported by Mobile Sensor Analytics". The current best practice guidelines for treating depression call for close monitoring of patients, and periodically adjusting treatment as needed. This project will advance personalized depression treatment by developing a system, DepWatch, that leverages mobile health technologies and machine learning tools. The objective of DepWatch is to assist clinicians with their decision making process in the management of depression. The project comprises two studies. Phase I collects sensory data and other data, e.g., clinical data, ecological momentary assessments (EMA), tolerability and safety data from 250 adult participants with unstable depression symptomatology initiating depression treatment. The data thus collected will be used to develop and validate assessment and prediction models, which will be incorporated into DepWatch system. In Phase II, three clinicians will use DepWatch to support their clinical decision making process. A total of 128 participants under treatment by the three participating clinicians will be recruited for the study. A number of new machine learning techniques will be developed.

Factors Associated with Non-Remission in Bipolar Disorder: The Multicenter Treatment Survey for Bipolar Disorder in Psychiatric Outpatient Clinics (MUSUBI)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with non-remission in bipolar disorder.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The multicenter treatment survey for bipolar disorder in psychiatric outpatient clinics (MUSUBI) study used a questionnaire administered at 176 clinics throughout Japan from September to October 2016. Clinic psychiatrists performed a retrospective medical record survey of consecutive cases with bipolar disorder. Patients were considered to be in remission if they met all of the following criteria: they were not in a mixed state, their manic or depressive symptoms were either borderline or nonexistent (corresponding to 2 or 1 points on the Clinical Global Impressions Scale, Bipolar Version), and their psychiatrists clinically considered them to be in remission. Enrolled patients were classified into remitters group and non-remitters group and demographic and clinical characteristics were contrasted between the groups. Non-remitters were compared with remitters, using a series of logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 3130 patients (1420 men; mean age: 50.3 years) were included in this study; 1307 patients (41.8%) were in remission. Of the remaining 1823 patients, 1260 (40.3%) had mild to severe depression, 261 (8.3%) suffered from manic or hypomanic episodes, and 302 (9.6%) were in a mixed state. Logistic regression analyses found the following eight factors to be significantly correlated with non-remission in patients with bipolar disorder: female gender, younger age, unemployed status, rapid cycling pattern, comorbid alcohol/substance abuse, poorer social function, lithium non-use, and antidepressant use.

CONCLUSION

The MUSUBI study, the largest nationwide investigation on bipolar disorder, identified eight clinically relevant factors associated with non-remission in bipolar patients. They have important clinical implications; further prospective studies are necessary to replicate these findings and to guide better managements for those in serious needs.

Predictability of Nonremitting Depression After First 2 Weeks of Antidepressant Treatment: A VAST‐D Trial Report

Objective:

In this secondary analysis of data from the Veterans Affairs Augmentation and Switching Treatments for Improving Depression Outcomes (VAST‐D) study, the authors sought to determine the effectiveness of early improvement (or lack thereof) for predicting remission from depression with antidepressant therapy.

Methods:

This study used data from the VAST‐D study, a multisite, randomized, single‐blind trial with parallel assignment to one of three medication interventions for 1,522 veterans whose major depressive disorder was unresponsive to at least one course of antidepressant treatment meeting minimal standards for dosage and duration. The authors calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of early improvement on remission, response, or greater than minimal improvement from depression for various degrees of improvement (10%–50%) on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology–Clinician Rated (QIDS‐C) at 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks.

Results:

The end of week 2 of treatment was identified as the best time to evaluate early improvement. The presence of a ≥20% drop from the baseline QIDS‐C score by the end of week 2 resulted in a PPV for remission of 38% and an NPV of 93% by week 12. Extending the observational window to week 6 minimally improved NPV (97%). This association did not differ across treatment groups.

Conclusions:

A lack of early improvement at the end of week 2 of antidepressant therapy can be used to inform clinical decisions on the likelihood of nonremission of depression during the subsequent 10 weeks, even when dosage optimization is incomplete.

A Partial Response at Week 4 Can Predict Subsequent Outcome during Lamotrigine Augmentation Therapy in Treatment-Resistant Depressive Disorder: A Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The present study prospectively examined whether or not a partial response at week 4 predicts subsequent response at week 8 during lamotrigine augmentation therapy in 51 (16 males and 35 females) inpatients with treatment-resistant depressive disorder using an open-study design.

METHODS

The subjects were 51 depressed patients who had already shown insufficient response to at least 3 psychotropics including antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and atypical antipsychotics. The diagnoses were major depressive disorder (n = 19), bipolar I disorder (n = 9), and bipolar II disorder (n = 23). The final doses of lamotrigine were 100 mg/day for 29 subjects who were not taking valproate and 75 mg/day for 22 subjects taking valproate. Depressive symptoms were evaluated by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) before the start of lamotrigine and then at week 4, and finally after the 8th week of treatment.

RESULTS

A significant linear relationship was found between percent improvements in MADRS scores at weeks 4 and 8 (r = 0.492, y = 0.438x + 30.223, R2 = 0.226, p < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristics analysis indicated that a percent improvement of 16% or greater at week 4 was significantly (p < 0.01) predictive of response (50% or more reduction in the MADRS score). The patients were significantly divided by the cut-off point into the responders and the nonresponders (18/26 vs. 1/25, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that a partial response at week 4 can predict subsequent outcome at week 8 during lamotrigine augmentation therapy in patients with treatment-resistant depressive disorder, and that the absence of a partial improvement at week 4 is highly predictive of nonresponse.

