A randomized, single-blind, comparison of duloxetine with bupropion in the treatment of SSRI-resistant major depression

Pharmacological Treatments for Patients with Treatment-Resistant Depression

Over a third of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) do not have an adequate response to first-line antidepressant treatments, i.e., they have treatment-resistant depression (TRD). These patients tend to have a more severe course of illness and are at an increased risk of suicide. Next step treatment options for patients with TRD, include switching to a different antidepressant, combining more than one antidepressant, or augmenting an antidepressant with another (non-antidepressant) medication. It is unclear which of these treatment approaches should be applied to a given patient, and in what order. Due to this ambiguity, comparing antidepressants and augmentation agents on the basis of their efficacy, tolerability, and speed of symptom relief would be beneficial for clinicians. To accomplish this, a systematic search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Only randomized controlled trials were included in this qualitative synthesis, resulting in 66 articles. This review identified several effective pharmaco-therapeutic strategies that are currently available for patients with TRD. Ketamine and esketamine appear to be effective for the treatment of TRD. Augmentation with certain second generation antipsychotics, such as quetiapine or aripiprazole is likewise effective, and may be preferred over switching to antidepressant monotherapy. While the combination of olanzapine and fluoxetine was one of the first pharmacotherapy approved for TRD, and its use may be limited by metabolic side-effects. Other effective strategies include augmentation with lithium, liothyronine (T3), lamotrigine, or combination of antidepressants including bupropion, tricyclics, or mirtazapine. There is insufficient research to demonstrate the efficacy of ziprasidone or levothyroxine (T4). A shared decision-making approach is recommended to guide treatment selection to address each patient’s individual needs.

Predicting SSRI-Resistance: Clinical Features and tagSNPs Prediction Models Based on Support Vector Machine

BACKGROUND

A large proportion of major depressive patients will experience recurring episodes. Many patients still do not response to available antidepressants. In order to meaningfully predict who will not respond to which antidepressant, it may be necessary to combine multiple biomarkers and clinical variables.

METHODS

Eight hundred fifty-seven patients with recurrent major depressive disorder who were followed up 3-10 years involved 32 variables including socio-demographic, clinical features, and SSRIs treatment features when they received the first treatment. Also, 34 tagSNPs related to 5-HT signaling pathway, were detected by using mass spectrometry analysis. The training samples which had 12 clinical variables and four tagSNPs with statistical differences were learned repeatedly to establish prediction models based on support vector machine (SVM).

RESULTS

Twelve clinical features (psychomotor retardation, psychotic symptoms, suicidality, weight loss, SSRIs average dose, first-course treatment response, sleep disturbance, residual symptoms, personality, onset age, frequency of episode, and duration) were found significantly difference (P< 0.05) between 302 SSRI-resistance and 304 SSRI non-resistance group. Ten SSRI-resistance predicting models were finally selected by using support vector machine, and our study found that mutations in tagSNPs increased the accuracy of these models to a certain degree.

CONCLUSION

Using a data-driven machine learning method, we found 10 predictive models by mining existing clinical data, which might enable prospective identification of patients who are likely to resistance to SSRIs antidepressant.

A Systematic Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Duloxetine

Duloxetine is a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients affected by major depressive disorder (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), neuropathic pain (NP), fibromyalgia (FMS), and stress incontinence urinary (SUI). These conditions share parallel pathophysiological pathways, and duloxetine treatment might be an effective and safe alternative. Thus, a systematic review was conducted following the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items (PRISMA) recommendations and Joanna Briggs Institute Critical (JBI) Appraisals guidelines. Eighty-five studies focused on efficacy, safety, and tolerability of duloxetine were included in our systematic review. Studies were subdivided by clinical condition and evaluated individually. Thus, 32 studies of MDD, 11 studies of GAD, 19 studies of NP, 9 studies of FMS, and 14 studies of SUI demonstrated that the measured outcomes indicate the suitability of duloxetine in the treatment of these clinical conditions. This systematic review confirms that the dual mechanism of duloxetine benefits the treatment of comorbid clinical conditions, and supports the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of duloxetine in short- and long-term treatments.

