A double-blind efficacy and safety study of duloxetine flexible dosing in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder

Effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) on suicide: A network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized trials

The relationship between the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and suicide risk in patients with mental disorders remains controversial. We conducted a network meta-analysis to examine the effects of SSRIs on suicide risk in patients with mental disorders. A comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, Wanfang Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for articles published until December 19, 2023. The main outcomes were suicidal ideation and instances of suicidal behavior. We included 29 double-blind randomized trials in our analysis. The findings suggest that SSRIs primarily offer short-term protection against suicidal ideation. By week 2, paroxetine, fluoxetine, escitalopram, and non-SSRI treatments were linked to a decreased suicide risk compared with a placebo, with the exception of sertraline. This protective effect was diminished by week 8. In contrast, studies on instances of suicidal behavior from weeks 1 to 10 found no significant difference in efficacy between SSRIs, non-SSRIs, and placebo. These results indicate that SSRIs may offer short-term protection against suicidal ideation. However, their long-term effectiveness in mitigating suicidal ideation and preventing suicidal behaviors is limited.

Retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics and treatment of children and adolescents with depression

Objective

To analyze the demographic and clinical characteristics and treatment among children and adolescents with depression in different age groups of onset.

Methods

635 children and adolescents with depression in a hospital from January 2014 to December 2021 were collected by e-case, and grouped according to age of onset, including 115 cases in childhood 8-12, 359 cases in early adolescence 13-1 and 161 cases in late adolescence 16-18, and the general conditions, clinical characteristics, and treatment were compared between the three groups.

Results

Females had more onset and were more likely to have psychotic symptoms in childhood, short duration and hospitalization in early adolescence increased year by year, and males had more onset and less hospitalization in late adolescence. There were no statistical differences in medication regimen, suicide, length of hospitalization, or family history between the three groups.

Conclusion

Children and adolescents with depression have their unique clinical characteristics at different age of onset and need to enhance prevention and individualized treatment.

Factors Related to Placebo Response in Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trials of Antidepressants in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-regression Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for antidepressants in children and adolescents have failed to demonstrate efficacy due to a high placebo response. The aim of this study was to identify the potential factors affecting placebo response using meta-regression analysis of RCTs for antidepressants in children and adolescents using the Children's Depressive Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) as the outcome.

METHODS

PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants for the acute treatment of major depressive disorder in children and adolescents. The outcome used in the present study was the mean change of the CDRS-R total score from baseline to the last assessment for the primary efficacy in the placebo arm. Potential factors related to the placebo response, such as study design, operational, and patient factors, were explored using meta-regression.

RESULTS

The analyses included 23 trials. On multivariable meta-regression, setting up a placebo lead-in period was significantly associated with a smaller placebo response in the CDRS-R.

CONCLUSION

Setting up a placebo lead-in period should be considered in future clinical trials of antidepressants in adolescents and children.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Assessment and Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Major and Persistent Depressive Disorders

OBJECTIVE

To enhance the quality of care and clinical outcomes for children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD) and persistent depressive disorder (PDD). The aims are as follows: (1) to summarize empirically based guidance about the psychosocial and psychopharmacologic treatment of MDD and PDD in children and adolescents; and (2) to summarize expert-based guidance about the assessment of these disorders as an integral part of treatment, and the implementation of empirically based treatments for these disorders in clinical practice.

METHOD

Statements about the treatment of MDD and PDD are based upon empirical evidence derived from a critical systematic review of the scientific literature conducted by the Research Triangle Institute International-University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (RTI-UNC) Evidence-based Practice Center under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Evidence from meta-analyses published since the AHRQ/RTI-UNC review is also presented to support or refute the AHRQ findings. Guidance about the assessment and clinical implementation of treatments for MDD and PDD is informed by expert opinion and consensus as presented in previously published clinical practice guidelines, chapters in leading textbooks of child and adolescent psychiatry, the DSM-5-TR, and government-affiliated prescription drug information websites.

RESULTS

Psychotherapy (specifically, cognitive-behavioral and interpersonal therapies) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) medication have some rigorous (randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses) empirical support as treatment options. Because effective treatment outcomes are predicated in part upon accuracy of the diagnosis, depth of the clinical formulation, and breadth of the treatment plan, comprehensive, evidence-based assessment may enhance evidence-based treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Disproportionate to the magnitude of the problem, there are significant limitations in the quality and quantity of rigorous empirical support for the etiology, assessment, and treatment of depression in children and adolescents. In the context of a protracted severe shortage of child and adolescent-trained behavioral health specialists, the demonstration of convenient, efficient, cost-effective, and user-friendly delivery mechanisms for safe and effective treatment of MDD and PDD is a key research need. Other research priorities include the sequencing and comparative effectiveness of depression treatments, delineation of treatment mediators and moderators, effective approaches to treatment nonresponders and disorder relapse/recurrence, long-term effects and degree of suicide risk with SSRI use, and the discovery of novel pharmacologic or interventional treatments.

Population pharmacokinetics of duloxetine in Japanese pediatric patients with major depressive disorder

The objectives of this analysis were to characterize the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine in Japanese pediatric patients aged 9-17 years with major depressive disorder (MDD) and to explore potential intrinsic factors affecting its pharmacokinetics. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed with plasma steady-state duloxetine concentrations from Japanese pediatric patients with MDD in an open-label long-term extension trial in Japan (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03395353). Duloxetine pharmacokinetics in Japanese pediatric patients was well described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption. The population mean estimates of CL/F and V/F of duloxetine were 81.4 L/h and 1170 L, respectively. Patient intrinsic factors were assessed for their potential influence on duloxetine apparent clearance (CL/F). Only sex was identified as a statistically significant covariate of duloxetine CL/F. Duloxetine pharmacokinetic parameters and model-predicted duloxetine concentrations at steady state in the Japanese pediatric population were compared with those in Japanese adults. The mean duloxetine CL/F in pediatrics is slightly higher than adults, it is, however, expected that comparable steady-state duloxetine exposure in pediatric patients can be achieved with the approved dose regimen for adults. The population PK model provides useful information to understand the pharmacokinetic characteristics of duloxetine for Japanese pediatric patients with MDD. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03395353.

Evidence for machine learning guided early prediction of acute outcomes in the treatment of depressed children and adolescents with antidepressants

BACKGROUND

The treatment of depression in children and adolescents is a substantial public health challenge. This study examined artificial intelligence tools for the prediction of early outcomes in depressed children and adolescents treated with fluoxetine, duloxetine, or placebo.

METHODS

The study samples included training datasets (N = 271) from patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with fluoxetine and testing datasets from patients with MDD treated with duloxetine (N = 255) or placebo (N = 265). Treatment trajectories were generated using probabilistic graphical models (PGMs). Unsupervised machine learning identified specific depressive symptom profiles and related thresholds of improvement during acute treatment.

RESULTS

Variation in six depressive symptoms (difficulty having fun, social withdrawal, excessive fatigue, irritability, low self-esteem, and depressed feelings) assessed with the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised at 4-6 weeks predicted treatment outcomes with fluoxetine at 10-12 weeks with an average accuracy of 73% in the training dataset. The same six symptoms predicted 10-12 week outcomes at 4-6 weeks in (a) duloxetine testing datasets with an average accuracy of 76% and (b) placebo-treated patients with accuracies of 67%. In placebo-treated patients, the accuracies of predicting response and remission were similar to antidepressants. Accuracies for predicting nonresponse to placebo treatment were significantly lower than antidepressants.

CONCLUSIONS

PGMs provided clinically meaningful predictions in samples of depressed children and adolescents treated with fluoxetine or duloxetine. Future work should augment PGMs with biological data for refined predictions to guide the selection of pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment in children and adolescents with depression.

Vortioxetine for Major Depressive Disorder in Adolescents: 12-Week Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Fluoxetine-Referenced, Fixed-Dose Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vortioxetine in adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHOD

After 4 weeks of single-blind lead-in treatment with a Brief Psychosocial Intervention (BPI) plus placebo, patients (aged 12-17 years) with MDD (DSM-5) who did not meet response criteria (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R]; total score ≥40 plus <40% reduction and a Parent Global Assessment score >2) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 8 weeks of BPI plus double-blind treatment with vortioxetine 10 mg, vortioxetine 20 mg, fluoxetine 20 mg, or placebo. The primary endpoint was change from randomization in CDRS-R total score at week 8; the primary comparison was the average effect of 2 vortioxetine doses vs placebo.

RESULTS

Of 784 patients enrolled in the lead-in, 616 were randomized. At week 8, the mean change in CDRS-R total score averaged for vortioxetine doses was -18.01 (SE = 0.98) and the mean difference vs placebo was 0.21 (P = .878; not significant). For fluoxetine, the mean change in CDRS-R total score was -21.95 and the mean difference vs placebo was -3.73 (P = .015). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in ≥5% of patients in either vortioxetine arm and at least twice more frequently than placebo were nausea, headache, vomiting, and dizziness.