Lithium, Stress, and Resilience in Bipolar Disorder: Deciphering this key homeostatic synaptic plasticity regulator

BACKGROUND

Lithium is the lightest metal and the only mood stabilizer that has been used for over half a century for the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). As a small ion, lithium is omnipresent, and consequently, its molecular mechanisms and targets are widespread. Currently, lithium is a crucial pharmacotherapy for the treatment of acute mood episodes, prophylactic therapy, and suicide prevention in BD. Besides, lithium blood level is the most widely used biomarker in clinical psychiatry. The concept of stress in BD characterizes short- and long-term deleterious effects at multiple levels (from genes to behaviors) and the ability to establish homeostatic regulatory mechanisms to either prevent or reverse these effects. Within this concept, lithium has consistently shown anti-stress effects, by normalizing components across several levels associated with BD-induced impairments in cellular resilience and plasticity.

METHODS

A literature search for biomarkers associated with lithium effects at multiple targets, with a particular focus on those related to clinical outcomes was performed. An extensive search of the published literature using PubMed, Medline and Google Scholar was performed. Example search terms included lithium, plasticity, stress, efficacy, and neuroimaging. Articles determined by the author to focus on lithium's impact on neural plasticity markers (central and periphery) and clinical outcomes were examined in greater depth. Relevant papers were evaluated, selected and included in this review.

RESULTS

Lithium induces neurotrophic and neuroprotective effects in a wide range of preclinical and translational models. Lithium's neurotrophic effects are related to the enhancement of cellular proliferation, differentiation, growth, and regeneration, whereas its neuroprotective effects limit the progression of neuronal atrophy or cell death following the onset of BD. Lithium's neurotrophic and neuroprotective effects seem most pronounced in the presence of pathology, which again supports its pivotal role as an active homeostatic regulator.

LIMITATIONS

Few studies associated with clinical outcomes. Due to space limitations, the author was unable to detail all findings, in special those originated from preclinical studies.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support a potential role for biomarkers involved in neuroprotection and activation of plasticity pathways in lithium's clinical response. Evidence supporting this model comes from results evaluating macroscopic and microscopic brain structure as well neurochemical findings in vivo from cellular to sub-synaptic (molecules and intracellular signaling) compartments using central and peripheral biomarkers. Challenges to precisely decipher lithium's biological mechanisms involved in its therapeutic profile include the complex nature of the illness and clinical subtypes, family history and comorbid conditions. In the context of personalized medicine, it is necessary to validate predictive biomarkers of response to lithium by designing longitudinal clinical studies during mood episodes and associated clinical dimensions in BD.

Does early response predict subsequent remission in bipolar depression treated with repeated sleep deprivation combined with light therapy and lithium?

BACKGROUND

The combination of three cycles of sleep deprivation (SD), light therapy (LT), and lithium has recently been proposed as a possible first-line treatment for bipolar depression. However, it is unclear whether early improvement predicts final response/remission in bipolar depression treated with this regimen.

METHOD

We studied 220 consecutively admitted inpatients with a major depressive episode in the course of bipolar disorder. The relation between response to first SD and response/remission at the end of the treatment (day 6) was analyzed using logistic regression analysis. Severity of depression was rated using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Clinical response was defined as a ≥50% reduction in HDRS scores, and remission was defined as an HDRS score of ≤7.

RESULTS

Among the 217 completers, 67.7% showed response and 54.4% reached remission at the end of the treatment. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that response after first recovery sleep (day 2) predicted final response and remission at the end of the treatment with high odds ratios (10.9 for response and 8.2 for remission); however, response immediately after the first SD (day 1) did not predict final response or remission.

LIMITATIONS

Whether our results can be generalized to unipolar depression remains uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Clinical status after first recovery sleep is a strong predictor of successful final outcome in patients with bipolar depression treated with the combination of repeated SD, LT, and lithium. Recovery sleep may play a role in inducing the antidepressant effect associated with the success of treatment.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

ISSLS PRIZE IN CLINICAL SCIENCE 2018: longitudinal analysis of inflammatory, psychological, and sleep-related factors following an acute low back pain episode-the good, the bad, and the ugly

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether systemic cytokines and C-reactive protein (CRP) during an acute episode of low back pain (LBP) differ between individuals who did and did not recover by 6 months and to identify sub-groups based on patterns of inflammatory, psychological, and sleep features associated with recovery/non-recovery. Systemic inflammation is observed in chronic LBP and may contribute to the transition from acute to persistent LBP. Longitudinal studies are required to determine whether changes present early or develop over time. Psychological and/or sleep-related factors may be related.

METHODS

Individuals within 2 weeks of onset of acute LBP (N = 109) and pain-free controls (N = 55) provided blood for assessment of CRP, tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and interleukin-1β, and completed questionnaires related to pain, disability, sleep, and psychological status. LBP participants repeated measurements at 6 months. Biomarkers were compared between LBP and control participants at baseline, and in longitudinal (baseline/6 months) analysis, between unrecovered (≥pain and disability), partially recovered (reduced pain and/or disability) and recovered (no pain and disability) participants at 6 months. We assessed baseline patterns of inflammatory, psychological, sleep, and pain data using hierarchical clustering and related the clusters to recovery (% change in pain) at 6 months.

