Relative effectiveness of augmentation treatments for treatment-resistant depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Adjunctive cariprazine as a novel effective strategy for treating major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cariprazine has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treating bipolar depression and as an adjunctive treatment for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). However, it remains unclear about its pharmacological efficacy in treating MDD. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the adjunctive use of cariprazine in MDD.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of cariprazine in patients with MDD up to November 15, 2023. The changes in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score and incidence of adverse events (AEs), which represents of efficacy and tolerability, are considered as the main outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 3066 patients with MDD included in all across 5 RCTs. With regard to MADRS score, cariprazine group showed better results than control group (SMD = -0.12, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.04, P = 0.002, 5 RCTs, n = 3066). Cariprazine, meanwhile, improved the MADRS response (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.31, P = 0.0004, 5 RCTs, n = 3066). For safety outcomes, statistical difference was observed in AEs (RR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.35, P < 0.00001, 5 RCTs, n = 3077). The suicide ideation and SAEs showed no statistical difference between two groups.

CONCLUSION

Cariprazine demonstrated antidepressant effect as an augmentation therapy in treating MDD. Meanwhile, the tolerability of it was acceptable as an adjunctive treatment. However, studies with larger sample sizes are still needed to explore the optimal dosage.

Plasma Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Levels in First-Episode and Recurrent Major Depression and before and after Bright Light Therapy in Treatment-Resistant Depression

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is implicated in the etiology and treatment response in major depressive disorder (MDD). However, peripheral BDNF concentrations have not been compared across different MDD stages. Bright light therapy (BLT) offers some potential in treatment-resistant depression (TRD), but its effects on BDNF levels are unknown. This study included a cross-sectional analysis of plasma BDNF concentration in females with TRD, unmedicated MDD patients, and healthy controls (HC), and measurements of longitudinal BLT effects on plasma BDNF levels in TRD patients. The present study included 55 drug-naïve, first-episode patients, 25 drug-free recurrent-episode MDD patients, 71 HC participants, and 54 TRD patients. Patients were rated by Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD)-17 and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Patients with TRD received BLT during 4 weeks. The total HAMD-17 and MADRS scores decreased following BLT. All patient groups had lower plasma BDNF than HC, but BDNF levels did not differ between first- and recurrent-episode BDNF patients and TRD patients before or after BLT. However, responders and remitters to BLT had higher post-treatment plasma BDNF concentrations than patients who did not achieve response or remission. The changes in plasma BDNF levels may be candidates for biomarkers of treatment response to BLT in TRD patients.

Reliability and validity of the difficult to treat depression questionnaire (DTDQ)

It has recently been recommended that treatment resistant depression be reconceptualized and renamed as difficult to treat depression (DTD). A consensus statement by an expert panel identified multiple variables associated with DTD and emphasized the importance of conducting a comprehensive evaluation of patients to identify predictors of inadequate treatment response. For practical reasons, it would be desirable to develop a self-report scale that can be incorporated into clinical practice that identifies patient, clinical, and treatment risk factors for DTD. Nine hundred twenty depressed patients completed the Difficult to Treat Depression Questionnaire (DTDQ). A subset of patients completed the scale a second time and completed the Remission from Depression Questionnaire at admission and discharge from a partial hospital program. The DTDQ demonstrated excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Both the total DTDQ and the number of prior failed medication trials, the metric primarily relied upon to classify treatment resistant depression, predicted outcome. However, the DTDQ continued to be significantly associated with outcome after controlling for the number of failed trials, whereas the number of failed trials did not predict outcome after controlling for DTDQ scores. The DTDQ is a reliable and valid measure of the recently discussed concept of DTD.

Pramipexole Augmentation for Treatment-Resistant Unipolar and Bipolar Depression in the Real World: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Pramipexole is a dopamine full agonist approved for the treatment of Parkinson's disease and restless legs syndrome. Its high affinity for the D3 receptor and neuroprotective, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory activity provides a rationale for the treatment of depression. In this paper, we review studies on the effectiveness and safety of antidepressant pramipexole augmentation in treatment-resistant depression.

