Unintended Consequences of Adjusting Citalopram Prescriptions Following the 2011 FDA Warning

Evaluating the prescribing and monitoring of medications associated with QTc-prolongation in the ambulatory care setting

RATIONALE

Little is known about the prescribing of medications with potential to cause QTc-prolongation in the ambulatory care settings. Understanding real-world prescribing of QTc-prolonging medications and actions taken to mitigate this risk will help guide strategies to optimize safety and appropriate prescribing among ambulatory patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency of clinician action taken to monitor and mitigate modifiable risk factors for QTc-prolongation when indicated.

METHODS

This retrospective, cross-sectional study evaluated clinician action at the time of prescribing prespecified medications with potential to prolong QTc in adult patients in primary care. The index date was defined as the date the medication was ordered. Electronic health record (EHR) data were evaluated to assess patient, clinician and visit characteristics. Clinician action was determined if baseline or follow-up monitoring was ordered or if action was taken to mitigate modifiable risk factors (laboratory abnormalities or electrocardiogram [ECG] monitoring) within 48 h of prescribing a medication with QTc-prolonging risk. Descriptive statistics were used to describe current practice.

RESULTS

A total of 399 prescriptions were prescribed to 386 patients, with a mean age of 51 ± 18 years, during March 2021 from a single-centre, multisite health system. Of these, 17 (4%) patients had a known history of QTc-prolongation, 170 (44%) did not have a documented history of QTc-prolongation and 199 (52%) had an unknown history (no ECG documented). Thirty-nine patients (10%) had at least one laboratory-related risk factor at the time of prescribing, specifically hypokalemia (16 patients), hypomagnesemia (8 patients) or hypocalcemia (19 patients). Of these 39 patients with laboratory risk factors, only 6 patients (15%) had their risk acknowledged or addressed by a clinician. Additionally, eight patients' most recent QTc was ≥500 ms and none had an ECG checked at the time the prescription was ordered.

CONCLUSION

Despite national recommendations, medication monitoring and risk mitigation is infrequent when prescribing QTc-prolonging medications in the ambulatory care setting. These findings call for additional research to better understand this gap, including reasons for the gap and consequences on patient outcomes.

[Effect of the direct healthcare professional communication on citalopram and escitalopram drug utilization for inpatient treatment of anxiety disorders]

BACKGROUND

In 2011, direct healthcare professional communication (DHPC) letters on citalopram and escitalopram were sent out to address the risk of QTc prolongation in the ECG. Healthcare professionals were informed about a reduction of the maximum recommended daily dose. Furthermore, a contraindication for QTc-prolonging co-medication was given. Previous studies noted that these instructions were implemented incompletely.

AIM

For the first time, this study analyzed how the DHPC affected the prescription of citalopram and escitalopram in patients with anxiety disorders.

METHODS

Drug utilization data from the project "Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie e. V." (AMSP) was used to examine whether the proportion of patients treated with a higher-than-recommended daily dose ("high dose") and the proportion of patients with QTc-prolonging co-medication would decrease post-DHPC (combined category of citalopram/escitalopram).

RESULTS

Drug utilization data of n = 364 patients pre- and n = 262 patients post-DHPC were compared. The proportion of patients with high dose declined from 10.7% to 5.4% (p = 0.019). The proportion of patients with QTc-prolonging co-medication did not change significantly from pre- (54.7%) to post-DHPC (51.5%, p = 0.437).

DISCUSSION

In accordance with previous studies, the proportion of high-dose patients decreased after DHPC publication while the proportion of patients with QTc-prolonging co-medication remained widely unchanged. The specific recommendation on daily dosage seems to have been better implemented than the broadly formulated contraindication of QTc-prolonging co-medication. Hence, DHPCs should be written precisely and give advice for specific clinical situations.

The assessment of cardiac risk in patients taking lamotrigine; a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned about lamotrigine's arrhythmogenicity based on in vitro data. This systematic review investigates lamotrigine's effect on cardiac conduction and risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in individuals with and without cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

We searched Web of Science and PubMed from inception through August 2021. We included studies measuring electrocardiogram (ECG) changes, laboratory abnormalities, or SCD among patients taking lamotrigine. Studies examining sudden unexpected death in epilepsy were excluded for scope. Two reviewers assessed articles and extracted data. We used the Effective Public Healthcare Panacea Project tool to evaluate confidence in evidence.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials, 9 nonrandomized observational studies, and 24 case reports were identified, with >3054 total participants, >1606 of whom used lamotrigine. One randomized trial of older patients found an average QRS increase of 3.5 +/- 13.1 ms. Fifteen studies reported no changes in ECG parameters. Case reports documented QRS widening (13), Brugada syndrome (6), QTc prolongation (1) and SCD (2), though many ingested toxic quantities of lamotrigine and/or other medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence is insufficient to support the breadth of the FDA warning concerning lamotrigine's cardiac risk. Lamotrigine at therapeutic doses may be associated with modest, non-dangerous QRS widening.