RESULTS

CRP was higher in acute LBP than controls at baseline. In LBP, baseline CRP was higher in the recovered than non-recovered groups. Conversely, TNF was higher at both time-points in the non-recovered than recovered groups. Two sub-groups were identified that associated with more ("inflammatory/poor sleep") or less ("high TNF/depression") recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first evidence of a relationship between an "acute-phase" systemic inflammatory response and recovery at 6 months. High inflammation (CRP/IL-6) was associated with good recovery, but specific elevation of TNF, along with depressive symptoms, was associated with bad recovery. Depression and TNF may have a two-way relationship. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Efficacy of quetiapine XR vs. placebo as concomitant treatment to mood stabilizers in the control of subthreshold symptoms of bipolar disorder: Results from a pilot, randomized controlled trial

Patients with bipolar disorder (BD) do not always achieve full remission between episodes. Subthreshold symptoms (depressive, manic or mixed) represent a major cause of relapse and disability in these patients. Immediate release (IR) and extended release (XR) formulations of quetiapine are both indicated for short and long-term treatment of BD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of quetiapine XR vs placebo in subthreshold symptomatology when added to previous mood stabilizer treatment. A pilot phase IIIB, multicentre, prospective, placebo controlled, randomized, double blinded study of 12 weeks follow-up was performed (NCT01197846). Patients were randomized to quetiapine XR 300mg or placebo once daily. The primary outcome was the mean change between quetiapine XR and placebo from baseline to study endpoint (week 6) in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Quetiapine XR 300mg (n=16) significantly improved depressive subthreshold symptoms compared with placebo (n=16) after 6 weeks (P=0.021). Early response (reduction of at least the 20% of the MADRS total score) and remission rate (reduction in MADRS total score <8 and YMRS<8) did not show differences between groups. Quetiapine XR did not show superiority vs placebo when evaluating subthreshold manic symptoms, instead it was superior when evaluating functioning (GAF score) in BD type I patients (P=0.005). The most common adverse events were somnolence (9.1%), increased appetite, dry mouth and dizziness (6.8%). Quetiapine XR 300mg once daily was significantly more effective than placebo in depressive subthreshold symptoms. Adverse events were consistent with the known side effects of quetiapine.

Early Improvement Predicts Treatment Outcomes for Patients With Acute Mania: A Naturalistic Study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a serious mental disorder. This study investigated whether early improvement at week 1 or 2 could predict treatment outcomes at week 4 in clinical populations with acute mania.

METHODS

We conducted a naturalistic study, recruiting inpatients with bipolar mania for acute treatment. Symptom severity was assessed using the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) at weeks 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4. Early improvement was defined as a reduction in the YMRS score of at least 20% or 25%, assessed at weeks 1 and 2. Response was defined as a reduction of 50% or more in the YMRS score, and remission was defined as an end-point YMRS score of 12 or less. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine whether week 1 or week 2 had better discriminative capacity. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated for the different definitions of early improvement.

RESULTS

Of the 350 patients, 32.9% (n = 115) and 16.6% (n = 58) of the subjects were classified as responders and remitters at week 4, respectively. Early improvement at week 2 showed better discriminative capacity, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve greater than 0.8. It had high sensitivity and high negative predictive value for 2 cutoffs in predicting response and remission.

CONCLUSIONS

Relatively lower response and remission rates were observed. Response and remission could be predicted by early improvement at week 2, whereas patients without early improvement were unlikely to reach response and remission at week 4.

The International College of Neuro-Psychopharmacology (CINP) Treatment Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder in Adults (CINP-BD-2017), Part 2: Review, Grading of the Evidence, and a Precise Algorithm

Background

The current paper includes a systematic search of the literature, a detailed presentation of the results, and a grading of treatment options in terms of efficacy and tolerability/safety.

Material and Methods

The PRISMA method was used in the literature search with the combination of the words 'bipolar,' 'manic,' 'mania,' 'manic depression,' and 'manic depressive' with 'randomized,' and 'algorithms' with 'mania,' 'manic,' 'bipolar,' 'manic-depressive,' or 'manic depression.' Relevant web pages and review articles were also reviewed.

Results

The current report is based on the analysis of 57 guideline papers and 531 published papers related to RCTs, reviews, posthoc, or meta-analysis papers to March 25, 2016. The specific treatment options for acute mania, mixed episodes, acute bipolar depression, maintenance phase, psychotic and mixed features, anxiety, and rapid cycling were evaluated with regards to efficacy. Existing treatment guidelines were also reviewed. Finally, Tables reflecting efficacy and recommendation levels were created that led to the development of a precise algorithm that still has to prove its feasibility in everyday clinical practice.

Conclusions

A systematic literature search was conducted on the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder to identify all relevant random controlled trials pertaining to all aspects of bipolar disorder and graded the data according to a predetermined method to develop a precise treatment algorithm for management of various phases of bipolar disorder. It is important to note that the some of the recommendations in the treatment algorithm were based on the secondary outcome data from posthoc analyses.

The predictive value of early treatment response in antipsychotic-naive patients with first-episode psychosis: Haloperidol versus olanzapine

Early antipsychotic response predicts outcomes for psychotic patients, but recent evidence suggests that this may not be true for patients treated with olanzapine. In this study, we assessed the predictive value of early response to olanzapine or haloperidol in 75 antipsychotic-naive, first-episode psychosis inpatients. Patients were assessed weekly using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Regression analyses were used to determine whether improvement at week 2 or week 3 predicted improvement at hospital discharge. The majority of patients in both groups experienced a decrease in symptom severity of ≥50% at week 2. In the haloperidol group, week 2 improvement predicted improvement at discharge for all measures except the HAM-A. In the olanzapine group, week 2 improvement only predicted improvement at discharge for HAM-D scores. However, week 3 improvement in the olanzapine group predicted improvement at discharge for all measures except the HAM-A. Olanzapine non-responders at week 3 (but not week 2) benefited from having olanzapine switched to another antipsychotic. These results suggest that a 2 week trial of haloperidol is sufficient to predict treatment outcomes, while a 3 week trial is required for olanzapine.