METHODS

This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on pramipexole-antidepressant augmentation included patients with resistant unipolar and bipolar depression. The primary outcome measure was the treatment response, measured at the study endpoint.

RESULTS

We identified 8 studies including 281 patients overall, 57% women and 39.5% with bipolar disorder and 60.5% with major depressive disorder. The mean follow-up duration was 27.3 weeks (range 8-69). The pooled estimate of treatment response was 62.5%, without significant differences between unipolar and bipolar depression. Safety was good, with nausea and somnolence the most frequent side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this systematic review, needing further confirmation, show that off-label use of pramipexole as augmentation of antidepressant treatment could be a useful and safe strategy for unipolar and bipolar treatment-resistant depression.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmentation and combination treatments for early-stage treatment-resistant depression

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly burdensome health condition, for which there are numerous accepted pharmacological and psychological interventions. Adjunctive treatment (augmentation/combination) is recommended for the ~50% of MDD patients who do not adequately respond to first-line treatment. We aimed to evaluate the current evidence for concomitant approaches for people with early-stage treatment-resistant depression (TRD; defined below).

METHODS

We systematically searched Medline and Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science to identify randomised controlled trials of adjunctive treatment of ⩾10 adults with MDD who had not responded to ⩾1 adequate antidepressant. The cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool was used to assess study quality. Pre-post treatment meta-analyses were performed, allowing for comparison across heterogeneous study designs independent of comparator interventions.

RESULTS

In total, 115 trials investigating 48 treatments were synthesised. The mean intervention duration was 9 weeks (range 5 days to 18 months) with most studies assessed to have low (n = 57) or moderate (n = 51) RoB. The highest effect sizes (ESs) were from cognitive behavioural therapy (ES = 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-2.07), (es)ketamine (ES = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.73) and risperidone (ES = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.29-1.61). Only aripiprazole and lithium were examined in ⩾10 studies. Pill placebo (ES = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.98) had a not inconsiderable ES, and only six treatments' 95% CIs did not overlap with pill placebo's (aripiprazole, (es)ketamine, mirtazapine, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone). We report marked heterogeneity between studies for almost all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support cautious optimism for several augmentation strategies; although considering the high prevalence of TRD, evidence remains inadequate for each treatment option.

Effect of Adjunctive Simvastatin on Depressive Symptoms Among Adults With Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Immune-metabolic disturbances have been implicated in the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder and may be more prominent in individuals with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Preliminary trials suggest that lipid-lowering agents, including statins, may be useful adjunctive treatments for major depressive disorder. However, no adequately powered clinical trials have assessed the antidepressant efficacy of these agents in TRD.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive simvastatin compared with placebo for reduction of depressive symptoms in TRD.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 5 centers in Pakistan. The study involved adults (aged 18-75 years) with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) major depressive episode that had failed to respond to at least 2 adequate trials of antidepressants. Participants were enrolled between March 1, 2019, and February 28, 2021; statistical analysis was performed from February 1 to June 15, 2022, using mixed models.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized to receive standard care plus 20 mg/d of simvastatin or placebo.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the difference between the 2 groups in change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total scores at week 12. Secondary outcomes included changes in scores on the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, the Clinical Global Impression scale, and the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale and change in body mass index from baseline to week 12. C-reactive protein and plasma lipids were measured at baseline and week 12.

RESULTS

A total of 150 participants were randomized to simvastatin (n = 77; median [IQR] age, 40 [30-45] years; 43 [56%] female) or placebo (n = 73; median [IQR] age, 35 [31-41] years; 40 [55%] female). A significant baseline to end point reduction in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score was observed in both groups and did not differ significantly between groups (estimated mean difference for simvastatin vs placebo, -0.61; 95% CI, -3.69 to 2.46; P = .70). Similarly, there were no significant group differences in any of the secondary outcomes or evidence for differences in adverse effects between groups. A planned secondary analysis indicated that changes in plasma C-reactive protein and lipids from baseline to end point did not mediate response to simvastatin.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, simvastatin provided no additional therapeutic benefit for depressive symptoms in TRD compared with standard care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03435744.