Degeneration of dopaminergic circuitry influences depressive symptoms in Lewy body disorders

Aims

Depression is commonly observed even in prodromal stages of Lewy body disorders (LBD), and is associated with cognitive impairment and a faster rate of cognitive decline. Given the role of dopamine in the development of movement disorders, but also in motivation and reward, we investigated neurodegenerative pathology in dopaminergic circuitry in Parkinson's disease (PD), PD with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) patients in relation to depressive symptoms.

Methods

α‐synuclein, hyperphosphorylated tau and amyloid‐beta pathology was assessed in 17 DLB, 14 PDD and 8 PD cases within striatal and midbrain subregions, with neuronal cell density assessed in substantia nigra and ventral tegmental area. Additionally, we used a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to investigate the extent to which brain connectivity might influence the deposition of pathological proteins within dopaminergic pathways.

Results

A significantly higher α‐synuclein burden was observed in the substantia nigra (P = 0.006), ventral tegmental area (P = 0.011) and nucleus accumbens (P = 0.031) in LBD patients with depression. Significant negative correlations were observed between cell density in substantia nigra with Lewy body (LB) Braak stage (P = 0.013), whereas cell density in ventral tegmental area showed negative correlations with LB Braak stage (P = 0.026) and neurofibrillary tangle Braak stage (P = 0.007).

Conclusions

Dopaminergic α‐synuclein pathology appears to drive depression. Selective targeting of dopaminergic pathways may therefore provide symptomatic relief for depressive symptoms in LBD patients.

Serotonin and Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors

This chapter covers antidepressants that fall into the class of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) reuptake inhibitors. That is, they bind to the 5-HT and NE transporters with varying levels of potency and binding affinity ratios. Unlike the selective serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), most of these antidepressants have an ascending rather than a flat dose-response curve. The chapter provides a brief review of the chemistry, pharmacology, metabolism, safety and adverse effects, clinical use, and therapeutic indications of each antidepressant. Venlafaxine, a phenylethylamine, is a relatively weak 5-HT and weaker NE uptake inhibitor with a 30-fold difference in binding of the two transporters. Therefore, the drug has a clear dose progression, with low doses predominantly binding to the 5-HT transporter and more binding of the NE transporter as the dose ascends. Venlafaxine is metabolized to the active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV; desvenlafaxine) by CYP2D6, and it therefore is subject to significant inter-individual variation in blood levels and response dependent on variations in CYP2D6 metabolism. The half-life of venlafaxine is short at about 5 h, with the ODV metabolite being 12 h. Both parent compound and metabolite have low protein binding and neither inhibit CYP enzymes. Therefore, both venlafaxine and desvenlafaxine are potential options if drug-drug interactions are a concern, although venlafaxine may be subject to drug-drug interactions with CYP2D6 inhibitors. At low doses, the adverse effect profile is similar to an SSRI with nausea, diarrhea, fatigue or somnolence, and sexual side effects, while venlafaxine at higher doses can produce mild increases in blood pressure, diaphoresis, tachycardia, tremors, and anxiety. A disadvantage of venlafaxine relative to the SSRIs is the potential for dose-dependent blood pressure elevation, most likely due to the NE reuptake inhibition caused by higher doses; however, this adverse effect is infrequently observed at doses below 225 mg per day. Venlafaxine also has a number of potential advantages over the SSRIs, including an ascending dose-antidepressant response curve, with possibly greater overall efficacy at higher doses. Venlafaxine is approved for MDD as well as generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Desvenlafaxine is the primary metabolite of venlafaxine, and it is also a relatively low-potency 5-HT and NE uptake inhibitor. Like venlafaxine it has a favorable drug-drug interaction profile. It is subject to CYP3A4 metabolism, and it is therefore vulnerable to enzyme inhibition or induction. However, the primary metabolic pathway is direct conjugation. It is approved in the narrow dose range of 50-100 mg per day. Duloxetine is a more potent 5-HT and NE reuptake inhibitor with a more balanced profile of binding at about 10:1 for 5HT and NE transporter binding. It is also a moderate inhibitor of CYP2D6, so that modest dose reductions and careful monitoring will be needed when prescribing duloxetine in combination with drugs that are preferentially metabolized by CYP2D6. The most common side effects identified in clinical trials are nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, constipation, insomnia, asthenia, and hypertension, consistent with its mechanisms of action. Clinical trials to date have demonstrated rates of response and remission in patients with major depression that are comparable to other marketed antidepressants reviewed in this book. In addition to approval for MDD, duloxetine is approved for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and musculoskeletal pain. Milnacipran is marketed as an antidepressant in some countries, but not in the USA. It is approved in the USA and some other countries as a treatment for fibromyalgia. It has few pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with other drugs. Milnacipran has a half-life of about 10 h and therefore needs to be administered twice per day. It is metabolized by CYP3A4, but the major pathway for clearance is direct conjugation and renal elimination. As with other drugs in this class, dysuria is a common, troublesome, and dose-dependent adverse effect (occurring in up to 7% of patients). High-dose milnacipran has been reported to cause blood pressure and pulse elevations. Levomilnacipran is the levorotary enantiomer of milnacipran, and it is pharmacologically very similar to the racemic compound, although the side effects may be milder within the approved dosing range. As with other NE uptake inhibitors, it may increase blood pressure and pulse, although it appears to do so less than some other medications. All medications in the class can cause serotonin syndrome when combined with MAOIs.