Early improvement predicts outcome of major depressive patients treated with electroconvulsive therapy

The aim of this study was to test whether early symptom improvement predicts final response and remission for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) receiving electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). MDD inpatients (N=130) requiring ECT were recruited. ECT was generally performed for a maximum of 12 sessions. Symptom severity was assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) before ECT, after every 3 ECT sessions, and after the last ECT. Early improvement was defined as a reduction in the HAMD-17 score by at least 20%, 25%, or 30% after 3 and 6 ECT sessions. Response was defined as 60% HAMD-17 score reduction, while remission was defined as an end point HAMD-17 score of ≦7. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine whether 3 or 6 ECT sessions had better discriminative capacity. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were calculated for the different definitions of early improvement. Of the 105 patients entering the analysis, 85.7% (n=90) and 70.5% (n=74) were classified as responders and remitters, respectively. Early improvement after 6 ECT sessions showed better discriminative capacity, with areas under the ROC curve at least 0.8. It had high sensitivity and high negative predictive value for all cutoffs in predicting response and remission. High response and remission rates were observed. Final response and remission could be predicted by early improvement after 6 ECT sessions. Patients without early improvement were unlikely to reach response and remission.

Prediction of treatment outcomes in psychiatry--where do we stand ?

Psychiatric treatment relies on a solid armamentarium of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment modalities that perform reasonably well for many patients but leave others in a state of chronic disability or troubled by problematic side effects. Treatment planning in psychiatry remains an art that depends on considerable trial and error. Thus, there is an urgent need for better tools that will provide a means for matching individual patients with the most effective treatments while minimizing the risk of adverse events. This review will consider the current state of the science in predicting treatment outcomes in psychiatry. Genetic and other biomarkers will be considered alongside clinical diagnostic, and family history data. Problems inherent in prediction medicine will also be discussed, along with recent developments that support the hope that psychiatry can do a better job in quickly identifying the best treatments for each patient.

Early Glycemic Response Predicts Achievement of Subsequent Treatment Targets in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Post hoc Analysis

INTRODUCTION

American Diabetes Association consensus guidelines emphasize individualized treatment in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Early glycemic response is a clinical marker that may predict longer term efficacy for individual patients and provide a clinical tool to enhance personalized treatment. This analysis evaluated whether glycemic response measured at week 12 ("early") could serve as a reliable predictor of glycemic control at weeks 24 and 52 of therapy in patients with T2DM.

METHODS

We used data from 3 randomized, controlled clinical trials that evaluated patients with T2DM treated with 3 commonly prescribed glucose-lowering medications: metformin (n = 597), sulfonylurea (n = 626), and insulin glargine (n = 1046). The gradient boosting method was used to identify predictors of subsequent response; predictive accuracy was represented by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Treatment success at weeks 24 and 52 was assessed for each patient and defined as achieving a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level of <7.0% or a reduction from baseline of ≥1.0%.

RESULTS

The predictive parameters (sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV) for improvements in HbA1c at week 24 for metformin were 0.83, 0.81, 0.44, and 0.96; for sulfonylurea, 0.79, 0.94, 0.71, and 0.96; and for insulin glargine, 0.67, 0.89, 0.65, and 0.90. The predictive parameters for improvements in HbA1c at week 52 for metformin were 0.73, 0.84, 0.56, and 0.92 and for sulfonylurea, 0.45, 0.94, 0.74, and 0.82.

CONCLUSION

High predictive values identified in this analysis support "early" response as an appropriate tool for predicting treatment success at weeks 24 and 52. The high NPV (lack of early glycemic response) appears to be an effective indicator of the likely need for change in (or intensification of) therapy. These data support the current guideline recommendations that clinicians evaluate therapeutic responses to pharmacologic interventions with metformin, sulfonylureas, or insulin glargine as early as week 12.

Patterns of response to aripiprazole, lithium, haloperidol, and placebo across factor scores of mania

Background

A previous factor analysis of Young Mania Rating Scale and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale items identified composite factors of depression, mania, sleep disturbance, judgment/impulsivity, and irritability/hostility as major components of psychiatric symptoms in acute mania or mixed episodes in a series of trials of antipsychotics. However, it is unknown whether these factors predict treatment outcome.

Methods

Data from six double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trials with aripiprazole in acute manic or mixed episodes in adults with bipolar I disorder were pooled for this analysis and the previously identified factors were examined for their value in predicting treatment outcome. Treatment efficacy was assessed for aripiprazole (n = 1,001), haloperidol (n = 324), lithium (n = 155), and placebo (n = 694) at baseline, days 4, 7, and 10, and then weekly to study end. Mean change in factor scores from baseline to week 3 was assessed by receiver operating characteristics curves for percentage factor change at day 4 and week 1.

Results

Subjects receiving aripiprazole, haloperidol, and lithium significantly improved mania factor scores versus placebo. Factors most predictive of endpoint efficacy for aripiprazole were judgment/impulsivity at day 4 and mania at week 1. Optimal factor score improvement for outcome prediction was approximately 40% to 50%. Early efficacy predicted treatment outcome across all factors; however, response at week 1 was a better predictor than response at day 4.

Conclusions

This analysis confirms clinical benefits in early treatment/assessment for subjects with bipolar mania and suggests that certain symptom factors in mixed or manic episodes may be most predictive of treatment response.

Prediction of treatment outcomes in psychiatry--where do we stand ?