Novel and emerging treatments for major depression

Depression is common, costly, debilitating, and associated with increased risk of suicide. It is one of the leading global public health problems. Although existing available pharmacological treatments can be effective, their onset of action can take up to 6 weeks, side-effects are common, and recovery can require treatment with multiple different agents. Although psychosocial interventions might also be recommended, more effective treatments than those currently available are needed for people with moderate or severe depression. In the past 10 years, treatment trials have developed and tested many new targeted interventions. In this Review, we assess novel and emerging biological treatments for major depressive disorder, evaluate their putative brain and body mechanisms, and highlight how close each might be to clinical use.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for rapid cycling bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

Rapid cycling is a common and disabling phenomenon in individuals with bipolar disorders. In the absence of a recent literature examination, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesise the evidence of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of treatments for individuals with rapid cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD).

METHOD

A systematic search was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials assigning participants with RCBD to pharmacological and/or non-pharmacological interventions. Study inclusion and data extraction were undertaken by two reviewers independently. The primary outcome was continuous within-subject RCBD illness severity before and after treatment. Pre-post random effects meta-analyses were conducted for each outcome/intervention arm studied, generating a standardised effect size (hedge's g) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 34 articles describing 30 studies were included. A total of 16 separate pharmacological treatments were examined in contrast to 1 psychological therapy study. Only quetiapine and lamotrigine were assessed in >5 studies. By assessing 95% CI overlap of within-subject efficacy effects compared to placebo, the only interventions suggesting significant depression benefits (placebo g = 0.60) were olanzapine (with/without fluoxetine; g = 1.01), citalopram (g = 1.10) and venlafaxine (g = 2.48). For mania, benefits were indicated for quetiapine (g = 1.01), olanzapine (g = 1.19) and aripiprazole (g = 1.09), versus placebo (g = 0.33). Most of these effect sizes were from only one trial per treatment. Heterogeneity between studies was variable, and 20% were rated to have a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

While many interventions appeared efficacious, there was a lack of robust evidence for most treatments. Given the limited and heterogeneous evidence base, the optimal treatment strategies for people with RCBD are yet to be established.

Optimal dose of brexpiprazole for augmentation therapy of antidepressant-refractory depression: A systematic review and dose-effect meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Brexpiprazole augmentation is an effective treatment strategy for antidepressant-refractory depression, but its optimal dosage remains unclear.

AIMS

To find the optimal dosage of brexpiprazole as augmentation of other antidepressants.

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases (from inception to September 16th, 2021) to identify double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled fixed-dose trials evaluating brexpiprazole augmentation therapy in adults (≥18 years old, both genders) with major depressive disorder not adequately responding to one or more antidepressant treatment. Our outcomes of interest at 8 weeks (range 4-12 weeks) were efficacy (treatment response defined as 50% or greater reduction in depression severity), tolerability (dropouts due to adverse effects) and acceptability (dropouts for any reason). We performed a random-effects, one-stage dose-effect meta-analysis with restricted cubic splines.

RESULTS

Six studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1671 participants in total. The dose-efficacy curve showed an increase up to doses around 2 mg (odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-2.06) and then a decreasing trend through the higher licensed dose up to 3 mg (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.95-2.08). The shape of the dose-tolerability curve was comparable to that of the efficacy and the dose-acceptability curve showed a monotonic increasing trend but both had wide confidence bands.

CONCLUSIONS

One to two milligrams of brexpiprazole as augmentation treatment may achieve an optimal balance between efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability in the acute treatment of antidepressant-refractory depression. However, the small number of included studies limit the reliability of the results. Further research is required to validate the findings.