CONCLUSION

Patients in all groups showed reduction in CDRS-R scores by the end of the study, with no difference between combined doses of vortioxetine and placebo. The primary endpoint was not met, thereby rendering the study negative. The overall favorable safety profile of vortioxetine in an adolescent patient population was consistent with that seen in adults.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Active Reference (Fluoxetine) Fixed-Dose Study of Vortioxetine in Paediatric Patients Aged 12 to 17 Years With Major Depressive Disorder (MDD); http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02709746.

Efficacy and tolerability of antidepressant drugs in treatment of depression in children and adolescents: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of antidepressants in treatment of depression disorder in children and adolescents by network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CBM, CNKI and Wanfang Data were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) related to antidepressants in treatment of children and adolescents with depression from inception to December 2021. Quality assessment and data extraction from the included RCTs were performed. Statistical analyses of efficacy and tolerability were conducted with Stata 15.1 software. Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCAR) was used to rank the value of the antidepressants.

RESULTS

A total of 33 RCTs were included in 32 articles, involving 6949 patients. There are 13 antidepressants used in total, including amitriptyline, vilazodone, fluoxetine, selegiline, paroxetine, imipramine, desipramine, sertraline, nortriptyline, escitalopram, citalopram, venlafaxine and duloxetine. The results of network meta-analysis showed that the efficacy of duloxetine ( OR=1.95, 95% CI: 1.41-2.69), fluoxetine ( OR=1.73, 95% CI: 1.40-2.14), venlafaxine ( OR=1.37, 95% CI: 1.04-1.80) and escitalopram ( OR=1.48, 95% CI: 1.12-1.95) were significantly higher than that of placebos (all P<0.05); the probability cumulative ranks were duloxetine (87.0%), amitriptyline (83.3%), fluoxetine (79.0%), escitalopram (62.7%), etc. The results showed that the intolerability of patients receiving imipramine ( OR=0.15, 95% CI: 0.08-0.27), sertraline ( OR=0.33, 95% CI: 0.16-0.71), venlafaxine ( OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72), duloxetine ( OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.73) and paroxetine ( OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.30-0.88) were significantly higher than that of placebos (all P<0.05), and the probability cumulative ranks were imipramine (95.7%), sertraline (69.6%), venlafaxine (68.6%), duloxetine (68.2%), etc. Conclusion: Among 13 antidepressants, duloxetine, fluoxetine, escitalopram and venlafaxine are significantly better than placebo in terms of efficacy, but duloxetine and venlafaxine are less well tolerated.

Antidepressants in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder and the influence of placebo response: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are few available antidepressants for pediatric Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review industry-funded studies of antidepressants in children and adolescents with MDD, and to better understand the contribution of study design and placebo response to the findings of these studies.

METHODS

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials that compared antidepressant with placebo for the acute treatment of MDD in children and/or adolescents were selected. Estimates of the standardized mean difference (SMD) in change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised scores were pooled, after examining for heterogeneity. A random-effects meta-analysis was completed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four antidepressant-placebo comparisons, involving 6161 subjects, were included. The SMD among all studies was 0.12 (CI 0.08, 0.17; p < 0.001), a very small effect size, lower than that seen in studies of adults with MDD. When the meta-analysis was limited to studies with a low mean placebo response, the SMD increased to 0.19 and further increased to 0.22 when studies with at least a 50% chance of receiving placebo were included.

LIMITATIONS

Many studies focused on older children and younger adolescents. Our findings may not reflect antidepressant efficacy in older adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

The modest SMD identified in this analysis may reflect study design factors and the application of antidepressants developed for adults to pediatric patients. Given the urgent clinical need for more pediatric MDD treatments, the influence of placebo response and the need for drug development tailored to this population should be considered in pediatric MDD trial design.

Efficacy and Safety of Duloxetine in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder in Japan: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Followed by an Open-Label Long-Term Extension Trial

Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in children and adolescents (9-17 years of age) with major depressive disorder (MDD) in Japan. Methods: This study consists of two clinical trials. First, a 6-week, randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial (RCT) was conducted. The primary endpoint of RCT was the change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total scores from baseline. Following RCT, an open-label long-term extension trial (OLE) was conducted to investigate the longer-term safety of duloxetine for ∼1 year. Results: In RCT, CDRS-R total score changes from baseline to 6 weeks after the start of administration (primary endpoint) were -21.03 in the duloxetine group (n = 74) and -22.42 in the placebo group (n = 74). No significant difference was observed in the primary endpoint between the groups (p = 0.5587). In addition, no significant difference was observed in secondary endpoints such as CDRS-R response rates. The proportion of patients with ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) in RCT was significantly higher in the duloxetine group (78.7%) than in the placebo group (62.2%), and most were mild or moderate in severity. Changes in CDRS-R total scores during OLE, in consecutive patients from the duloxetine group in RCT (n = 63), or placebo group (n = 59) in RCT, and newly enrolled patients (n = 28), were -12.1, -11.3, and -17.8, respectively. The proportion of patients with ≥1 TEAE in OLE was 90.5%, 88.1%, and 89.3% in the respective groups, and most of them were mild or moderate in severity. Conclusions: Duloxetine did not show superiority to placebo in efficacy in children and adolescents with MDD in Japan. Overall reported TEAEs were consistent with the currently available duloxetine safety profile and no new safety finding was observed in the two clinical trials.

Meta-Analysis: Pediatric Placebo Response in Depression Trials Does Not Replicate in Anxiety and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Trials

Background: Placebo response has been identified as an important factor influencing the success of adult antidepressant trials, yet little research of placebo response has been conducted in pediatric populations. Understanding disorder-specific and transdiagnostic predictors of pediatric placebo response is important in designing successful child psychopharmacological trials. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted for all pediatric antidepressant randomized controlled trials treating depression, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). A random-effects model was utilized to examine the magnitude of placebo symptom improvement using standardized mean difference (SMD) and placebo response rates. Stratified subgroup analysis was performed by diagnostic indication. Meta-regression was utilized to search possible correlates of placebo symptom improvement and placebo response rate. Results: Thirty antidepressant trials involving 2911 participants receiving placebo were included in this meta-analysis. Magnitude of placebo improvement and placebo response rates varied significantly across disorders; being greater in depression (SMD = 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18 to 1.71) than anxiety disorders (SMD = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.41) and the lowest in OCD (SMD = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.12). Different predictors were associated with placebo response in different indications. Conclusions: Both the magnitude and predictors of placebo response in pediatric depression trials do not replicate across anxiety and OCD. Based on our results, across disorders, minimizing the number of sites might significantly reduce placebo improvement. In addition to these, we could potentially decrease the placebo response in depression trials by increasing the number of subjects enrolled per study site, minimizing the number of study visits and conducting the studies in the United States. Further research is needed into the predictors of placebo response in pediatric anxiety and OCD.

Fluoxetine in the Management of Major Depressive Disorder in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Fluoxetine is a serotonin-specific reuptake inhibitor antidepressant and is the only approved pharmacological treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescent.

Methods

We searched the published randomized controlled-trials to review fluoxetine efficacy and tolerability using the databases PubMed, EudraCT, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for fluoxetine role in managing MDD in children and adolescents. A meta-analysis was conducted using the identified 7 clinical trials to assess efficacy using the outcomes: Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) response rate. The risk of discontinuation due to adverse effects and common side effects were examined.

Results

The mean difference in change from baseline for CDRS-R was -2.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.96, -1.48) favoring fluoxetine treatment (P < .001). Similarly, mean difference for CGI-S was -0.21 (95% CI, -0.36, -0.06). The risk ratio (RR) of discontinuing due to adverse events was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.54, 1.83), with RR for headache side effects 1.34 (95% CI, 1.03, 1.74) and rash 2.6 (95% CI, 1.32, 5.14).

Conclusion

Fluoxetine demonstrates significant improvements in symptom intensity control in young patients suffering from MDD and is considered well tolerated with similar rates of trials discontinuation; however, fluoxetine was associated with a higher risk of headache and rash side effects. These findings will guide psychiatrists and pharmacists in their clinical role for supporting the care of young mental health patients.

Forks in the road: Definitions of response, remission, recovery, and other dichotomized outcomes in randomized controlled trials for adolescent depression. A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Definitions of dichotomous outcome terms, such as "response," "remission," and "recovery" are central to the design, interpretation, and clinical application of randomized controlled trials of adolescent depression interventions. Accordingly, this scoping review was conducted to document how these terms have been defined and justified in clinical trials.

METHOD

Bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and CINAHL were searched from inception to February 2020 for randomized controlled trials evaluating treatments for adolescent depression. Ninety-eight trials were included for data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

Assessment of outcome measurement instruments, metric strategies, methods of aggregation, and measurement timing, yielded 53 unique outcome definitions of "response" across 45 trials that assessed response, 47 unique definitions of "remission" in 29 trials that assessed remission, and 19 unique definitions of "recovery" across 11 trials that assessed recovery. A minority of trials (N = 35) provided a rationale for dichotomous outcomes definitions, often by citing other studies that used a similar definition (N = 11). No rationale included input from youth or families with lived experience.