Serum Levels of Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recent findings suggest an involvement of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) in the pathogenesis of many psychiatric disorders; however, there is a lack of data regarding IGF-1 in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The aims of the present study were (1) to analyze putative alterations of IGF-1 serum content in patients with OCD compared to patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and healthy controls, and (2) to analyze putative changes of IGF-1 levels during drug treatment in subjects with OCD compared to patients with MDD.

METHODS

We recruited 40 OCD patients, 37 MDD patients, and 43 healthy controls. All participants were adults. Serum IGF-1 levels were measured by the ELISA method on venous blood samples collected at baseline and after 10 ± 1 weeks of drug treatment.

RESULTS

IGF-1 levels were increased in OCD patients compared to controls (149.9 ± 60.2 vs. 121.2 ± 51.6 ng/ml; p = 0.040). No correlations were observed between baseline IGF-1 levels, clinical features, and response to treatment at follow-up in OCD or MDD patients. No changes in serum IGF-1 were observed after drug treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our results show for the first time that serum IGF-1 levels are altered in patients with OCD. Further research on the role of IGF-1 in OCD is warranted.

[Unsatisfactory response: definition and involvement]

In the treatment of unipolar depression, treatment response is a key issue in terms of evolution and prognosis. Within this concept, the inadequate response includes the worsening, the lack of response, partial response and poor tolerance. This lack of response may be related to intrinsic factors to the individual, but also to more extrinsic environmental factors. In this review, we explore this concept through its links with adherence and treatment duration. In this field, the concept of early response can be a powerful indicator of therapeutic response, which conditions the prescription of antidepressants beyond the strict framework of the sufficient period of 4 to 6 weeks. In addition to its impact on prognosis, the literature data show that the insufficient response is a significant burden in terms of medical and economic cost, and somatic comorbidity; and justifies a systematic identification of this dimension. Therefore self-reports (QIDS; BDI) will be preferred to the clinician-rated depression symptom rating scales (MADRS, HAMD) that require a specific training. Identifying predictors of non-response would be an attractive target for prescribers but the results to date are not operative.