Optimal dose of aripiprazole for augmentation therapy of antidepressant-refractory depression: preliminary findings based on a systematic review and dose-effect meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Aripiprazole augmentation is proven effective for antidepressant-refractory depression, but its licensed dose range is wide and optimal dosage remains unclear.

AIMS

To find the optimal dosage of aripiprazole augmentation.

METHOD

Multiple electronic databases were searched (from inception to 16 February 2021) to identify all assessor-masked randomised controlled trials evaluating aripiprazole augmentation therapy in adults (≥18 years old, both genders) with major depressive disorder showing inadequate response to at least one antidepressant treatment. A random-effects, one-stage dose-effect meta-analysis with restricted cubic splines was conducted. Outcomes were efficacy (treatment response: ≥50% reduction in depression severity), tolerability (drop-out due to adverse effects) and acceptability (drop-out for any reason) after 8 weeks of treatment (range 4-12 weeks).

RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. All were individually randomised, placebo-controlled, multi-centre, parallel studies including 2625 participants in total. The maximum target dose-efficacy curve showed an increase up to doses between 2 mg (odds ratio OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.15-1.85) and 5 mg (OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.33-2.81), and then a non-increasing trend through the higher licensed doses up to 20 mg (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.52-2.37). Tolerability showed a similar trend with greater uncertainty. Acceptability showed no significant difference through the examined dose range. Certainty of evidence was low to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose aripiprazole as augmentation treatment might achieve the optimal balance between efficacy, tolerability and acceptability in the acute treatment of antidepressant-refractory depression. However, the small number of included studies and the overall moderate to high risk of bias seriously compromise the reliability of the results. Further research is required to investigate the benefits of low versus high dose.

Care pathways for people with major depressive disorder: a European Brain Council Value of Treatment study

Background

Despite well-established guidelines for managing major depressive disorder, its extensive disability burden persists. This Value of Treatment mission from the European Brain Council aimed to elucidate the nature and extent of “gaps” between best-practice and current-practice care, specifically to:Identify current treatment gaps along the care pathway and determine the extent of these gaps in comparison with the stepped-care model and Recommend policies intending to better meet patient needs (i.e., minimize treatment gaps).

Methods

After agreement upon a set of relevant treatment gaps, data pertaining to each gap were gathered and synthesized from several sources across six European countries. Subsequently, a modified Delphi approach was undertaken to attain consensus among an expert panel on proposed recommendations for minimizing treatment gaps.

Results

Four recommendations were made to increase the depression diagnosis rate (from ~50% episodes), aiming to both increase the number of patients seeking help, and the likelihood of a practitioner to correctly detect depression. These should reduce time to treatment (from ~1 to ~8 years after illness onset) and increase rates of treatment; nine further recommendations aimed to increase rates of treatment (from ~25 to ~50% of patients currently treated), mainly focused on targeting the best treatment to each patient. To improve follow-up after treatment initiation (from ~30 to ~65% followed up within 3 months), seven recommendations focused on increasing continuity of care. For those not responding, 10 recommendations focused on ensuring access to more specialist care (currently at rates of ~5–25% of patients).

Conclusions

The treatment gaps in depression care are substantial and concerning, from the proportion of people not entering care pathways to those stagnating in primary care with impairing and persistent illness. A wide range of recommendations can be made to enhance care throughout the pathway.

Efficiently identifying individuals at high risk for treatment resistance in major depressive disorder using electronic health records

BACKGROUND

With the emergence of evidence-based treatments for treatment-resistant depression, strategies to identify individuals at greater risk for treatment resistance early in the course of illness could have clinical utility. We sought to develop and validate a model to predict treatment resistance in major depressive disorder using coded clinical data from the electronic health record.