CONCLUSION

Our review revealed that definitions of "response," "remission," "recovery," and related terms are highly variable, lack clear rationales, and are not informed by key stakeholder input. These limitations impair pooling of trial results and the incorporation of trial findings into pragmatic treatment decisions in clinical practice. Systematic approaches to establishing outcome definitions are needed to enhance the impact of trials examining adolescent depression treatment.

New generation antidepressants for depression in children and adolescents: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorders have a significant impact on children and adolescents, including on educational and vocational outcomes, interpersonal relationships, and physical and mental health and well-being. There is an association between major depressive disorder and suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide. Antidepressant medication is used in moderate to severe depression; there is now a range of newer generations of these medications.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate, via network meta-analysis (NMA), the comparative effectiveness and safety of different newer generation antidepressants in children and adolescents with a diagnosed major depressive disorder (MDD) in terms of depression, functioning, suicide-related outcomes and other adverse outcomes. The impact of age, treatment duration, baseline severity, and pharmaceutical industry funding was investigated on clinician-rated depression (CDRS-R) and suicide-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR)), together with Ovid Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO till March 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of six to 18 year olds of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed major depressive disorder were included. Trials that compared the effectiveness of newer generation antidepressants with each other or with a placebo were included. Newer generation antidepressants included: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; norepinephrine dopamine reuptake inhibitors; norepinephrine dopamine disinhibitors (NDDIs); and tetracyclic antidepressants (TeCAs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data as Odds Ratios (ORs), and continuous data as Mean Difference (MD) for the following outcomes: depression symptom severity (clinician rated), response or remission of depression symptoms, depression symptom severity (self-rated), functioning, suicide related outcomes and overall adverse outcomes. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted in a frequentist framework using multivariate meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA). We used "informative statements" to standardise the interpretation and description of the results.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. There were no data for the two primary outcomes (depressive disorder established via clinical diagnostic interview and suicide), therefore, the results comprise only secondary outcomes. Most antidepressants may be associated with a "small and unimportant" reduction in depression symptoms on the CDRS-R scale (range 17 to 113) compared with placebo (high certainty evidence: paroxetine: MD -1.43, 95% CI -3.90, 1.04; vilazodone: MD -0.84, 95% CI -3.03, 1.35; desvenlafaxine MD -0.07, 95% CI -3.51, 3.36; moderate certainty evidence: sertraline: MD -3.51, 95% CI -6.99, -0.04; fluoxetine: MD -2.84, 95% CI -4.12, -1.56; escitalopram: MD -2.62, 95% CI -5.29, 0.04; low certainty evidence: duloxetine: MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.03, -0.37; vortioxetine: MD 0.60, 95% CI -2.52, 3.72; very low certainty evidence for comparisons between other antidepressants and placebo). There were "small and unimportant" differences between most antidepressants in reduction of depression symptoms (high- or moderate-certainty evidence). Results were similar across other outcomes of benefit. In most studies risk of self-harm or suicide was an exclusion criterion for the study. Proportions of suicide-related outcomes were low for most included studies and 95% confidence intervals were wide for all comparisons. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of mirtazapine (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.03, 8.04), duloxetine (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.72, 1.82), vilazodone (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.68, 1.48), desvenlafaxine (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59, 1.52), citalopram (OR 1.72, 95% CI 0.76, 3.87) or vortioxetine (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.29, 8.60) on suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo. There is low certainty evidence that escitalopram may "at least slightly" reduce odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.43, 1.84). There is low certainty evidence that fluoxetine (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87, 1.86), paroxetine (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.85, 3.86), sertraline (OR 3.03, 95% CI 0.60, 15.22), and venlafaxine (OR 13.84, 95% CI 1.79, 106.90) may "at least slightly" increase odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo. There is moderate certainty evidence that venlafaxine probably results in an "at least slightly" increased odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with desvenlafaxine (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01, 0.56) and escitalopram (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01, 0.56). There was very low certainty evidence regarding other comparisons between antidepressants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, methodological shortcomings of the randomised trials make it difficult to interpret the findings with regard to the efficacy and safety of newer antidepressant medications. Findings suggest that most newer antidepressants may reduce depression symptoms in a small and unimportant way compared with placebo. Furthermore, there are likely to be small and unimportant differences in the reduction of depression symptoms between the majority of antidepressants. However, our findings reflect the average effects of the antidepressants, and given depression is a heterogeneous condition, some individuals may experience a greater response. Guideline developers and others making recommendations might therefore consider whether a recommendation for the use of newer generation antidepressants is warranted for some individuals in some circumstances. Our findings suggest sertraline, escitalopram, duloxetine, as well as fluoxetine (which is currently the only treatment recommended for first-line prescribing) could be considered as a first option. Children and adolescents considered at risk of suicide were frequently excluded from trials, so that we cannot be confident about the effects of these medications for these individuals. If an antidepressant is being considered for an individual, this should be done in consultation with the child/adolescent and their family/caregivers and it remains critical to ensure close monitoring of treatment effects and suicide-related outcomes (combined suicidal ideation and suicide attempt) in those treated with newer generation antidepressants, given findings that some of these medications may be associated with greater odds of these events. Consideration of psychotherapy, particularly cognitive behavioural therapy, as per guideline recommendations, remains important.

Psychiatric Diseases in Children and Adolescents

Pharmacotherapy of psychiatric illnesses in children and adolescents has grown significantly over the last few decades. However, the body of research examining pharmacological treatments for psychiatric illnesses is much smaller in children and adolescents than it is in adults. As most treatments for psychiatric disorders are more effective if started early in the course of illness, treatment options for youth are especially important in order to ensure better treatment outcomes. This chapter discusses currently approved medications to treat psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents. Research on medications that may be effective treatments but are not yet FDA approved is also discussed. The medications are broken down into major categories used in youth with psychiatric disorders including antidepressants, mood stabilizers, ADHD medications, and antipsychotics.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Vilazodone in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder with Twenty-Six-Week Open-Label Follow-Up

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and long-term safety of vilazodone in children and adolescent outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: Children and adolescents aged 7-17 years of age with MDD were randomized 2:2:1 to 8 weeks of double-blind placebo, vilazodone 15 or 30 mg/day or fluoxetine 20 mg/day, respectively. The primary and secondary efficacy outcomes, respectively, were change from baseline to week 8 in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score total score and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measurement approach. Patients who completed the 8-week randomized controlled trial (RCT), as well as new (de novo) patients, could participate in a 26-week, vilazodone-only, open-label extension (OLE) study. Results: The RCT enrolled 473 patients (60% female) with an average age of 13 years. Change in CDRS-R and CGI-S scores from baseline to week 8 did not differ between patients who received vilazodone and those randomized to placebo. The least-squares mean change from baseline in CDRS-R scores was similar for vilazodone and placebo (-20.7 vs. -20.3, p = 0.77; least-squares mean difference [LSMD] = -0.40). For fluoxetine, the LSMD versus placebo was -2.3 (p = 0.14). The OLE enrolled 330 patients (60% female) with an average age of 13-14 years. Overall, no new safety concerns were identified compared to what is known in adults. Conclusions: Similar improvements in depressive symptoms were observed in all arms. This study does not support the efficacy of vilazodone 15 or 30 mg/day for pediatric patients with MDD. No new or unexpected safety concerns were detected during the RCT or OLE studies.

Primary outcome reporting in adolescent depression clinical trials needs standardization

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based health care is informed by results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their syntheses in meta-analyses. When the trial outcomes measured are not clearly described in trial publications, knowledge synthesis, translation, and decision-making may be impeded. While heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD) RCTs has been described, the comprehensiveness of outcome reporting is unknown. This study aimed to assess the reporting of primary outcomes in RCTs evaluating treatments for adolescent MDD.

METHODS

RCTs evaluating treatment interventions in adolescents with a diagnosis of MDD published between 2008 and 2017 specifying a single primary outcome were eligible for outcome reporting assessment. Outcome reporting assessment was done independently in duplicate using a comprehensive checklist of 58 reporting items. Primary outcome information provided in each RCT publication was scored as "fully reported", "partially reported", or "not reported" for each checklist item, as applicable.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 42 identified articles were found to have a discernable single primary outcome and were included for outcome reporting assessment. Most trials (72%) did not fully report on over half of the 58 checklist items. Items describing masking of outcome assessors, timing and frequency of outcome assessment, and outcome analyses were fully reported in over 70% of trials. Items less frequently reported included outcome measurement instrument properties (ranging from 6 to 17%), justification of timing and frequency of outcome assessment (6%), and justification of criteria used for clinically significant differences (17%). The overall comprehensiveness of reporting appeared stable over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneous reporting exists in published adolescent MDD RCTs, with frequent omissions of key details about their primary outcomes. These omissions may impair interpretability, replicability, and synthesis of RCTs that inform clinical guidelines and decision-making in this field. Consensus on the minimal criteria for outcome reporting in adolescent MDD RCTs is needed.