Psychiatric treatment relies on a solid armamentarium of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment modalities that perform reasonably well for many patients but leave others in a state of chronic disability or troubled by problematic side effects. Treatment planning in psychiatry remains an art that depends on considerable trial and error. Thus, there is an urgent need for better tools that will provide a means for matching individual patients with the most effective treatments while minimizing the risk of adverse events. This review will consider the current state of the science in predicting treatment outcomes in psychiatry. Genetic and other biomarkers will be considered alongside clinical diagnostic, and family history data. Problems inherent in prediction medicine will also be discussed, along with recent developments that support the hope that psychiatry can do a better job in quickly identifying the best treatments for each patient.

Predictive value of baseline resistance in early response to antidepressants

BACKGROUND

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is the 3rd source for burden worldwide according to the World Health Organization (WHO). This comes partly from unsatisfactory response rates after usual treatment, highlighting the need for early indicators such as early improvement of depressive symptoms to adapt treatment strategies, especially for severe inpatients. Thus our objective was to assess the predictive value of baseline partial resistance in early antidepressant response (EAR), hypothesizing that previous treatment failures would decrease the probability of early response.

METHODS

We included 122 consecutive inpatients with current unipolar MDE. The Mini-Neuropsychiatric Interview was used to ascertain DSM-IV diagnoses of MDD as well as psychiatric comorbidities, and to exclude patients with a history of bipolar disorder. A specifically designed questionnaire was used to collect data on previous treatment trials for the current episode so as to generate scores on the five existing methods for quantifying treatment resistance. We prospectively assessed EAR, defined as a 50% decrease in MADRS after 14 days of steady regimen of antidepressant.

RESULTS

In the per protocol sample (N=76), multivariate analyses showed that psychotic features at baseline remained an independent predictor of absence of EAR (p<.01), unlike baseline partial resistance, which may rather be associated with a lack of any improvement.

LIMITATIONS

Lack of data about further response and non-randomized treatment allocation.

CONCLUSION

Available methods for quantifying treatment resistance are heterogeneous and do not predict short-term response among severely depressed inpatients, despite potential usefulness in predicting a lack of early improvement.

Use of mental health telemetry to enhance identification and predictive value of early changes during augmentation treatment of major depression

Standard clinical trial methodology in depression does not allow for careful examination of early changes in symptom intensity. The purpose of this study was to use daily "Mental Health Telemetry" (MHT) to prospectively record change in depressive and anxiety symptoms for depressed patients receiving augmentation treatment, and determine the extent and predictive capacity of early changes. We report results of a 6-week, open-label study of the addition of quetiapine XR (range, 50-300 mg) for adult patients (n = 26) with major depressive disorder who were nonresponsive to antidepressant treatment. In addition to regular study visits, all participants completed daily, wirelessly transmitted self-report ratings of symptoms on a Smartphone. Daily and 3-day moving average mean scores were calculated, and associations between early symptom change and eventual response to treatment were determined. Improvement in depressive and anxiety symptoms was identified as early as day 1 of treatment. Of the total decline in depression severity over 6 weeks, 9% was present at day 1, 28% at day 2, 39% at days 3 and 4, 65% at day 7, and 80% at day 10. Self-report rating of early improvement (≥20%) in depressive symptoms at day 7 significantly predicted responder status at week 6 (P = 0.03). Clinician-rated depressive and anxiety symptoms only became significantly associated with responder status at day 14. In conclusion, very early changes in depressive symptoms were identified using MHT, early changes accounted for most of total change, and MHT-recorded improvement as early as day 7 significantly predicted response to treatment at study end point.

Can early improvement be an indicator of treatment response in obsessive-compulsive disorder? Implications for early-treatment decision-making

In major depression, early response to treatment has been strongly associated with final outcome. We aimed to investigate the ability of early improvement (4 weeks) to predict treatment response at 12 weeks in DSM-IV-defined obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) patients treated with serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRI). We conducted an SRI practical trial with 128 subjects.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

age range 18-65 years-old, baseline Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) score ≥ 16, and absence of previous adequate pharmacological treatment. Systematic assessments were performed at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks of treatment. Treatment response at 12 weeks was defined as a 35% or greater reduction in baseline Y-BOCS score. Stepwise logistic regression was used to test the relationship between early improvement and treatment response at 12 weeks, taking into account additional potential predictive factors. Different thresholds of early improvement were tested and their predictive power was calculated. Early improvement, defined as a 20% or greater reduction from baseline Y-BOCS score at 4 weeks, predicted response at 12 weeks with 75.6% sensitivity and 61.9% specificity. According to a logistic regression including demographic and clinical features as explaining variables, early improvement was the best predictor of treatment response (OR = 1.05, p < 0.0001). Only 19.8% of patients who did not improve at 4 weeks were responders after 12 weeks. In contrast, 55.3% of the individuals who showed early improvement were responders at 12 weeks (Pearson Chi-Square = 17.06, p < 0.001). Early improvement predicted OCD treatment response with relatively good sensitivity and specificity, such that its role in early decision-making warrants further investigation in wider samples.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT00680602.

Early improvement as a predictor of acute treatment outcome in manic or mixed episodes in bipolar-1 disorder: a pooled, post hoc analysis from the asenapine development program

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether early symptom improvement predicts later treatment outcome in acute manic/mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder using Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) or Clinical Global Impression scale, bipolar disorders (CGI-BP) assessments.