Evaluation of Antipsychotic Reduction Efforts in Patients With Dementia in Veterans Health Administration Nursing Homes

OBJECTIVE

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) each created initiatives to reduce off-label use of antipsychotics in patients with dementia in nursing homes. Although CMS has reported antipsychotic reductions, the impact on prescribing of antipsychotic and other CNS-active medications in the VHA remains unclear. The authors evaluated national trends in antipsychotic and other CNS-active medication prescribing for nursing home patients with dementia in the VHA.

METHODS

The study sample was all veterans with dementia residing in VHA nursing homes for more than 30 days (N=35,742). Using an interrupted time-series design, the quarterly prevalences of antipsychotic, antidepressant, antiepileptic, anxiolytic, opioid, and memory medication prescribing were evaluated from FY2009 through FY2018.

RESULTS

Antipsychotic prescribing in VHA nursing homes declined from FY2009 to FY2018 (from 33.7% to 27.5%), with similar declines in anxiolytic prescribing (from 33.5% to 27.1%). During this period, prescribing of antiepileptics, antidepressants, and opioids increased significantly (antiepileptics: from 26.8% to 43.3%; antidepressants: from 56.8% to 63.4%; opioids: from 32.6% to 41.2%). Gabapentin served as the main driver of antiepileptic increases (from 11.1% to 23.5%). Increases in antidepressant prescribing included sertraline, mirtazapine, and trazodone. From FY2009 to FY2018, the overall prescribing of non-antipsychotic psychotropic medications grew from 75.0% to 81.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotic and anxiolytic prescribing for VHA nursing home residents with dementia declined, although overall prescribing of other psychotropic and opioid medications increased. Policies focused primarily on reducing antipsychotic use without considering use in the context of other medications may contribute to growth in alternative medication classes with even less evidence of benefit and similar risks.

Comparison of the effect of citalopram, bupropion, sertraline, and tricyclic antidepressants on QTc: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Some data suggests that citalopram has more risk of corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation than other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Consequently the U.S. Food and Drug Administration distributed a safety warning limiting the maximum dose for citalopram. There is also a suggestion that bupropion may decrease QTc in patients on drugs that increase QTc. The goals of this cross-sectional study were to examine (1) effects on QTc of citalopram compared to sertraline, bupropion, and tricyclic antidepressants; (2) dose dependent effects of citalopram; and (3) effects of bupropion on citalopram-mediated changes in QTc.

METHODS

Records of subjects who received an EKG while taking one of the specified antidepressants were reviewed to collect demographic information, antidepressant history, and information about other confounders. Linear regression was used to examine the relationship between QTc and antidepressants.

RESULTS

487 subjects provided 798 EKG records. The sample was 95% male with an average age of 61 years. No differences were found in QTc between citalopram and other antidepressants. No dose relationship was detected between citalopram and QTc. Bupropion did not affect the relationship between citalopram and QTc (coefficient = -3.4; 95%CI = -14.2, 7.5; p = 0.54).

LIMITATIONS

Observational study designs are prone to biases from retrospective data collection. Some data subsets had small numbers of subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

No effect of citalopram on QTc was found at therapeutic doses. Neither was there evidence of a "QTc-sparing" effect of bupropion. The risk of adverse cardiovascular effects from citalopram at doses of 60 mg per day or less appears minimal.

Psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Depression occurs frequently in individuals with coronary artery disease (CAD) and is associated with a poor prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in CAD patients with comorbid depression.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases up to August 2020. We also searched three clinical trials registers in September 2021. We examined reference lists of included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and contacted primary authors. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs investigating psychological and pharmacological interventions for depression in adults with CAD and comorbid depression. Our primary outcomes included depression, mortality, and cardiac events. Secondary outcomes were healthcare costs and utilisation, health-related quality of life, cardiovascular vital signs, biomarkers of platelet activation, electrocardiogram wave parameters, non-cardiac adverse events, and pharmacological side effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently examined the identified papers for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. We performed random-effects model meta-analyses to compute overall estimates of treatment outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Psychological interventions may result in a reduction in end-of-treatment depression symptoms compared to controls (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to -0.19, I² = 88%; low certainty evidence; 10 trials; n = 1226). No effect was evident on medium-term depression symptoms one to six months after the end of treatment (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.01, I² = 69%; 7 trials; n = 2654). The evidence for long-term depression symptoms and depression response was sparse for this comparison. There is low certainty evidence that psychological interventions may result in little to no difference in end-of-treatment depression remission (odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% CI 0.78 to 5.19, I² = 87%; low certainty evidence; 3 trials; n = 862). Based on one to two trials per outcome, no beneficial effects on mortality and cardiac events of psychological interventions versus control were consistently found. The evidence was very uncertain for end-of-treatment effects on all-cause mortality, and data were not reported for end-of-treatment cardiovascular mortality and occurrence of myocardial infarction for this comparison. In the trials examining a head-to-head comparison of varying psychological interventions or clinical management, the evidence regarding the effect on end-of-treatment depression symptoms is very uncertain for: cognitive behavioural therapy compared to supportive stress management; behaviour therapy compared to person-centred therapy; cognitive behavioural therapy and well-being therapy compared to clinical management. There is low certainty evidence from one trial that cognitive behavioural therapy may result in little to no difference in end-of-treatment depression remission compared to supportive stress management (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.50; low certainty evidence; n = 83). Based on one to two trials per outcome, no beneficial effects on depression remission, depression response, mortality rates, and cardiac events were consistently found in head-to-head comparisons between psychological interventions or clinical management. The review suggests that pharmacological intervention may have a large effect on end-of-treatment depression symptoms (SMD -0.83, 95% CI -1.33 to -0.32, I² = 90%; low certainty evidence; 8 trials; n = 750). Pharmacological interventions probably result in a moderate to large increase in depression remission (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.89, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence; 4 trials; n = 646). We found an effect favouring pharmacological intervention versus placebo on depression response at the end of treatment, though strength of evidence was not rated (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.54, I² = 62%; 5 trials; n = 891). Based on one to four trials per outcome, no beneficial effects regarding mortality and cardiac events were consistently found for pharmacological versus placebo trials, and the evidence was very uncertain for end-of-treatment effects on all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. In the trials examining a head-to-head comparison of varying pharmacological agents, the evidence was very uncertain for end-of-treatment effects on depression symptoms. The evidence regarding the effects of different pharmacological agents on depression symptoms at end of treatment is very uncertain for: simvastatin versus atorvastatin; paroxetine versus fluoxetine; and escitalopram versus Bu Xin Qi. No trials were eligible for the comparison of a psychological intervention with a pharmacological intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In individuals with CAD and depression, there is low certainty evidence that psychological intervention may result in a reduction in depression symptoms at the end of treatment. There was also low certainty evidence that pharmacological interventions may result in a large reduction of depression symptoms at the end of treatment. Moderate certainty evidence suggests that pharmacological intervention probably results in a moderate to large increase in depression remission at the end of treatment. Evidence on maintenance effects and the durability of these short-term findings is still missing. The evidence for our primary and secondary outcomes, apart from depression symptoms at end of treatment, is still sparse due to the low number of trials per outcome and the heterogeneity of examined populations and interventions. As psychological and pharmacological interventions can seemingly have a large to only a small or no effect on depression, there is a need for research focusing on extracting those approaches able to substantially improve depression in individuals with CAD and depression.

Safety considerations for prescribing SSRI antidepressants to patients at increased cardiovascular risk

INTRODUCTION

With the development of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), a relatively uncomplicated treatment of depression and a safer alternative to tricyclic antidepressants was introduced. Any medical treatment has potential safety risks, however, and these risks should also be considered when prescribing SSRIs.

AREAS COVERED

The present review focuses on safety considerations when prescribing SSRIs to patients with previous stroke and myocardial infarction, as depression, and the need for antidepressant treatment, is common in these patients. At the same time, patients with stroke and myocardial infarction may be at increased risk of developing adverse events due to higher age, comorbidity, and co-medication. Specifically, the evidence of the risk of QT prolongation and bleeding versus thrombotic events will be discussed in the present review.

EXPERT OPINION

No medical treatment comes without risk and SSRIs are no exception. Depression, a common complication after vascular events, is a potentially life-threatening condition in itself and relevant and sufficient treatment is imperative. SSRIs are often the first medical treatment choice in the ambulatory setting, also in patients at increased cardiovascular risk. Relevant comorbidity and co-medication, however, should always be taken into account when initiating treatment and when choosing a specific SSRI.

The Cardiovascular Effects of Newer Antidepressants in Older Adults and Those With or At High Risk for Cardiovascular Diseases