METHODS

We identified individuals from a large health system with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder receiving an index antidepressant prescription, and used a tree-based machine learning classifier to build a risk stratification model to identify those likely to experience treatment resistance. The resulting model was validated in a second health system.

RESULTS

In the second health system, the extra trees model yielded an AUC of 0.652 (95% CI: 0.623-0.682); with sensitivity constrained at 0.80, specificity was 0.358 (95% CI: 0.300-0.413). Lift in the top quintile was 1.99 (95% CI: 1.76-2.22). Including additional data for the 4 weeks following treatment initiation did not meaningfully improve model performance.

LIMITATIONS

The extent to which these models generalize across additional health systems will require further investigation.

CONCLUSION

Electronic health records facilitated stratification of risk for treatment-resistant depression and demonstrated generalizability to a second health system. Efforts to improve upon such models using additional measures, and to understand their performance in real-world clinical settings, are warranted.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

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

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review does not require ethical approval.

Augmentation strategies for treatment resistant major depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and discontinuation of augmentation agents in adult patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analyses (NMA) to combine direct and indirect comparisons of augmentation agents.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials comparing one active drug with another or with placebo following a treatment course up to 24 weeks. Nineteen agents were included: stimulants, atypical antipsychotics, thyroid hormones, antidepressants, and mood stabilizers. Data for response/remission and all-cause discontinuation rates were analyzed. We estimated effect-size by relative risk using pairwise and NMA with random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 65 studies (N = 12,415) with 19 augmentation agents were included in the NMA. Our findings from the NMA for response rates, compared to placebo, were significant for: liothyronine, nortriptyline, aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, quetiapine, lithium, modafinil, olanzapine (fluoxetine), cariprazine, and lisdexamfetamine. For remission rates, compared to placebo, were significant for: thyroid hormone(T4), aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, risperidone, quetiapine, and olanzapine (fluoxetine). Compared to placebo, ziprasidone, mirtazapine, and cariprazine had statistically significant higher discontinuation rates. Overall, 24% studies were rated as having low risk of bias (RoB), 63% had moderate RoB and 13% had high RoB.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity in TRD definitions, variable trial duration and methodological clinical design of older studies and small number of trials per comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

This NMA suggests a superiority of the regulatory approved adjunctive atypical antipsychotics, thyroid hormones, dopamine compounds (modafinil and lisdexamfetamine) and lithium. Acceptability was lower with ziprasidone, mirtazapine, and cariprazine. Further research and head-to-head studies should be considered to strengthen the best available options for TRD.

Partial agonists of dopamine receptors: mechanisms and clinical effects of aripiprazole, brexpiprazole and cariprazine

Aripiprazole, brexpiprazole and cariprazine are partial dopamine (and serotonin) agonists developed as novel antipsychotics. This article discusses their pharmacology, evidence on their licensed and off-licence uses (including psychosis, mania, bipolar depression, Tourette syndrome and autism spectrum disorder) and side-effects. In schizophrenia, they have a low risk of Parkinsonism or hyperprolactinaemia, cause modest increases in body weight and are of moderate efficacy.

Magnitude of the Placebo Response Across Treatment Modalities Used for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

The placebo effect in depression clinical trials is a substantial factor associated with failure to establish efficacy of novel and repurposed treatments. However, the magnitude of the placebo effect and whether it differs across treatment modalities in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the magnitude of the placebo effect in patients with TRD across different treatment modalities and its possible moderators.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, Web of Science, and PsychInfo from inception to June 21, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they recruited patients with TRD and randomized them to a placebo or sham arm and a pharmacotherapy, brain stimulation, or psychotherapy arm.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Independent reviewers used standard forms for data extraction and quality assessment. Random-effects analyses and standard pairwise meta-analyses were performed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the Hedges g value for the reported depression scales. Secondary outcomes included moderators assessed via meta-regression and response and remission rates. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 test, and publication bias was evaluated using the Egger test and a funnel plot. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to estimate risks.