Socio-demographic and clinical predictors of non-response/non-remission in treatment resistant depressed patients: A systematic review

Up to one third of patients adequately treated for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) do not respond to multiple interventions. Many studies investigated predictors in MDD outcome, but no study focused on predictors of non-response or non-remission to antidepressants in subjects with treatment resistant depression (TRD). The present study aimed to evaluate possible socio-demographic and clinical predictors of non-response and non-remission in MDD patients who failed to benefit from at least one antidepressant trial. A total of 51 papers were included. A number of severity indicators, such as longer duration of depressive episode, moderate-high suicidal risk, anxious comorbidity, higher number of hospitalizations and higher dosage of antidepressants, were associated with non-response as well as age. Interestingly, severity of illness, as well as comorbid personality disorders and anxiety symptoms, had also a predictive value in non-remission with the addition of marital status. Considering limitations, selected studies were observational or randomized non controlled/controlled trials and different TRD definitions and outcome measures were used. Overall, predictors of outcome were similar to MDD, but specific socio-demographic and clinical factors should be considered in clinical practice to formulate a more focused treatment in TRD patients.

Bupropion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness as an antidepressant

Bupropion has been used as an antidepressant for over 20 years, though its licence for such use varies and it is typically a third- or fourth-line agent. It has a unique pharmacology, inhibiting the reuptake of noradrenaline and dopamine, potentially providing pharmacological augmentation to more common antidepressants such as selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). This systematic review and meta-analysis identified 51 studies, dividing into four categories: bupropion as a sole antidepressant, bupropion coprescribed with another antidepressant, bupropion in 'other' populations (e.g. bipolar depression, elderly populations) and primary evaluation of side effects. Methodologically more robust trials support the superiority of bupropion over placebo, and most head-to-head antidepressant trials showed an equivalent effectiveness, though some of these are hindered by a lack of a placebo arm. Most work on the coprescribing of bupropion with another antidepressant supports an additional effect, though many are open-label trials. Several large multi-medication trials, most notably STAR*D, also support a therapeutic role for bupropion; in general, it demonstrated similar effectiveness to other medications, though this literature highlights the generally low response rates in refractory cohorts. Effectiveness has been shown in 'other' populations, though there is an overall dearth of research. Bupropion is generally well tolerated, it has very low rates of sexual dysfunction, and is more likely to cause weight loss than gain. Our findings support the use of bupropion as a sole or coprescribed antidepressant, particularly if weight gain or sexual dysfunction are, or are likely to be, significant problems. However there are notable gaps in the literature, including less information on treatment naïve and first presentation depression, particularly when one considers the ever-reducing rates of response in more refractory illness. There are some data to support bupropion targeting specific symptoms, but insufficient information to reliably inform such prescribing, and it remains uncertain whether bupropion pharmacodynamically truly augments other drugs.

Socio-demographic and clinical predictors of treatment resistant depression: A prospective European multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Few studies investigated socio-demographic and clinical predictors of non response and remission in treatment resistant depression (TRD) in the case of failure of more than two adequate antidepressant (AD) trial. The primary aim of this study was to investigate socio-demographic and clinical predictors of TRD defined as the lack of response to at least three adequate AD treatments, two of which prospectively evaluated. As secondary aims, we also investigated predictors of non response and remission to: (1) at least two adequate AD treatment (one of which prospectively assessed); (2) at least one adequate and retrospectively assessed AD treatment.

METHODS

In the context of a European multicenter project, 407 major depressive disorder (MDD) patients who failed to respond to a previous AD treatment were recruited for a 2 stage trial, firstly receiving venlafaxine and then escitalopram. MINI, HRSD, MADRS, UKU, CGI-S and CGI-I were administered.