Duloxetine and cardiovascular adverse events: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Duloxetine has been increasingly administered, but the associated cardiovascular adverse event risk is not clearly understood. Therefore, we identified the association between duloxetine and cardiovascular adverse events through an analysis of heart rate and blood pressure change. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and psycINFO in June 2019. The title, abstract, and full text were checked in order to obtain articles. A meta-analysis was conducted with random effect model and quality of articles was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. The manuscript has been written according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) harm checklist. A total of 4009 studies were screened by the title and abstract. After reviewing 186 full texts, 17 studies were finally selected for the meta-analysis. Nine of the 17 studied duloxetine given for mood disorders and 8 for pain control. The duration of 14 studies was under 13 weeks. Cardiovascular adverse events (hypertension, myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack, tachycardia atrial fibrillation, and cerebrovascular accident) were reported. The meta-analysis demonstrated that duloxetine increased heart rate by 2.22 beats/min (95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 1.53, 2.91) and diastolic blood pressure by 0.82 mmHg (95% CI: 0.17, 1.47). Our findings may be the signal for the safety of cardiovascular disease for short-term use of duloxetine. Well-designed pharmaco-epidemiological studies evaluating the causal relationship between long-term use of duloxetine and cardiovascular disease is still necessary.

Annual Research Review: Defining and treating pediatric treatment-resistant depression

BACKGROUND

Adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD) is a significant health problem, associated with substantial morbidity, cost, and mortality. Depression is a significant risk factor for suicide, which is now the second leading cause of death in young people. Up to twenty per cent of adolescents will experience MDD before adulthood, and while a substantial proportion will improve with standard-of-care treatments (psychotherapy and medication), roughly one third will not.

METHODS

Here, we have reviewed the literature in order to discuss the concept of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adolescence, examine risk factors, diagnostic difficulties, and challenges in evaluating symptom improvement, and providing guidance on how to define adequate medication and psychotherapy treatment trials.

RESULTS

We propose a staging model for adolescent TRD and review the treatment literature. The evidence base for first- and second-line treatments primarily derives from four large pediatric clinical trials (TADS, TORDIA, ADAPT, and IMPACT). After two medications and a trial of evidence-based psychotherapy have failed to alleviate depressive symptoms, the evidence becomes quite thin for subsequent treatments. Here, we review the evidence for the effectiveness of medication switches, medication augmentation, psychotherapy augmentation, and interventional treatments (i.e., transcranial magnetic stimulation, electroconvulsive therapy, and ketamine) for adolescent TRD. Comparisons are drawn to the adult TRD literature, and areas for future pediatric depression research are highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

As evidence is limited for treatments in this population, a careful consideration of the known risks and side effects of escalated treatments (e.g., mood stabilizers and atypical antipsychotics) is warranted and weighed against potential, but often untested, benefits.

Duty to Warn: Antidepressant Black Box Suicidality Warning Is Empirically Justified

The United States Food and Drug Administration issued a Black Box warning in October 2004 after placebo-controlled trials of antidepressant medications found an increased risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors among children and adolescents taking antidepressant medications relative to placebo. Subsequently, some researchers have concluded that the Black Box warning caused severe unintended consequences; specifically, they have argued that the warning led to reduced use of antidepressants among youth, which led to more suicides. In this paper, we critically examine research regarding the Black Box warning's alleged deleterious consequences. One study claimed that controlled trials did not actually find an increased risk of suicidality among youth taking fluoxetine relative to those taking placebo, but its measure of suicidality is likely invalid. We found that ecological time series studies claiming that decreasing antidepressant prescriptions are linked to higher rates of suicide attempts or actual suicides among youth were methodologically weak. These studies exhibited shortcomings including: selective use of time points, use of only a short-term time series, lack of performing statistical analysis, not examining level of severity/impairment among participants, inability to control confounding variables, and/or use of questionable measures of suicide attempts. Further, while some time-series studies claim that increased antidepressant prescriptions are related to fewer youth suicides, more recent data suggests that increasing antidepressant prescriptions are related to more youth suicide attempts and more completed suicides among American children and adolescents. We also note that case-control studies show increased risk of suicide attempts and suicide among youth taking antidepressants, even after controlling for some relevant confounds. As clinical trials have the greatest ability to control relevant confounds, it is important to remember such trials demonstrated increased risk of suicidality adverse events among youth taking antidepressants. The Black Box warning is firmly rooted in solid data whereas attempts to claim the warning has caused harm are based on quite weak evidence.

Placebo response rates and potential modifiers in double-blind randomized controlled trials of second and newer generation antidepressants for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

Children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD) appear to be more responsive to placebo than adults in randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of second and newer generation antidepressants (SNG-AD). Previous meta-analyses obtained conflicting results regarding modifiers. We aimed to conduct a meta-analytical evaluation of placebo response rates based on both clinician-rating and self-rating scales. Based on the most recent and comprehensive study on adult data, we tested whether the placebo response rates in children and adolescents with MDD also increase with study duration and number of study sites. We searched systematically for published RCTs of SNG-AD in children and/or adolescents (last update: September 2017) in public domain electronic databases and additionally for documented studies in clinical trial databases. The log-transformed odds of placebo response were meta-analytically analyzed. The primary and secondary outcomes were placebo response rates at the end of treatment based on clinician-rating and self-rating scales, respectively. To examine the impact of study duration and number of study sites on placebo response rates, we performed simple meta-regression analyses. We selected other potential modifiers of placebo response based on significance in at least one previous pediatric meta-analysis and on theoretical considerations to perform explorative analyses. We applied sensitivity analyses with placebo response rates closest to week 8 to compare our data with those reported for adults. We identified 24 placebo-controlled trials (2229 patients in the placebo arms). The clinician-rated placebo response rates ranged from 22 to 62% with a pooled response rate of 45% (95% CI 41-50%). The number of study sites was a significant modifier in the simple meta-regression analysis [odds ratio (OR) 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02, p = 0.0003, k = 24) with more study sites linked to a higher placebo response. Study duration was not significantly associated with the placebo response rate. The explorative simple analyses revealed that publication year may be an additional modifier. However, in the explorative multivariable analysis including the number of study sites and the publication year only the number of study sites reached a p value ≤ 0.05. The self-rated placebo response rates ranged from 1 to 68% with a pooled response rate of 26% (95% CI 10-54%) (k = 6; n = 396). This meta-analysis confirms a high pooled placebo response rate in children and adolescents based on clinician ratings, which exceeds that observed in the most recent meta-analysis of placebo effects in adults (36%; 95% CI 35-37%) published in 2016. However, and similar to findings in adults, the pooled response rates based on self-ratings were substantially lower. In accordance with previous meta-analyses, we corroborated the number of study sites as significant modifier. In comparison to the recent adult meta-analysis, the substantially lower number of pediatric studies entails a reduced power to detect modifiers. Future studies should provide more precise and homogenous information to support discovery of potential modifiers and consider no-treatment-if ethically permissible-to allow differentiation between placebo and spontaneous remission rates. If these differ, practicing clinicians should facilitate placebo effects as an addition to the verum effect to maximize benefits. Further research is required to explain the discrepant response rates between clinician and self-ratings.

The Impact of Placebo Response Rates on Clinical Trial Outcome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Antidepressants in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder

Objective: The high placebo response rate may hamper the discovery of antidepressants in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). The aim of the study was to clarify the relationship between the placebo response rate and clinical trial outcomes of the use of antidepressants in children and adolescents, and distinguish main factors responsible to placebo response rate. Methods: The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched for double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials of the new-generation antidepressants for the acute treatment of MDD in children and adolescents. The response rate differences (RDs) between placebo group and treatment group under different level of placebo response rate were pooled by random-effects meta-analysis. The classification thresholds for low, medium, and high placebo response rate were set at <40%, 40%-50%, and ≥50%, respectively. Predictors of placebo response rate were explored using meta-regression. Results: The analysis included 18 trials with 4365 participants. This study found that the lower the placebo response rate, the greater the efficacy differences between antidepressants and placebo. In the high, moderate, and low placebo response rate subgroups, the response RDs (95% CI) between antidepressants and placebo were 8 (1-14)%, 10 (2-17)%, and 21 (9-32)%, respectively. The meta-regression showed that the number of study sites was the factor most associated with placebo response rate, and that response rate increased 3% with every additional 10 study sites. Conclusions: The clinical outcome was related to the placebo response rates in the clinical trials of antidepressants in children and adolescents with MDD. The efficacy differences between antidepressants and placebo will be maximized when placebo response rates are reduced. The number of study sites was the factor most associated with the placebo response rates.

Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Desvenlafaxine in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder: Results from Two Open-Label Extension Trials

OBJECTIVE

Two similarly designed extension studies evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). Efficacy was evaluated as a secondary objective.