METHODS

Data were pooled from two 3-week randomized controlled studies with asenapine (ASE; n=372), olanzapine (OLA; n=391), or placebo (PL; n=197). Early improvement was defined as reduction of YMRS total scores (≥15%, ≥20%, ≥25%) or CGI-BP severity scores (≥1 point change) at days 2, 4, and 7. Treatment outcome at week 3 was defined as response (YMRS: ≥50% score reduction; CGI-BP severity: "minimally ill" or better) or remission (YMRS total score ≤12; CGI-BP severity: "not at all ill"). Odds ratios (ORs) and predictive performance statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

Early improvement occurred in a substantial percentage of patients and was associated with significantly increased ORs for response or remission. For ASE, results were significant as early as day 2 on all measures of YMRS and CGI-severity of mania assessment. For all treatments sensitivity and negative predictive values increased from days 2 to 7 for all YMRS and CGI-BP measures, while specificity values decreased.

CONCLUSION

In acute manic/mixed episodes, early improvement within 1 week of treatment was associated with significantly increased ORs of endpoint response or remission. While only a subset of early improvers reach the endpoint treatment goals, absence of improvement within week 1 of treatment initiation strongly predicts the unlikely success of subsequent treatment. Further, CGI-based predictors had predictive properties similar to those based on the YMRS scale.

Management of chronic depressive patients with residual symptoms

Various clinical issues are involved in the appropriate diagnosis and proper treatment interventions for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Despite a number of diverse antidepressants for treating MDD now, response and remission rates following adequate trials of antidepressant intervention are still not satisfactory. Furthermore, a significant proportion of MDD patients have residual symptoms, which are associated with increased relapse and recurrence of MDD, leading to negative impacts on the clinical course and outcomes of MDD. Timely and appropriate decision-making regarding the proper management of such cases is required in our routine daily practice. These issues are illustrated and also framed by one MDD case with a complicated clinical course. This review paper may give physicians clinical insight into how we can effectively and properly evaluate and manage such patients in clinical practice.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) collaborative update of CANMAT guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2013

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments published guidelines for the management of bipolar disorder in 2005, with updates in 2007 and 2009. This third update, in conjunction with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders, reviews new evidence and is designed to be used in conjunction with the previous publications.The recommendations for the management of acute mania remain largely unchanged. Lithium, valproate, and several atypical antipsychotic agents continue to be first-line treatments for acute mania. Monotherapy with asenapine, paliperidone extended release (ER), and divalproex ER, as well as adjunctive asenapine, have been added as first-line options.For the management of bipolar depression, lithium, lamotrigine, and quetiapine monotherapy, as well as olanzapine plus selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), and lithium or divalproex plus SSRI/bupropion remain first-line options. Lurasidone monotherapy and the combination of lurasidone or lamotrigine plus lithium or divalproex have been added as a second-line options. Ziprasidone alone or as adjunctive therapy, and adjunctive levetiracetam have been added as not-recommended options for the treatment of bipolar depression. Lithium, lamotrigine, valproate, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, risperidone long-acting injection, and adjunctive ziprasidone continue to be first-line options for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. Asenapine alone or as adjunctive therapy have been added as third-line options.

Early improvement with lithium in classic mania and its association with later response

OBJECTIVES

Despite lithium's clinical efficacy in treating mania in bipolar disorder (BD), studies evaluating early improvement and subsequent treatment response are sparse. This study investigated whether early improvement (within one week) to lithium monotherapy predicted later response and remission in individuals with BD mania.

METHODS

BD-I patients (n=46) experiencing a manic episode received lithium monotherapy for four weeks (initial dose: 600mg/d, adjusted to therapeutic levels); individuals experiencing a mixed episode, rapid cyclers, previous non-responders to lithium, and those with current drug abuse/dependence were excluded. Symptoms were rated using the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) at baseline and at Days 7, 14, 21, and 28.

RESULTS

Thirty-three percent of the total sample responded to lithium within the first week of treatment, defined as a ≥50% decrease from baseline YMRS scores; 63% responded by study endpoint. In addition, 39% of the total sample showed early improvement (at least 20% decrease in YMRS scores) after one week of treatment. In this group, 79% responded to lithium by study endpoint. Among those showing less than 20% improvement at Week 1, only 23% responded to lithium by study endpoint.

LIMITATIONS

History of episodes sequence was not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Early improvement in response to lithium monotherapy in subjects with BD mania predicted later response and remission. Most patients who did not show early improvement in response to lithium during the first week of treatment showed no response after one month. The findings provide a valuable clinical tool for early identification of those patients most likely to benefit from lithium in clinical practice.

Pharmacokinetic evaluation of olanzapine + fluoxetine for the treatment of bipolar depression

INTRODUCTION

A proprietary combination of the atypical antipsychotic drug olanzapine and the serotonin reuptake inhibitor fluoxetine (OFC, Symbyax) was approved for the treatment of bipolar depression based on a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison of olanzapine, OFC, and placebo.

AREAS COVERED

This review considers published controlled and uncontrolled studies of the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, interactions, and adverse effects of OFC. Beyond previously reviewed efficacy studies, an open-label 7-week study of 161 bipolar depressed patients (93% bipolar I), and an 8-week double-blind study of 833 bipolar I depressed patients with an open-label extension were identified. The structure and limitations of clinical trials of OFC are critically addressed.

EXPERT OPINION

OFC trades simplicity of administration for loss of flexibility of dosing and lack of a generic preparation, both of which are available for olanzapine and fluoxetine separately. Clinical trials are limited by short-term follow-up, exclusive use of symptom rating scale scores, limitation of subjects to those with depression that is not overly complex or comorbid, lack of consideration of subsyndromal hypomania and mood cycling, and high dropout rates. In the absence of comparisons to mood stabilizers combined with each other and/or antidepressants, the role of OFC in the treatment of bipolar depression remains unclear.