RESULTS

Fifty RCTs were included involving various types of placebo or sham interventions with a total of 3228 participants (mean [SD] age, 45.8 [6.0] years; 1769 [54.8%] female). The pooled placebo effect size for all modalities was large (g = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.91-1.1); the placebo effect size in RCTs of specific treatment modalities did not significantly differ. Similarly, response and remission rates associated with placebo were comparable across modalities. Heterogeneity was large. Three variables were associated with a larger placebo effect size: open-label prospective treatment before double-blind placebo randomization (β = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.59; P = .004), later year of publication (β = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.003 to 0.05; P = .03), and industry-sponsored trials (β = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.58; P = .007). The number of failed interventions was associated with the probability a smaller placebo effect size (β = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.23 to -0.01, P = .03). The Egger test result was not significant for small studies' effects.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This analysis may provide a benchmark for past and future clinical RCTs that recruit patients with TRD standardizing an expected placebo effect size.

Melancholic features in major depression - a European multicenter study

There is still a debate, if melancholic symptoms can be seen rather as a more severe subtype of major depressive disorder (MDD) or as a separate diagnostic entity. The present European multicenter study comprising altogether 1410 MDD in- and outpatients sought to investigate the influence of the presence of melancholic features in MDD patients. Analyses of covariance, chi-squared tests, and binary logistic regression analyses were accomplished to determine differences in socio-demographic and clinical variables between MDD patients with and without melancholia. We found a prevalence rate of 60.71% for melancholic features in MDD. Compared to non-melancholic MDD patients, they were characterized by a significantly higher likelihood for higher weight, unemployment, psychotic features, suicide risk, inpatient treatment, severe depressive symptoms, receiving add-on medication strategies in general, and adjunctive treatment with antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepine (BZD)/BZD-like drugs, low-potency antipsychotics, and pregabalin in particular. With regard to the antidepressant pharmacotherapy, we found a less frequent prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in melancholic MDD. No significant between-group differences were found for treatment response, non-response, and resistance. In summary, we explored primarily variables to be associated with melancholia which can be regarded as parameters for the presence of severe/difficult-to treat MDD conditions. Even if there is no evidence to realize any specific treatment strategy in melancholic MDD patients, their prescribed medication strategies were different from those for patients without melancholia.

Synthesizing the Evidence for Ketamine and Esketamine in Treatment-Resistant Depression: An International Expert Opinion on the Available Evidence and Implementation

Replicated international studies have underscored the human and societal costs associated with major depressive disorder. Despite the proven efficacy of monoamine-based antidepressants in major depression, the majority of treated individuals fail to achieve full syndromal and functional recovery with the index and subsequent pharmacological treatments. Ketamine and esketamine represent pharmacologically novel treatment avenues for adults with treatment-resistant depression. In addition to providing hope to affected persons, these agents represent the first non-monoaminergic agents with proven rapid-onset efficacy in major depressive disorder. Nevertheless, concerns remain about the safety and tolerability of ketamine and esketamine in mood disorders. Moreover, there is uncertainty about the appropriate position of these agents in treatment algorithms, their comparative effectiveness, and the appropriate setting, infrastructure, and personnel required for their competent and safe implementation. In this article, an international group of mood disorder experts provides a synthesis of the literature with respect to the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ketamine and esketamine in adults with treatment-resistant depression. The authors also provide guidance for the implementation of these agents in clinical practice, with particular attention to practice parameters at point of care. Areas of consensus and future research vistas are discussed.

The use of sequential pharmacotherapy for the treatment of acute major depression: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a chronic, relapsing, and remitting disorder affecting over 250 million persons each year worldwide. More than 50% of the patients do not respond to their initial antidepressant treatment and may benefit from sequential pharmacotherapy for the acute treatment of their MDD. Although guidelines outline options for next-step treatments, there is a paucity of evidence to select specific second- or third-step treatments.