METHODS

Both 6-month, open-label, flexible-dose extension studies enrolled children and adolescents who had completed one of two double-blind, placebo-controlled, lead-in studies. One lead-in study included a 1-week transition period prior to the extension study. Patients received 26-week treatment with flexible-dose desvenlafaxine (20-50 mg/d). Safety assessments included comprehensive psychiatric evaluations, vital sign assessments, laboratory evaluations, 12-lead electrocardiogram, physical examination with Tanner assessment, and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Adverse events (AEs) were collected throughout the studies. Efficacy was assessed using the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R).

RESULTS

A total of 552 patients enrolled (completion rates: 66.4 and 69.1%). AEs were reported by 79.4 and 79.1% of patients in the two studies; 8.9 and 5.2% discontinued due to AEs. Treatment-emergent suicidal ideation or behavior was reported for 16.6 and 14.1% of patients in the two studies. Mean (SD) CDRS-R total score decreased from 33.83 (11.93) and 30.92 (10.20) at the extension study baseline to 24.31 (7.48) and 24.92 (8.45), respectively, at week 26.

CONCLUSION

Desvenlafaxine 20 to 50 mg/d was generally safe and well tolerated with no new safety signals identified in children and adolescents with MDD who received up to 6 months of treatment in these studies. Patients maintained the reduction in severity of depressive symptoms observed in all treatment groups at the end of the lead-in study.

Assessment tools of immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in children and young people: A scoping review

There are increasing numbers of children presenting to paediatric hospital settings in mental health crisis. Typically, non-mental health professionals are responsible for the initial assessment of these children and are required to identify immediate physical and emotional health needs. To ensure the safety of these children, immediate risk of suicide and self-harm should be assessed. However, no standardized assessment tool is used in clinical practice, and for those tools that are used, their validity and reliability is unclear. A scoping review was conducted to identify the existing assessment tools of immediate self-harm and suicide risk. Searches of electronic databases and relevant reference lists were undertaken. Twenty-two tools were identified and most assessed acute risk of suicide with only four tools incorporating a self-harm assessment. The tools varied in number of items (4-146), subscales (0-11) and total scores (16-192). Half incorporated Likert-type scales, and most were completed via self-report. Many tools were subject to limited psychometric testing, and no single tool was valid or reliable for use with children presenting in mental health crisis to non-mental health settings. As such, a clinically appropriate, valid and reliable tool that assesses immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in paediatric settings should be developed.

Targeting Serotonin Transporters in the Treatment of Juvenile and Adolescent Depression

Depression is a serious public health concern. Many patients are not effectively treated, but in children and adolescents this problem is compounded by limited pharmaceutical options. Currently, the Food and Drug Administration approves only two antidepressants for use in these young populations. Both are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Compounding matters further, they are therapeutically less efficacious in children and adolescents than in adults. Here, we review clinical and preclinical literature describing the antidepressant efficacy of SSRIs in juveniles and adolescents. Since the high-affinity serotonin transporter (SERT) is the primary target of SSRIs, we then synthesize these reports with studies of SERT expression/function during juvenile and adolescent periods. Preclinical literature reveals some striking parallels with clinical studies, primary among them is that, like humans, juvenile and adolescent rodents show reduced antidepressant-like responses to SSRIs. These findings underscore the utility of preclinical assays designed to screen drugs for antidepressant efficacy across ages. There is general agreement that SERT expression/function is lower in juveniles and adolescents than in adults. It is well established that chronic SSRI treatment decreases SERT expression/function in adults, but strikingly, SERT expression/function in adolescents is increased following chronic treatment with SSRIs. Finally, we discuss a putative role for organic cation transporters and/or plasma membrane monoamine transporter in serotonergic homeostasis in juveniles and adolescents. Taken together, fundamental differences in SERT, and putatively in other transporters capable of serotonin clearance, may provide a mechanistic basis for the relative inefficiency of SSRIs to treat pediatric depression, relative to adults.

Short- and Long-Term Antidepressant Clinical Trials for Major Depressive Disorder in Youth: Findings and Concerns

The diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD) in U.S. youth is increasing as is the rate of antidepressant medication (ADM) treatment for the disorder. Fluoxetine and escitalopram are FDA approved for the short term and maintenance treatment of MDD in youth. Placebo-controlled short-term ADM trials represent the basis for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Meta-analyses in 2007 and 2016 revealed that short-term ADM treatment of youth diagnosed with MDD resulted in no meaningful benefit for children and only marginal benefit for adolescents. Placebo substitution trials of ADM short-term responders represent the basis for FDA approval of ADM maintenance treatment. These ADM placebo substitution maintenance trials for youth with MDD are characterized by high dropout rates, a rapid withdrawal that often can follow the switch to placebo, and relapse rates that are not dissimilar from those in the natural course of the disorder. Without the evidence from problematic ADM placebo substitution trials, there is no acceptable support for the inclusion of ADM in maintenance treatment for MDD in youth.

Update on Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials in the Past Decade for Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in Child and Adolescent Patients: A Systematic Review

Objectives: Antidepressant treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) has been a topic of continued interest with a number of placebo randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) being published in the past decade. We review the updated literature since the 2007 Bridge meta-analysis, and reassess safety data looking at signals of treatment-emergent suicidality with the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (CSSR-S). Methods: PubMed literature review was performed searching for RCTs published since the 2007 article and supplemented with manual search. Results: Findings from seven trials (five industry sponsored, one NIMH funded, and one other) were included in this systematic review, which showed high medication and placebo response rates, with only fluoxetine and escitalopram treatment reaching statistical significance. Fluoxetine was also shown to prevent relapse of MDD with continued treatment with an odds ratio of 3.2 for prevention of relapse compared with placebo. There were no increases in treatment-emergent suicidality associated with antidepressant medication in any trial measuring suicidality systematically using the CSSR-S. Conclusions: Depressed pediatric patients respond similarly in these trials to antidepressant intervention and placebo, with recent studies showing that newer agents did not clearly demonstrate benefit above placebo. The evidence continues to support fluoxetine and escitalopram as first-line treatment and demonstrated effect to prevent relapse. Use of newer rating scales reveals similar rates of treatment-emergent suicidality in patients on antidepressants as placebo, in contrast to increased suicide signal suggested by past research using adverse events data. Antidepressant treatment is generally safe and well tolerated in this age group.

Antidepressants in paediatric depression: do not look back in anger but around in awareness

In this paper, we summarise and critique a network meta-analysis (NMA) of antidepressant efficacy and tolerability for paediatric depression and an accompanying editorial. Although we agree that many of the extant studies are flawed, this meta-analysis showed clear efficacy of fluoxetine in the NMA, and for sertraline and escitalopram in pairwise analyses. Consequently, these papers underestimate the benefits of antidepressants for paediatric depression, and provide support for current practice guideline, which recommends the use of an antidepressant if the patient does not respond to psychotherapy. In these circumstances, fluoxetine should be the first choice, with escitalopram and sertraline as alternatives. Declaration of interest D.A.B. receives royalties from Guilford Press, has or will receive royalties from the electronic self-rated version of the C-SSRS from eResearch Technology, Inc., is on the editorial board of UpToDate, and is a reviewer for Healthwise. R.D.G. serves as an expert witness for the US Department of Justice, Pfizer, Wyeth and GSK; and is the founder of Adaptive Testing Technologies. P.W. receives personal fees from Lundbeck and Takeda. B.D. reports a licensing agreement with Lundbeck for a psychosocial treatment manual for depression. No other disclosures were reported.

Desvenlafaxine Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine versus placebo in the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Outpatient children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD and had screening and baseline Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total scores >40 were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of treatment with placebo, low exposure desvenlafaxine (20, 30, or 35 mg/day based on baseline weight), or higher exposure desvenlafaxine (25, 35, or 50 mg/day based on baseline weight). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in CDRS-R total score at week 8, analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. Secondary efficacy assessments included Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scales. Safety assessments included adverse events and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale.

RESULTS

The safety population included 363 patients (children, n = 109; adolescents, n = 254). No statistical separation from placebo was observed for either desvenlafaxine group for CDRS-R total score or for any secondary efficacy endpoint. At week 8, adjusted mean (standard error) changes from baseline in CDRS-R total score for the desvenlafaxine low exposure, desvenlafaxine high exposure, and placebo groups were -23.7 (1.1), -24.4 (1.1), and -22.9 (1.1), respectively. The incidence of adverse events was similar among groups.

CONCLUSION

Low and high exposure desvenlafaxine groups did not demonstrate efficacy for the treatment of MDD in children and adolescents in this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Desvenlafaxine (20-50 mg/day) was generally safe and well tolerated with no new safety signals identified in pediatric patients with MDD in this study.

Desvenlafaxine Versus Placebo in a Fluoxetine-Referenced Study of Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine (25-50 mg/d) compared with placebo in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Outpatient children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD and had screening and baseline Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total scores >40 were randomly assigned to 8-week treatment with placebo, desvenlafaxine (25, 35, or 50 mg/d based on baseline weight), or fluoxetine (20 mg/d). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in CDRS-R total score at week 8, analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. Secondary efficacy endpoints included week 8 Clinical Global Impressions-Severity, Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I), and response (CGI-I ≤ 2). Safety assessments included adverse events, physical and vital sign measurements, laboratory evaluations, electrocardiogram, and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale.