Early improvement of psychotic symptoms with lithium monotherapy as a predictor of later response in mania

Although lithium has been the first line agent in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD), few studies have evaluated lithium's efficacy in mania with psychosis and its association with later response. Furthermore, given the widespread concern about antipsychotic side effects, answering a question about whether lithium alone can manage to treat both psychotic and non-psychotic mania seems a very relevant one. The present study addresses the antipsychotic efficacy of lithium monotherapy in acute mania and early improvement of psychotic symptoms as a predictor of later response of manic symptoms. Forty-six patients presenting a manic episode (32 with psychotic features and 14 subjects without psychotic features) were treated for 4 weeks with lithium monotherapy and evaluated weekly using the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Subjects with rapid cycling, substance abuse/dependence, or mixed episodes were excluded. The overall antimanic efficacy of lithium in psychosis vs. non-psychosis groups was evaluated. In addition, early improvement of psychotic symptoms and its prediction of subsequent response (>50% decrease in total YMRS scores) or remission were evaluated. Lithium showed a similar efficacy in both psychosis and non-psychosis mania. Early improvement of psychotic symptoms was associated with clinical response and remission at endpoint.

An update on antidepressant use in bipolar depression

The effective treatment of depression in people with bipolar disorder remains a clinical challenge. The role of antidepressant medication in treating bipolar depression has been controversial. While early studies and meta-analyses supported a role for antidepressant medication, more recent, high quality randomized controlled trials in bipolar depression have generally not demonstrated efficacy for antidepressant medications. Although the risk of affective switch and long-term de-stabilization remains a concern when using antidepressant medications in bipolar disorder, the magnitude of this risk has been difficult to ascertain with confidence. Maintenance use of antidepressant medication has generally not demonstrated a favorable risk-benefit ratio. Future studies should explore the patient characteristics and response patterns that predict a more favorable response profile to antidepressants amongst patients with bipolar disorder so that the medications can be rationally used in those who are most likely to benefit.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of olanzapine in patients with bipolar I depression

BACKGROUND

Atypical antipsychotics are widely used in bipolar mania. However, the efficacy of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression has not been comprehensively explored.

AIMS

To evaluate olanzapine monotherapy in patients with bipolar depression.

METHOD

Patients with bipolar depression received olanzapine (5-20 mg/day, n = 343) or placebo (n = 171) for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change from baseline to end-point in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary outcomes included: Clinical Global Impression - Bipolar Version (CGI-BP) scale, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores, and the rate of response (≥50% reduction in MADRS at end-point), recovery (MADRS ≤12 for ≥4 weeks plus treatment completion) and remission (MADRS ≤8). The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00510146).

RESULTS

Olanzapine demonstrated: significantly greater (P<0.04) improvements on MADRS (least-squares mean change -13.82 v. -11.67), HRSD-17 and YMRS total scores and all CGI-BP subscale scores v. placebo; significantly (P≤0.05) more response and remission, but not recovery; significantly (P<0.01) greater mean increases in weight, fasting cholesterol and triglycerides; and significantly more (P<0.001) patients gained ≥7% body weight.

CONCLUSIONS

Olanzapine monotherapy appears to be efficacious in bipolar depression. Additional long-term studies are warranted to confirm these results. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of olanzapine.

Efficacy of pharmacotherapy in bipolar disorder: a report by the WPA section on pharmacopsychiatry

The current statement is a systematic review of the available data concerning the efficacy of medication treatment of bipolar disorder (BP). A systematic MEDLINE search was made concerning the treatment of BP (RCTs) with the names of treatment options as keywords. The search was updated on 10 March 2012. The literature suggests that lithium, first and second generation antipsychotics and valproate and carbamazepine are efficacious in the treatment of acute mania. Quetiapine and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination are also efficacious for treating bipolar depression. Antidepressants should only be used in combination with an antimanic agent, because they can induce switching to mania/hypomania/mixed states/rapid cycling when utilized as monotherapy. Lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine and aripiprazole are efficacious during the maintenance phase. Lamotrigine is efficacious in the prevention of depression, and it remains to be clarified whether it is also efficacious for mania. There is some evidence on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions as an adjunctive treatment to medication. Electroconvulsive therapy is an option for refractory patients. In acute manic patients who are partial responders to lithium/valproate/carbamazepine, adding an antipsychotic is a reasonable choice. The combination with best data in acute bipolar depression is lithium plus lamotrigine. Patients stabilized on combination treatment might do worse if shifted to monotherapy during maintenance, and patients could benefit with add-on treatment with olanzapine, valproate, an antidepressant, or lamotrigine, depending on the index acute phase. A variety of treatment options for BP are available today, but still unmet needs are huge. Combination therapy may improve the treatment outcome but it also carries more side-effect burden. Further research is necessary as well as the development of better guidelines and algorithms for the step-by-step rational treatment.

Balanced efficacy, safety, and tolerability recommendations for the clinical management of bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

To provide practical and clinically meaningful treatment recommendations that amalgamate clinical experience and research findings for each phase of bipolar disorder.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken using electronic database search engines (Medline, PubMed, Cochrane reviews) using key words (e.g., bipolar depression, mania, treatment). All relevant randomised controlled trials were examined, along with review papers, meta-analyses, and book chapters known to the authors. In addition, the recommendations from accompanying papers in this supplement have been distilled and captured in the form of summary boxes. The findings, in conjunction with the clinical experience of international researchers and clinicians who are practiced in treating mood disorders, formed the basis of the treatment recommendations within this paper.