AREAS COVERED

This scoping review synthesizes and discusses available evidence for sequential pharmacotherapy for MDD. MEDLINE was searched from inception to 7 July 2020; 4490 studies were identified. We selected meta-analyses and reports on clinical trials that were judged to inform the sequential selection of pharmacotherapy for MDD.

EXPERT OPINION

Most relevant published trials are focused on, and support, the use of augmentation pharmacotherapy. There is also some support for other strategies such as combining or switching antidepressants. In the future, more studies need to directly compare these sequential options. To provide more personalized treatment within the framework of precision psychiatry, these studies should include an assessment of moderators and mediators ('mechanism') of antidepressant response.

Real-world data analysis of the clinical and economic burden and risk factors in patients with major depressive disorder with an inadequate response to initial antidepressants

AIM

We aimed to determine the incidence of and identify the factors associated with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), psychiatric conditions, hospitalization, and cost in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who were treated using second-line strategies after an inadequate response to initial antidepressants (AD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using South Korean National Health Insurance claims data (1 January 2013 to 30 June 2018), we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis in newly treated patients with MDD who subsequently switched or added AD, or added atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) as a second-line treatment. We assessed the incidence of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), psychiatric conditions, and hospitalization for the first 2 years and costs in the third year. Odds ratios (ORs) or relative ratios were estimated using logistic and linear regression models to identify the risk factors for clinical and economic outcomes.

RESULTS

In 15,887 patients, the TRD was 16.81% during the 24-month follow-up period (14.14% in switching AD, 19.65% in adding AD, and 19.91% in adding AAP; p < 0.0001). When adding AD or AAP, the OR of TRD was 1.43 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30-1.56) and 1.42 (95% CI: 1.23-1.65), respectively, compared to switching AD. However, these factors were not associated with the incidence of psychiatric conditions. Adding AAP increased hospitalization (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.11-1.41), the number of inpatient days by 2.57-fold (95% CI: 1.75-3.76), and cost by 1.20-fold (95% CI: 1.02-1.40), compared to switching AD; adding AD did not show a significant association with these outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with MDD with inadequate responses to initial AD, TRD still occurred after subsequent treatments according to clinical guidelines. Since the effectiveness of second treatment strategies can differ in reality, further analysis of the clinical and economic evidence regarding second treatment strategies, such as adding AD or AAP, is needed using real-world data.

Management of Treatment-Resistant Depression in Real-World Clinical Practice Settings Across Asia

PURPOSE

Consensus is lacking on the management of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), resulting in significant variations on how TRD patients are being managed in real-world practice. A survey explored how clinicians managed TRD across Asia, followed by an expert panel that interpreted the survey results and provided recommendations on how TRD could be managed in real-world clinical settings.

METHODS

Between March and July 2018, 246 clinicians from Hong Kong, Japan, Mainland China, South Korea, and Taiwan completed a survey related to their treatment approaches for TRD.

RESULTS

The survey showed physicians using more polytherapy (71%) compared to maintaining patients on monotherapy (29%). The most commonly (23%) administered polytherapy involved antidepressant augmentation with antipsychotics that 19% of physicians also indicated as their most important approach for managing TRD. The highest number of physicians (34%) ranked switching to another class of antidepressants as their most important approach, while 16% and 9% chose antidepressant combinations and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Taking into account the survey results, the expert panel made general recommendations on the management of TRD. TRD partial-responders to antidepressants should be considered for augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics. For non-responders, switching to another class of antidepressants ought to be considered. TRD patients achieving remission with acute treatment should consider continuing their antidepressants for at least another 6 months to prevent relapse. ECT is a treatment consideration for patients with severe depression or persistent symptoms despite multiple adequate trials of antidepressants. Physicians should also consider the response, tolerability and adherence to the current and previous antidepressants, the severity of symptoms, comorbidities, concomitant medications, preferences, and cost when choosing a TRD treatment approach for each individual patient.