RESULTS

The safety population included 339 patients (children, n = 130; adolescents, n = 209). The primary endpoint, change from baseline in CDRS-R total score at week 8, did not statistically separate from placebo, for either desvenlafaxine (adjusted mean [standard error] change, -22.6 [1.17]) or fluoxetine (-24.8 [1.17]; placebo, -23.1 [1.18]). Week 8 CGI-I response rates were significantly greater for fluoxetine (78.2%; p = 0.017) than for placebo (62.6%); desvenlafaxine (68.7%) did not differ from placebo. Other secondary outcomes were consistent with those obtained with CDRS-R. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable among treatment groups (desvenlafaxine, 60.0%; placebo, 70.5%; and fluoxetine, 64.3%).

CONCLUSION

Desvenlafaxine did not demonstrate efficacy for treating MDD in children and adolescents in this trial. Because neither desvenlafaxine nor the reference medication, fluoxetine, demonstrated a statistically significant difference from placebo on the primary endpoint, this was considered a failed trial and no efficacy conclusions can be drawn. Desvenlafaxine 25-50 mg/d was generally safe and well tolerated in children and adolescents in this study.

A 6-Month Open-Label Extension Study of Vortioxetine in Pediatric Patients with Depressive or Anxiety Disorders

OBJECTIVES

In this 6-month open-label extension (OLE) of NCT01491035 (a 14-day, open-label, pharmacokinetic/safety lead-in study), the long-term safety and tolerability of vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day) were investigated in children and adolescents with a DSM-IV-TR™ diagnosis of depressive or anxiety disorder in the United States or Germany. The study also was designed to provide data to inform dose selection and titration in future pediatric studies with vortioxetine.

METHODS

Safety evaluations included spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs), the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), and the Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale (PAERS; clinician administered). Clinical effectiveness was determined by Clinical Global Impressions. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was permitted, including concomitant use of stimulant medication (US sites only).

RESULTS

Of the 47 patients who completed the lead-in period, 41 continued into the OLE. Most patients (n = 39 [95%]) continued their previous dose regimen. Twenty-one patients (51%) withdrew during the OLE; the most common primary reasons were administrative [n = 8], AEs [n = 4], and lack of efficacy [n = 3]. Thirty-five patients (85%) had ≥1 AE, 86% of which were mild or moderate in severity. Five patients (12%) reported a severe AE, none of which was considered related to study medication. The most common AEs (≥10%) were headache (27%), nausea (20%), dysmenorrhea (females; 19%), and vomiting (15%), with no relationship between AE intensity and age or dose. Five patients reported instances of suicidal ideation during the OLE, one of whom also reported this during the lead-in period. Two patients had nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior; one had a nonfatal suicide attempt. Throughout the study, there was a decrease over time in the incidence and intensity of AEs collected using the PAERS. Effectiveness assessment indicated a trend toward improvement based on numeric results.

CONCLUSION

This OLE confirms the findings from the lead-in study, which concluded that a dosing strategy of 5-20 mg/day is safe, well tolerated, and suitable for future clinical studies of vortioxetine in pediatric patients.

A Phase 3, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of Vilazodone in Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a serious illness in children and adolescents. Vilazodone is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor approved for MDD in adults. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vilazodone in adolescent patients, ages 12-17 years, with MDD (NCT01878292).

METHODS

This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, fixed-dose study was conducted at 56 study centers in the United States and was 10 weeks in duration (a 1-week screening period, an 8-week double-blind treatment period, and a 1-week double-blind down-taper period). Outpatients with an MDD diagnosis based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria were included in the study. Clinical inclusion criteria required a Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total score of ≥ 40 and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score of ≥ 4. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 174), vilazodone 15 mg/day (n = 175), or vilazodone 30 mg/day (n = 180). The primary and secondary efficacy parameters were change from baseline to week 8 in CDRS-R total score and CGI-S score, respectively. Safety parameters included adverse events (AEs); clinical laboratory, vital sign, and electrocardiogram parameters; and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Approximately 86% of patients completed double-blind treatment. There was no statistically significant difference between vilazodone 15 mg/day or 30 mg/day and placebo in change from baseline in CDRS-R score. Change in CGI-S score was not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were nausea, upper abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, nasopharyngitis, headache, and dizziness. Reports of suicidal ideation (placebo, 33.3%; vilazodone 15 mg/day, 36.0%; vilazodone 30 mg/day, 31.1%) and suicidal behavior (placebo, 1.8%; vilazodone 15 mg/day, 1.1%; vilazodone 30 mg/day, 1.1%) were similar between treatment groups. There were no deaths in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of vilazodone for the treatment of MDD in adolescent patients could not be confirmed in this study. Vilazodone was generally safe and well tolerated, with treatment-emergent AEs similar to those in adult patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01878292.

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.

Generalizability of Clinical Trial Results for Adolescent Major Depressive Disorder

BACKGROUND

Although there have been a number of clinical trials evaluating treatments for adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD), the generalizability of those trials to samples of depressed adolescents who present for routine clinical care is unknown. Examining the generalizability of clinical trials of pharmacological and psychotherapy interventions for adolescent depression can help administrators and frontline practitioners determine the relevance of these studies for their patients and may also guide eligibility criteria for future clinical trials in this clinical population.

METHODS

Data on nationally representative adolescents were derived from the National Comorbidity Survey: Adolescent Supplement. To assess the generalizability of adolescent clinical trials for MDD, we applied a standard set of eligibility criteria representative of clinical trials to all adolescents in the National Comorbidity Survey: Adolescent Supplement with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition diagnosis of MDD (N = 592).

RESULTS

From the overall MDD sample, 61.9% would have been excluded from a typical pharmacological trial, whereas 42.2% would have been excluded from a psychotherapy trial. Among those who sought treatment (n = 412), the corresponding exclusion rates were 72.7% for a pharmacological trial and 52.2% for a psychotherapy trial. The criterion leading to the largest number of exclusions was "significant risk of suicide" in both pharmacological and psychotherapy trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacological and, to a lesser extent, psychotherapy clinical trials likely exclude most adolescents with MDD. Careful consideration should be given to balancing eligibility criteria and internal validity with applicability in routine clinical care while ensuring patient safety.

Efficacy and Safety of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Serotonin-Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors, and Placebo for Common Psychiatric Disorders Among Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Depressive disorders (DDs), anxiety disorders (ADs), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are common mental disorders in children and adolescents.

Objective

To examine the relative efficacy and safety of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and placebo for the treatment of DD, AD, OCD, and PTSD in children and adolescents.

Data Sources

PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database from inception through August 7, 2016.

Study Selection

Published and unpublished randomized clinical trials of SSRIs or SNRIs in youths with DD, AD, OCD, or PTSD were included. Trials using other antidepressants (eg, tricyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors) were excluded.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Effect sizes, calculated as standardized mean differences (Hedges g) and risk ratios (RRs) for adverse events, were assessed in a random-effects model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes, as defined by authors on preintervention and postintervention data, mean change data, and adverse event data, were extracted independently by multiple observers following PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Thirty-six trials were eligible, including 6778 participants (3484 [51.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 12.9 [5.1] years); 17 studies for DD, 10 for AD, 8 for OCD, and 1 for PTSD. Analysis showed that SSRIs and SNRIs were significantly more beneficial compared with placebo, yielding a small effect size (g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.25-0.40; P < .001). Anxiety disorder (g = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.40-0.72; P < .001) showed significantly larger between-group effect sizes than DD (g = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13-0.27; P < .001). This difference was driven primarily by the placebo response: patients with DD exhibited significantly larger placebo responses (g = 1.57; 95% CI, 1.36-1.78; P < .001) compared with those with AD (g = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.84-1.21; P < .001). The SSRIs produced a relatively large effect size for ADs (g = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97; P < .001). Compared with participants receiving placebo, patients receiving an antidepressant reported significantly more treatment-emergent adverse events (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.12; P = .01 or RR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.22-1.82; P < .001, depending on the reporting method), severe adverse events (RR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.34-2.32; P < .001), and study discontinuation due to adverse events (RR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.38-2.32; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Compared with placebo, SSRIs and SNRIs are more beneficial than placebo in children and adolescents; however, the benefit is small and disorder specific, yielding a larger drug-placebo difference for AD than for other conditions. Response to placebo is large, especially in DD. Severe adverse events are significantly more common with SSRIs and SNRIs than placebo.