RESULTS

Ninety eight subjects (27.61%) were considered as resistant to three AD treatments. Clinical predictors were: longer duration and higher severity of the current episode (p=0.004; ES=0.24; p=0.01; RR=1.41, respectively), outpatient status (p=0.04; RR=1.58), higher suicidal risk level (p=0.02; RR=1.49), higher rate of the first/second degree psychiatric antecedents (MDD and others) (p=0.04; RR=1.31, p=0.03; RR=1.32 respectively) and side effects during treatments (p=0.002; RR=2.82). Multivariate analyses underlined the association between TRD and the severity of the current episode (p=0.04). As for secondary outcomes, predicting factors were partially overlapping.

LIMITATIONS

The limited sample size and specific drugs used limit present findings.

CONCLUSION

Subjects with a high degree of resistance to AD treatments show specific features which may guide the clinicians to the choice of more appropriate therapies at baseline.

Efficacy and tolerability of switching therapy to vortioxetine versus other antidepressants in patients with major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine against different antidepressant monotherapies in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) with inadequate response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) therapy.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for monotherapy studies in patients with MDD with inadequate response to first-line therapy. Treatments included SSRIs, SNRIs, and other antidepressants. Identified studies underwent a three-stage screening/data extraction process and critical appraisal. Adjusted indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) on systematic literature review outputs were made using Bucher's method, comparing remission rates and withdrawal rates due to adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Of 27 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, a few studies were of high quality according to the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence checklist. Three studies contributed to an evidence network for quantitative assessment comparing vortioxetine with agomelatine, sertraline, venlafaxine XR, and bupropion SR. Vortioxetine had a statistically significantly higher remission rate than agomelatine (risk difference [RD]: -11.0% [95% CI: -19.4; -2.6]), and numerically higher remission rates than sertraline (RD: -14.4% [95% CI: -29.9; 1.1]), venlafaxine (RD: -7.20% [95% CI: -24.3; 9.9]), and bupropion (RD: -10.70% [95% CI: -27.8; 6.4]). Withdrawal rates due to AEs were statistically significantly lower for vortioxetine than sertraline (RD: 12.1% [95% CI: 3.1; 21.1]), venlafaxine XR (RD: 12.3% [95% CI: 0.8; 23.8]), and bupropion SR (RD: 18.3% [95% CI: 6.4; 30.1]).

CONCLUSIONS

The current systematic literature review found a few high quality switch studies assessing monotherapies in patients with MDD with inadequate response to SSRI/SNRIs. ITCs indicated that switching to vortioxetine leads to numerically higher remission rates compared with other antidepressants. Vortioxetine is a well tolerated treatment, showing statistically lower withdrawal rates due to AEs compared with other antidepressants. Vortioxetine is a relevant therapeutic alternative in patients experiencing inadequate response to prior SSRI or SNRI therapy.

Pharmacologic approaches to treatment resistant depression: Evidences and personal experience

AIM: To review evidence supporting pharmacological treatments for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and to discuss them according to personal clinical experience.

METHODS: Original studies, clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses addressing pharmacological treatment for TRD in adult patients published from 1990 to 2013 were identified by data base queries (PubMed, Google Scholar e Quertle Searches) using terms: “treatment resistant depression”, “treatment refractory depression”, “partial response depression”, “non responder depression”, “optimization strategy”, “switching strategy”, “combination strategy”, “augmentation strategy”, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors antidepressants (SSRI), tricyclic antidepressants (TCA), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors antidepressants, mirtazapine, mianserine, bupropione, monoamine oxidase inhibitor antidepressant (MAOI), lithium, thyroid hormones, second generation antipsychotics (SGA), dopamine agonists, lamotrigine, psychostimulants, dextromethorphan, dextrorphan, ketamine, omega-3 fatty acids, S-adenosil-L-metionine, methylfolat, pindolol, sex steroids, glucocorticoid agents. Other citations of interest were further identified from references reported in the accessed articles. Selected publications were grouped by treatment strategy: (1) switching from an ineffective antidepressant (AD) to a new AD from a similar or different class; (2) combining the current AD regimen with a second AD from a different class; and (3) augmenting the current AD regimen with a second agent not thought to be an antidepressant itself.