Depression is common in older adults and those with cardiovascular disease. Although selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors generally have been shown to be safe to treat depression in these patients, it is important to identify additional antidepressants when selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are not effective. This qualitative narrative review summarizes what is known about the cardiovascular side effects of some of the newer antidepressants. Twelve novel non-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants were identified from the literature: venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, milnacipran, levomilnacipran, mirtazapine, bupropion, vilazodone, vortioxetine, agomelatine, moclobemide, and ketamine-esketamine. A search restricted to publications written in English was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar with the following search criteria: the specific antidepressant AND (QT OR QTc OR "heart rate" OR "heart rate variability" OR "hypertension" OR "orthostatic hypotension" OR "cardiovascular outcomes" OR "arrhythmia" OR "myocardial infarction" OR "cardiovascular mortality") AND (geriatric OR "older adults" OR "late life depression" OR "cardiovascular disease" OR "hospitalized" OR "hospitalized"). The recommended use, dosing ranges, cardiovascular effects, and general advantages and disadvantages of each of the drugs are discussed. Levomilnacipran and vilazodone have not received enough study to judge their safety in older patients or in those with, or at high risk for, cardiovascular disease. There is at least some evidence for possible adverse events with each of the other newer antidepressants that could be of concern in these patients. Nevertheless, with careful administration and attention to the potential adverse reactions for each drug, these may provide safe effective alternatives for older adults and patients with cardiovascular disease who do not respond to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants. However, more research on the safety and efficacy of these drugs in these specific patient populations is urgently needed.

Effects of antidepressants on QT interval in people with mental disorders

INTRODUCTION

Drug-induced QT prolongation is associated with higher cardiovascular mortality.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a protocol-based comprehensive review of antidepressant-induced QT prolongation in people with mental disorders.

RESULTS

Based on findings from 47 published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 unpublished RCTs, 14 observational studies, 662 case reports of torsades de pointes, and 168 cases of QT prolongation, we conclude that all antidepressants should be used only with licensed doses, and that all patients receiving antidepressants require monitoring of QT prolongation and clinical symptoms of cardiac arrhythmias. Large observational studies suggest increased mortality associated with all antidepressants (RR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.60-1.63, number of adults: 1,716,552), high doses of tricyclic antidepressants (OR = 2.11, 85% CI 1.10-4.22), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (OR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.24-6.24), venlafaxine (OR = 3.73, 95% CI: 1.33-10.45, number of adults: 4,040), and nortriptyline (OR = 4.60, 95% CI: 1.20-18.40, number of adults: 5,298).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence regarding the risk of QT prolongation in children is sparse.

Association between citalopram, escitalopram and QTc prolongation in a real-world geriatric setting

BACKGROUND

Although the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended upper limits for citalopram dosing in older adults due to risk of corrected-QT (QTc) prolongation, which was adopted, and extended to escitalopram by Health Canada, the scientific basis is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between citalopram/escitalopram dosages and QTc interval in a real-world geriatric setting.

METHODS

We reviewed electronic health records at a university-affiliated geriatric health care center, over a 7-year period, to identify patients prescribed citalopram and escitalopram, who had an ECG within 90 days of initiation or dosage change. Linear regression analyses were conducted to assess the relationship between antidepressant dosage and QTc interval.

RESULTS

137 patients were identified (citalopram=97, escitalopram=40). No association was found between citalopram, escitalopram and QTc, in unadjusted or adjusted analyses. Among covariates, older age was significantly associated with QTc prolongation in the escitalopram group.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations to the current study include its retrospective design and the small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

These data do not support the FDA or Health Canada's recommended maximum dosages of citalopram or escitalopram in the elderly. Therefore, for patients already on higher doses of these medications, the risk of QTc prolongation may not always outweigh the risk of dose lowering, such as relapse. Until larger prospective studies become available, the decision to comply or not with these federal agencies' recommendations should be weighed on an individual basis, taking into consideration all potential risk factors.

Assessing Responsiveness of Health Systems to Drug Safety Warnings

OBJECTIVE

In 2011-2012 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued safety announcements cautioning providers against prescribing high doses of citalopram given concerns for QT prolongation. The authors evaluated Veterans Affairs (VA) national trends in citalopram use and dose compared with alternative antidepressants after the FDA warnings.

METHODS

Time series analyses estimated the effect of the FDA warnings on citalopram and other antidepressant across three periods: before the first FDA warning in August 2011, after the 2011 FDA warning until the second warning in March 2012, and after the 2012 FDA warning. In a National VA health system, adult VA outpatients prescribed citalopram or alternative antidepressants from February 2010 to September 2013 were studied. Outpatient use of high-dose citalopram (>40 or >20 mg daily in adults aged > 60 years) including the proportion of patients prescribed citalopram and difference between study periods.

RESULTS

Between the first and second FDA warnings, among patients aged 18-60, high-dose citalopram use decreased by 2.0% per month (p < 0.001) and by 1.9% per month (p < 0.001) for older adults. After the second FDA warning in 2012, 30.7% of older patients remained on doses higher than the newly recommended dose of 20 mg. Reductions in overall use of citalopram were accompanied by significant increases in prescriptions of alternative antidepressants, with sertraline most widely prescribed.

CONCLUSION

Although trends in high-dose citalopram use declined after the 2011-2012 FDA warnings, roughly one-third of older adults still remained on higher than recommended doses. Concomitant increases in sertraline and other antidepressant prescriptions suggest potential substitution of these medications for citalopram.