Randomized controlled trials of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor in treating major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis of efficacy and acceptability

New generation antidepressant therapies, including serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRIs), were introduced in the late 1980s; however, few comprehensive studies have compared the benefits and risks of various contemporary treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) in young patients. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO databases was conducted from 1970 to January 2015. Only clinical trials that randomly assigned one SNRI or placebo to patients aged 7 to 18 years who met the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder were included. Treatment success, dropout rate, and suicidal ideation/attempt outcomes were measured. Primary efficacy was determined by pooling the risk ratios (RRs) of treatment response and remission. Acceptability was determined by pooling the RRs of dropouts for all reasons and for adverse effects as well as suicide-risk outcomes. Five trials with a total of 973 patients were included. SNRIs were not significantly more effective than placebo for treatment response but were for remission. The comparison of patients taking SNRIs that dropped out for all reasons and those taking placebo did not reach statistical significance. Significantly more patients taking SNRIs dropped out for adverse effects than those taking placebo. No significant difference was found in suicide-related risk outcomes. SNRI therapy does not display a superior efficacy and is not better tolerated compared to placebo in these young patients. However, duloxetine has a potential beneficial effect for depression in young populations, showing a need for further research.

A meta-analysis of effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on blood pressure in depression treatment: outcomes from placebo and serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) have been commonly prescribed for depression treatment. However, their effects on blood pressure are unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Effects on blood pressure of depressive patients in two groups (SSRIs versus placebo and SSRIs versus SNRIs) were evaluated. A search was conducted for double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, PsycNET, CCRCT, and DARE (up to March 2017). The outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP) changes and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) changes from baseline to endpoint or to a certain period of treatment duration. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% CIs were calculated and pooled using random effects models. The χ² test and I² statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Funnel plots, Begg's test, and Egger's test were used to estimate publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 23 RCTs involving 13,285 participants were included. Patients on SSRIs showed no significant differences in blood pressure changes compared with placebo. In the group of SSRIs versus SNRIs, overall SBP changes and DBP changes revealed statistical significances (WMD 1.5 mmHg, 95% CI -2.15, -0.84, Z=4.46, P<0.00001 and WMD 1.34 mmHg, 95% CI -1.92, -0.75, Z=6.18, P<0.00001). Subgroup analyses on treatment duration and age further evidenced these findings.

CONCLUSION

It was established that SSRIs did not affect blood pressure, while SNRIs led to a modest increase in SBP and DBP with statistical significance compared with SSRIs.

Pharmacokinetics and Tolerability of Single-Ascending Doses of Desvenlafaxine Administered to Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of ascending doses of desvenlafaxine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder. Assessment of the effect of desvenlafaxine on depression symptoms was exploratory.

METHODS

The 8-week, open-label study included an initial 3.5-day inpatient period followed by a 7.5-week outpatient period. Children (7-11 years) received a single desvenlafaxine dose of 10, 25, 50, or 100 mg on day 1; adolescents (12-17 years) received desvenlafaxine 25, 50, 100, or 200 mg/day. Plasma and urine samples were collected over the initial 72-hour inpatient period. Evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), physical examinations (including Tanner Staging), vital signs, laboratory assessments, 12-lead electrocardiogram, Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R).

RESULTS

In all, 29 children and 30 adolescents took at least one dose of desvenlafaxine and were included in the safety population (children: 10 mg, n = 6; 25 mg, n = 7; 50 mg, n = 9; 100 mg, n = 7; adolescents: 25 mg, n = 7; 50 mg, n = 7; 100 mg, n = 8; 200 mg, n = 8). Total area under the drug concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC) appeared to increase linearly with increasing dose. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) AUC ranged from 628 (346) ng/mL (desvenlafaxine 10 mg) to 6732 (3031) ng/mL (100 mg) in children and from 1123 (361) ng/mL (25 mg) to 11,730 (3113) ng/mL (200 mg) in adolescents. During the combined inpatient and outpatient period, 16/29 (55%) children and 21/30 (70%) adolescents reported at least one TEAE. One serious adverse event (suicidal behavior) was reported. Mean (SD) change from baseline in CDRS-R total scores at week 8 was -19.00 (9.87) for children and -21.57 (11.50) for adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

Desvenlafaxine AUC values increased linearly with dose; body weight alone provided an adequate prediction for dose-normalized AUC. Desvenlafaxine was generally safe and well tolerated in children and adolescents for treatment up to 8 weeks.

Pharmacological treatment of children and adolescents with depression

INTRODUCTION

Despite an increasing number of studies, there is debate whether antidepressants have a favorable benefit/risk balance in depressed youth. Areas covered: A systematic search identified 23 systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 2010-2016. More than 30 controlled clinical trials were conducted in adolescents, but only a few in pre-pubertal patients. About one-third of the trials were severely statistically underpowered. Most studies failed to detect differences from placebo, but a few found fluoxetine effective. Although no suicide occurred in these studies, antidepressants increased suicidality risk (including suicidal ideation and behavior) versus placebo (OR = 2.39). Only two placebo-controlled trials with acceptable statistical power were publicly funded: both showed efficacy of fluoxetine, and one found a higher incidence of suicidality (OR = 3.7, 95% C.I. 1.00-13.7). Expert opinion: In youth, antidepressants have, on average, a small therapeutic effect. The high placebo response is exacerbated by the large number of sites in many industry-funded studies. There is evidence that fluoxetine leads to greater and faster improvement than placebo or psychotherapy in adolescents. Considering both the high response to non-specific interventions and safety concerns, antidepressants should be used cautiously in youth, and limited to patients with moderate-to-severe depression for whom psychosocial interventions are either ineffective or not feasible.

Comorbid Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Analysis

BACKGROUND

A large and extensive body of research has examined comorbid anxiety and depression in adults. Children and adolescents also frequently present with comorbid anxiety and depression; however, research and treatment require unique environmental and neurodevelopmental considerations in children. As a result, our understanding of comorbid anxiety and depression in children and adolescents is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this systematic review was to examine the current literature focused on comorbid anxiety and depression in children and adolescents. The review included theoretical conceptualizations as well as diagnostic, neurobiological, prevention, and treatment considerations. In addition, a proposed algorithm for the treatment of comorbid anxiety and depression in children/adolescents is provided.

METHODS

This systematic literature review included 3 discrete searches in Ovid SP Medline, PsycInfo, and PubMed.

RESULTS

The review included and synthesized 115 articles published between 1987 and 2015. The available evidence suggests that anxiety and depression are common in clinical populations of children and adolescents, and that comorbidity is likely underestimated in children and adolescents. Children and adolescents with comorbid anxiety and depression have unique presentations, greater symptom severity, and treatment resistance compared with those who have either disease in isolation. A dimensional approach may be necessary for the future development of diagnostic strategies and treatments for this population. Nascent neuroimaging work suggests that anxiety and depression each represents a distinct neurobiological phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature that is currently available suggests that comorbid anxiety and depression is a common presentation in children and adolescents. This diagnostic picture underscores the importance of comprehensive dimensional assessments and multimodal evidence-based approaches given the high disease severity. Future research on the neurobiology and the treatment of these common clinical conditions is warranted.

Unmet needs in paediatric psychopharmacology: Present scenario and future perspectives

Paediatric psychopharmacology holds great promise in two equally important areas of enormous biomedical and social impact, namely the treatment of behavioural abnormalities in children and adolescents, and the prevention of psychiatric disorders with adolescent- or adult-onset. Yet, in striking contrast, pharmacological treatment options presently available in child and adolescent psychiatry are dramatically limited. The most important currently unmet needs in paediatric psychopharmacology are: the frequent off-label prescription of medications to children and adolescents based exclusively on data from randomized controlled studies involving adult patients; the frequent lack of age-specific dose, long-term efficacy and tolerability/safety data; the lack of effective medications for many paediatric psychiatric disorders, most critically autism spectrum disorder; the scarcity and limitations of randomized placebo-controlled trials in paediatric psychopharmacology; the unexplored potential for the prevention of psychiatric disorders with adolescent- and adult-onset; the current lack of biomarkers to predict treatment response and severe adverse effects; the need for better preclinical data to foster the successful development of novel drug therapies; and the effective dissemination of evidence-based treatments to the general public, to better inform patients and families of the benefits and risks of pharmacological interventions during development. Priorities and strategies are proposed to overcome some of these limitations, including the European Child and Adolescent Clinical Psychopharmacology Network, as an overarching Pan-European infrastructure aimed at reliably carrying out much needed psychopharmacological trials in children and adolescents, in order to fill the identified gaps and improve overall outcomes.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Early Treatment Responses of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Pediatric Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the first-line pharmacological treatment for pediatric major depressive disorder (MDD). We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the following: the time-course of response to SSRIs in pediatric depression; whether higher doses of SSRIs are associated with an improved response in pediatric depression; differences in efficacy between SSRI agents; and whether the time-course and magnitude of response to SSRIs is different in pediatric and adult patients with MDD.

METHOD

We searched PubMed and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials comparing SSRIs to placebo for the treatment of pediatric MDD. We extracted weekly symptom data from trials to characterize the trajectory of pharmacological response to SSRIs. Pooled estimates of treatment effect were calculated based on standardized mean differences between treatment and placebo groups.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 13 pediatric MDD trials with a total of 3,004 patients. A logarithmic model indicating that the greatest benefits of SSRIs occurred early in treatment best fit the longitudinal data (log[week] = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.06-0.15, p < .0001). There were no significant differences based on maximum SSRI dose or between particular SSRI agents. SSRIs were demonstrated to have a smaller benefit in pediatric compared to adult MDD.