RESULTS: Switching from a TCA to another TCA provides only a modest advantage (response rate 9%-27%), while switching from a SSRI to another SSRI is more advantageous (response rate up to 75%). Evidence supports the usefulness of switching from SSRI to venlafaxine (5 positive trials out 6), TCA (2 positive trials out 3), and MAOI (2 positive trials out 2) but not from SSRI to bupropione, duloxetine and mirtazapine. Three reviews demonstrated that the benefits of intra- and cross-class switch do not significantly differ. Data on combination strategy are controversial regarding TCA-SSRI combination (positive results in old studies, negative in more recent study) and bupropion-SSRI combination (three open series studies but not three controlled trails support the useful of this combination) and positive regard mirtazapine (or its analogue mianserine) combination with ADs of different classes. As regards the augmentation strategy, available evidences supported the efficacy of TCA augmentation with lithium salts and thyroid hormone (T3), but are conflicting regard the SSRI augmentation with these two drugs (1 positive trial out of 4 for lithium and 3 out of 5 for thyroid hormone). Double-blind controlled studies showed the efficacy of AD augmentation with aripiprazole (5 positive trials out 5), quetiapine (3 positive trials out 3) and, at less extent, of fluoxetine augmentation with olanzapine (3 positive trials out 6), so these drugs received the FDA indication for the acute treatment of TRD. Results on AD augmentation with risperidone are conflicting (2 short term positive trials, 1 short-term and 1 long-term negative trials). Case series and open-label trials showed that AD augmentation with pramipexole or ropinirole, two dopamine agonists, could be an effective treatment for TRD (response rate to pramipexole 48%-74%, to ropinirole 40%-44%) although one recent double-blind placebo-controlled study does not support the superiority of pramipexole over placebo. Evidences do not justify the use of psychostimulants, omega-3 fatty acids, S-adenosil-L-metionine, methylfolate, pindolol, lamotrigine, and sex hormone as AD augmentation for TRD. Combining the available evidences with our experience we suggest treating non-responders to one SSRI bupropion or mirtazapine trial by switching to venlafaxine, and non-responders to one venlafaxine trial by switching to a TCA or, if TCA are not tolerated, combining mirtazapine with SSRI or venlafaxine. In non-responders to two or more ADs (including at least one TCA if tolerated) current AD regimen could be augmented with lithium salts (mainly in patients with bipolar depression or suicidality), SGAs (mostly aripiprazole) or DA-agonists (mostly pramipexole). In patients with severe TRD, i.e., non-responders to combination and augmentation strategies as well as to electroconvulsive therapy if workable, we suggest to try a combination plus augmentation strategy.

CONCLUSION: Our study identifies alternative effective treatment strategies for TRD. Further studies are needed to compare the efficacy of different strategies in more homogeneous subpopulations.

Early switching strategies in antidepressant non-responders: current evidence and future research directions

Studies have found that up to two-thirds of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) do not fully respond to the first antidepressant. While switching antidepressants is a common strategy for antidepressant non-responders, there is still a lack of consensus about the optimal timing of a switch. Many clinicians wait for 6-12 weeks before considering a switch. The objectives of this paper are to (1) review the evidence for positive and negative predictive value (NPV) of early improvement at 2-4 weeks to predict final antidepressant response; (2) review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examine early switching strategies; and (3) provide future research directions and clinical recommendations for timing of antidepressant switching. We conducted a literature search for English-language studies via PubMed and Google Scholar, from 1984 to May 2013, with the following terms: 'antidepressants', 'MDD', 'time course', 'trajectory', 'early response', 'onset', 'delayed response', 'early improvement', 'predictors', 'switch', 'combination therapy', and 'augmentation'. Replicated evidence indicates that lack of early improvement (e.g. <20% reduction in a depression scale score) at 2-4 weeks can be an accurate predictor to identify eventual non-responders. The NPVs suggest that only about one in five patients with lack of improvement at 4 weeks will have a response by 8 weeks. Three RCTs examined early switch strategies, but results are inconsistent and comparisons limited by methodological differences. Future studies should incorporate a standard consensus definition of early improvement, discern whether the effect of early switching is specific to certain types of antidepressants, and determine whether early switch is superior to other strategies such as augmentation or combination. Notwithstanding these limitations, there is reasonable evidence to recommend earlier assessment for improvement. If there is no indication of early improvement at 2-4 weeks after starting an antidepressant, and taking into account other patient and clinical factors, a change in management can be considered.