RESULTS

Balancing clinical experience with evidence informed and lead to the development of practical clinical recommendations that emphasise the importance of safety and tolerability alongside efficacy in the clinical management of bipolar disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

The current paper summarises the treatment recommendations relating to each phase of bipolar disorder while providing additional, evidence-based, practical insights. Medication-related side effects and monitoring strategies highlight the importance of safety and tolerability considerations, which, along with efficacy information, should be given equal merit.

Treatment response and cognitive impairment in major depression: association with C-reactive protein

Levels of inflammatory markers have been found to be significantly associated with major depressive disorder (MDD) and cognitive impairment. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the level of C-reactive protein (CRP) is correlated with depressive mood and cognitive impairment in MDD patients. In 149 subjects with MDD, the 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), Continuous Performance Test (CPT), Finger-Tapping Test (FTT), and Wisconsin Card-Sorting Test (WCST) were administered before and after antidepressant treatment. Besides, the level of CRP was measured. After 6weeks of treatment, the total HAM-D scores decreased significantly. In addition, the subjects' performance in the masked CPT and the WCST with completed categories significantly improved (p<0.001 and p=0.027, respectively) after the reliable change indices were corrected for practice effects. The CRP levels had increased significantly after six weeks of treatment after adjustment for age and gender (p<0.001). In addition, the CRP levels remained significantly high after six weeks of treatment in patients with a higher baseline level (r=0.657, p<0.001). Although the association between baseline CRP level and HAM-D score was not significant, the baseline CRP level was significantly correlated with treatment response at week 2 (r=0.327, p=0.020). The baseline CRP level was also negatively correlated with performance in the FTT before treatment (r=-0.580, p=0.006). Moreover, the baseline CRP level was significantly correlated with performance in the FTT (r=-0.501, p=0.021) and WCST with completed categories (r=-0.521, p=0.015) at week 6. The cognitive function of patients with high baseline CRP levels might remain impaired even if their mood symptoms improve after antidepressant treatment. Whether adjunctive anti-inflammatory medication may help to preserve cognitive function merits further investigation.

Antidepressant treatment for acute bipolar depression: an update

While studies in the past have focused more on treatment of the manic phase of bipolar disorder (BD), recent findings demonstrate the depressive phase to be at least as debilitating. However, in contrast to unipolar depression, depression in bipolar patients exhibits a varying response to antidepressants, raising questions regarding their efficacy and tolerability. Methods. We conducted a MEDLINE and Cochrane Collaboration Library search for papers published between 2005 and 2011 on the subject of antidepressant treatment of bipolar depression. Sixty-eight articles were included in the present review. Results. While a few studies did advocate the use of antidepressants, most well-controlled studies failed to show a robust effect of antidepressants in bipolar depression, regardless of antidepressant class or bipolar subtype. There was no significant increase in the rate of manic/hypomanic switch, especially with concurrent use of mood stabilizers. Prescribing guidelines published in recent years rely more on atypical antipsychotics, especially quetiapine, as a first-line therapy. Conclusions. Antidepressants probably have no substantial role in acute bipolar depression. However, in light of conflicting results between studies, more well-designed trials are warranted.

Characteristics of responders and non-responders to risperidone monotherapy or placebo in co-occurring bipolar disorder and anxiety disorder

Clinical characteristics predicting response and remission to psychopharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) and co-occurring anxiety disorders have been understudied. We hypothesized that non-response to risperidone or placebo in individuals with co-occurring BD and anxiety symptoms would be associated with a more severe clinical course of BD, and certain demographic variables. This study was a secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, parallel, 8-week study comparing risperidone monotherapy and placebo in individuals with BD plus current panic disorder, current generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), or lifetime panic disorder (n=111) [31]. We compared clinical characteristics of responders (50% improvement on the Hamilton Anxiety Scale [HAM-A]) and non-responders as well as remitters (HAM-A<7) and non-remitters in risperidone treatment (n=54) and placebo (n=57) groups. For non-responders in the risperidone group, co-occurring lifetime panic disorder was significantly more common than for non-responders in the placebo group. Apart from this, no significant differences in course of illness or demographics were found either between or across groups for patients with BD and co-occurring anxiety symptoms receiving risperidone or placebo in this acute phase study.

General and comparative efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants in the acute treatment of depressive disorders: a report by the WPA section of pharmacopsychiatry

Current gold standard approaches to the treatment of depression include pharmacotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic interventions with social support. Due to current controversies concerning the efficacy of antidepressants in randomized controlled trials, the generalizability of study findings to wider clinical practice and the increasing importance of socioeconomic considerations, it seems timely to address the uncertainty of concerned patients and relatives, and their treating psychiatrists and general practitioners. We therefore discuss both the efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants in the treatment of depressive disorders. We explain and clarify useful measures for assessing clinically meaningful antidepressant treatment effects and the types of studies that are useful for addressing uncertainties. This includes considerations of methodological issues in randomized controlled studies, meta-analyses, and effectiveness studies. Furthermore, we summarize the differential efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants with distinct pharmacodynamic properties, and differences between studies using antidepressants and/or psychotherapy. We also address the differential effectiveness of antidepressant drugs with differing modes of action and in varying subtypes of depressive disorder. After highlighting the clinical usefulness of treatment algorithms and the divergent biological, psychological, and clinical efforts to predict the effectiveness of antidepressant treatments, we conclude that the spectrum of different antidepressant treatments has broadened over the last few decades. The efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants is statistically significant, clinically relevant, and proven repeatedly. Further optimization of treatment can be helped by clearly structured treatment algorithms and the implementation of psychotherapeutic interventions. Modern individualized antidepressant treatment is in most cases a well-tolerated and efficacious approach to minimize the negative impact of otherwise potentially devastating and life-threatening outcomes in depressive disorders.