CONCLUSION

Treatment gains in pediatric MDD are greatest early in treatment and are, on average, minimal after 4 weeks of SSRI pharmacotherapy in pediatric MDD. Further research is needed using individual patient data to examine the power of early SSRI response (e.g., 2-4 weeks) to predict outcomes in short-term pharmacological trials.

Acute and longer-term safety results from a pooled analysis of duloxetine studies for the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess acute and longer-term safety of duloxetine in the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD), a pooled analysis of data from two completed randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase 3, placebo- and active-controlled trials was undertaken. In these studies, neither duloxetine (investigational drug) nor fluoxetine (active control) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement compared with placebo on the primary efficacy measure.

METHODS

Patients ages 7-17 years with MDD as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) received duloxetine (n=341), fluoxetine (n=234), or placebo (n=225) for 10 week acute and 26 week extended (duloxetine or fluoxetine only) treatments. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, vital signs, electrocardiograms, laboratory samples, and growth (height and weight) assessments.

RESULTS

Significantly more patients discontinued because of adverse events during duloxetine (8.2%) treatment than during placebo (3.1%) treatment (p≤0.05). TEAEs in >10% of duloxetine-treated patients were headache and nausea. No completed suicides or deaths occurred. During acute treatment, 6.6% of duloxetine-, 8.0% of fluoxetine-, and 8.2% of placebo-treated patients had worsening suicidal ideation from baseline. Among patients initially randomized to duloxetine or fluoxetine who had suicidal ideation at study baseline, 81% of duloxetine- and 77% of fluoxetine-treated patients had improvements in suicidal ideation at end-point in the 36-week studies. Suicidal behavior occurred in two fluoxetine-treated patients and one placebo-treated patient during acute treatment, and in seven duloxetine-treated patients and one fluoxetine-treated patient during extended treatment. Duloxetine-treated patients had a mean pulse increase of ∼3 beats per minute, and mean blood pressure (both systolic and diastolic) increases of <2.0 mm Hg at week 36. Weight decrease (≥3.5%) during acute treatment occurred with statistically (p≤0.05) greater frequency for both the duloxetine (11.4%) and fluoxetine (11.5%) groups versus the placebo (5.5%) group; however, mean weight increase occurred for both duloxetine and fluoxetine groups during extended treatment.

CONCLUSION

Results from this pooled analysis of two studies were consistent with the known safety and tolerability profile of duloxetine. Clinical Trial Registry Numbers: NCT00849901 and NCT00849693.

A randomized, placebo-controlled study of duloxetine for the treatment of children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the selective serotonin norepinephrine inhibitor duloxetine in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).

METHOD

Youth aged 7 through 17 years with a primary diagnosis of GAD were treated with flexibly dosed duloxetine (30-120 mg daily, n = 135) or placebo (n = 137) for 10 weeks, followed by open-label duloxetine (30-120mg daily) for 18 weeks. Efficacy measures included the Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-Severity) scale, and Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS). Safety measures included the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) as well as vital signs and electrocardiographic and laboratory monitoring.

RESULTS

On the primary efficacy measure (PARS severity for GAD), mean improvement from baseline to 10 weeks was statistically significantly greater for duloxetine (-9.7) compared with placebo (-7.1, p ≤ .001, Cohen's d: 0.5). Symptomatic response (50% improvement on the PARS severity for GAD), remission (PARS severity for GAD ≤8), and functional remission (CGAS >70) rates for the duloxetine group (59%, 50%, 37%, respectively) were statistically significantly greater than for the placebo group (42%, 34%, 24%, respectively, p ≤ .05) during acute treatment. Changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and discontinuation because of adverse events did not statistically differ between the duloxetine and placebo groups, although gastrointestinal-related adverse events, oropharyngeal pain, dizziness, cough, and palpitations were reported with a statistically significantly greater incidence for the duloxetine group compared with the placebo group. Mean changes in pulse and weight for the duloxetine group (+6.5 beats/min, -0.1 kg, respectively) were statistically different from the placebo group (+2.0 beats/min, +1.1 kg, respectively, p ≤ .01).

CONCLUSION

In this study, duloxetine was superior to placebo on the primary efficacy analysis of mean change from baseline to week 10 on the PARS severity for GAD score, and safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of duloxetine in pediatric and adult patients. Clinical trial registration information-A Study in Pediatric Participants With Generalized Anxiety Disorder; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01226511.

Pharmacokinetics of orally administered duloxetine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Duloxetine, a selective serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine) and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, has been approved since 2004 for the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). It is currently not approved for use in pediatric patients (aged <18 years) with MDD. The clinical development program for duloxetine in the pediatric MDD population, which consisted of three clinical studies, provided extensive data on the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of duloxetine across a wide dose range in pediatric patients of differing ages, sex, body weights, and sexual maturation.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to characterize the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine based on population modeling following daily oral administration in children and adolescents aged 7-17 years diagnosed with MDD; to estimate the magnitude of between- and within-patient variability; to identify potential patient factors affecting duloxetine pharmacokinetics, and to compare duloxetine pharmacokinetics in the pediatric population with those characterized in adults.

METHODS

The analyses meta-dataset was created from pharmacokinetic and demographic data available from one phase II (open-label) and two phase III (randomized, double-blind) clinical trials of duloxetine in children and adolescents. Patients received 20-120 mg of oral duloxetine once daily. Duloxetine concentrations (a total of 1,581 concentrations) were obtained from 428 patients: 34% were children (aged 7-11 years) and 66% were adolescents (aged 12-18 years). Population modeling analyses were performed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling and the first-order conditional estimation method with interaction. Patient factors were assessed for their potential influence on duloxetine apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V d/F). Duloxetine pharmacokinetic parameters and model-predicted duloxetine concentrations at steady state in the pediatric population were compared with those in adults.

RESULTS

Duloxetine pharmacokinetics in pediatric patients was described by a one-compartmental model. Typical values of CL/F, V d/F, and half-life (t 1/2) at 60 mg/day of duloxetine were 79.7 L/h, 1,200 L, and 10.4 h, respectively. The between-patient variability in CL/F and V d/F was 68 and 87%, respectively, while within-patient variability was 57% (proportional error) and 2.04 ng/mL (additive error). Body surface area (BSA), dose, and race had a statistically significant effect on duloxetine pharmacokinetics. With a 2.2-fold increase in BSA, the CL/F increased about twofold. A sixfold increase in dose (20 to 120 mg) decreased CL/F by 32%. In American Indian patients, V d/F was 131% higher than the other races combined. Age, sex, body mass index, serum creatinine, cytochrome P450 2D6 predicted phenotype, and menarche status did not have a statistically significant effect. Estimates of CL/F and V d/F were higher in the pediatric population than in adults; subsequently, the average steady-state duloxetine concentration was approximately 30% lower in the pediatric population than in adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Duloxetine pharmacokinetics was similar in children and adolescents with MDD. The statistically significant effects of dose, BSA, and race on duloxetine pharmacokinetics in pediatric patients did not appear to be clinically meaningful. At a given dose, the typical steady-state duloxetine concentrations in the pediatric population were lower than in adults, and the distribution of steady-state duloxetine concentrations in pediatric patients were typically in the lower range of concentrations in adults.

A double-blind efficacy and safety study of duloxetine fixed doses in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine fixed dose in the treatment of children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Patients (n=463) in this 36 week study (10 week acute and 26 week extension treatment) received duloxetine 60 mg QD (n=108), duloxetine 30 mg QD (n=116), fluoxetine 20 mg QD (n=117, active control), or placebo (n=122). Measures included: Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS).

RESULTS

Neither active drug (duloxetine or fluoxetine) separated significantly (p<0.05) from placebo on mean change from baseline to end-point (10 weeks) on the CDRS-R total score. Total TEAEs and discontinuation for AEs were significantly (p<0.05) higher only for the duloxetine 60 mg group versus the placebo group during acute treatment. No clinically significant electrocardiogram (ECG) or laboratory abnormalities were observed, and no completed suicides or deaths occurred during the study. A total of 7 (6.7%) duloxetine 60 mg, 6 (5.2%) duloxetine 30 mg, 9 (8.0%) fluoxetine, and 11 (9.4%) placebo patients had worsening of suicidal ideation from baseline during acute treatment. Of the patients with suicidal ideation at baseline, 13/16 (81%) duloxetine 60 mg, 16/17 (94%) duloxetine 30 mg, 11/16 (69%) fluoxetine, and 13/15 (87%) placebo had improvement in suicidal ideation at end-point during acute treatment. One fluoxetine, one placebo, and six duloxetine patients had treatment-emergent suicidal behavior during the 36 week study.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial results were inconclusive, as neither the investigational drug (duloxetine) nor the active control (fluoxetine) separated from placebo on the CDRS-R at 10 weeks. No new duloxetine safety signals were identified relative to those seen in adults. Clinical Trial Registry Number ( www.ClinicalTrials.gov ): NCT00849693.