Duloxetine in affective disorders: a naturalistic study on psychiatric and medical comorbidity, use in association and tolerability across different age groups

Objective:

Duloxetine, a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), is currently approved in many countries for the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). The present naturalistic study was aimed to investigate tolerability of Duloxetine in a sample of patients with affective disorders and psychiatric/medical comorbidity, comparing tolerability in monotherapy versus polytherapy and across different age groups.

Methods:

The sample included 165 patients, affected by anxiety and/or mood disorders with or without comorbidity, who had been taken Duloxetine for at least 1 month. Sample variables were collected through a retrospective chart review.

Results:

Most common primary diagnoses were MDD (49.1 %), Bipolar Disorder (BD) (15.7 %) and GAD (5.5%). The 40 % of the sample had psychiatric comorbidity: in particular, anxiety disorders (15.8 %) (GAD 7.9%, Panic Disorder –PD- 7.3%) and personality disorders (9.1%) as the most frequent ones. With respect to medical comorbidities (68% of the sample), hypertension (12.1%) and diabetes (7.3%) were the most common ones. Mean duration of treatment and dosage of Duloxetine were, respectively, 11 months (± 9.1) and 70 mg/day (± 28.6). The 68 % of the sample received Duloxetine in association with other drugs. Minor side-effects, in particular drowsiness and gastrointestinal problems, were reported by 15 % of the sample. No difference in terms of tolerability across distinct groups, divided on the basis of mono- vs polytherapy as well as of different age, was found.

Conclusion:

Duloxetine, mostly administered in patients with affective disorders with psychiatric/ medical comorbidity and in association with other drugs, appeared to be well tolerated, showing limited rates of side effects of mild intensity. Further naturalistic studies are warranted to confirm present results.

Treatment-resistant depression: therapeutic trends, challenges, and future directions

BACKGROUND

Patients with major depression respond to antidepressant treatment, but 10%-30% of them do not improve or show a partial response coupled with functional impairment, poor quality of life, suicide ideation and attempts, self-injurious behavior, and a high relapse rate. The aim of this paper is to review the therapeutic options for treating resistant major depressive disorder, as well as evaluating further therapeutic options.

METHODS

In addition to Google Scholar and Quertle searches, a PubMed search using key words was conducted, and relevant articles published in English peer-reviewed journals (1990-2011) were retrieved. Only those papers that directly addressed treatment options for treatment-resistant depression were retained for extensive review.

RESULTS

Treatment-resistant depression, a complex clinical problem caused by multiple risk factors, is targeted by integrated therapeutic strategies, which include optimization of medications, a combination of antidepressants, switching of antidepressants, and augmentation with non-antidepressants, psychosocial and cultural therapies, and somatic therapies including electroconvulsive therapy, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, deep brain stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and vagus nerve stimulation. As a corollary, more than a third of patients with treatment-resistant depression tend to achieve remission and the rest continue to suffer from residual symptoms. The latter group of patients needs further study to identify the most effective therapeutic modalities. Newer biomarker-based antidepressants and other drugs, together with non-drug strategies, are on the horizon to address further the multiple complex issues of treatment-resistant depression.

CONCLUSION

Treatment-resistant depression continues to challenge mental health care providers, and further relevant research involving newer drugs is warranted to improve the quality of life of patients with the disorder.