Why Is There No Food and Drug Administration-Approved Medication for Major Depression With Psychotic Features?

Challenges in the Treatment of Psychotic Bipolar Depression

BACKGROUND

Psychotic bipolar depression (PBD) is a prevalent yet understudied psychiatric illness, and there are no specific guidelines or Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for its treatment. Recent studies suggest that some antipsychotics and mood stabilizers may be effective in managing bipolar depression; however, their effectiveness for PBD remains unclear. Given the urgent need for more focused research for managing PBD, we conducted a literature review to summarize the existing literature on PBD.

METHODS

We conducted an electronic literature search from the 1960s to 2023, utilizing PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google, and selected studies based on their relevance to PBD.

FINDINGS

PBD is a complex disorder, with 50%-75% of patients with bipolar disorder exhibiting psychotic features. This likelihood increases among those with a history of psychotic mania. Treatment guidelines often recommend a combination of mood stabilizers, antipsychotics, or electroconvulsive therapy, but they do not specify a first-line treatment. PBD symptoms can be masked by mixed high mood and energy feelings, potentially delaying diagnosis and treatment while increasing suicide risk. Limited research has evaluated outcomes of various treatments for PBD, and despite the lack of evidence for superior efficacy, in clinical practice, antipsychotics are frequently prescribed. Notably, combining an antipsychotic with selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants may be effective, but including a mood stabilizer is necessary.

CONCLUSION

PBD poses a significant challenge in mental health due to its severity and the lack of consensus on optimal treatment approaches. There is a critical need for more dedicated clinical trials and research to answer key questions about the effective treatment of acute PBD, ideal follow-up care, traits of responders to different therapies, and decision models for subsequent treatments.

Esketamine for Unipolar Major Depression With Psychotic Features: A Retrospective Chart Review and Comparison With Nonpsychotic Depression

PURPOSES/BACKGROUND

The aims of the study were to assess subanesthetic esketamine as an antidepressant for major depressive disorder with psychotic features (PMDD) and to compare posttreatment symptoms among those with PMDD to a sample of nonpsychotic depression (major depressive disorder [MDD]).

METHODS/PROCEDURES

This study is a retrospective chart review of patients with major depression and current psychotic symptoms, treated with a single parenteral 0.5-mg/kg dose of esketamine. Depression symptoms were assessed at baseline and 24-hour posttreatment with the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. Individuals with PMDD were matched in a 1:2 ratio to nonpsychotic MDD patients from a randomized, noninferiority clinical trial of esketamine.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

A total of 15 individuals with PMDD were included, which had higher baseline depression scores (PMDD = 40.9, MDD = 33.6, P = 0.004). A statistically significant change in depressive symptoms was found for the PMDD sample (β = -16.20 [95% confidence interval, -23.30 to -9.10], P < 0.001), and no difference between PMDD and MDD groups was observed in the matched-sample analysis (β = -2.2 [95% confidence interval, -9.32 to 4.58], P = 0.537). Treatment-induced dissociative symptoms were present for both groups, self-contained to within 2 hours after treatment, and no exacerbation of psychotic symptoms was found in clinical assessments.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest a single 0.5-mg/kg dose of esketamine may benefit individuals with PMDD, and the symptom reduction may be comparable with esketamine's effects for MDD. Furthermore, esketamine may induce an antidepressant response in those with PMDD without complication of psychotic symptoms. Future research with controlled designs is warranted.

Patterns and Predictors of Off-Label Drug Prescribing in Psychiatric Practice: A Qualitative Study

Off-label drug prescribing (OLDP) must be based on strong scientific evidence to make sure that patients get the optimum therapeutic outcomes. Adherence to the prerequisites is determined by the physicians’ attitude and knowledge. In this context, the present study was conducted with the goal of investigating psychiatrists’ perceptions of the use of OLDP in their clinical practice. A total of 14 psychiatrists were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Thematic content analysis was performed. Data saturation was achieved at the 12th interview. Six major themes and fifteen subthemes emerged from qualitative interviews. Among the major themes were knowledge and concepts about the off-label drugs, attitude and current practice of prescribing off-label drugs, and rationale of prescribing and suggestions for reducing the use of off-label drugs. Almost all of the respondents interviewed provided detailed comments concerning the OLDP concept, depicted an optimistic approach and deemed that OLDP is quite common in psychiatry. Off-label usage of benzodiazepines such as clonazepam, diazepam and lorazepam in mania, depression, and obsessive–compulsive disorder were commonly reported. It was observed that the majority of the respondents did not inform the patients before prescribing off-label drugs. The present findings revealed that respondents had awareness; however, they depicted diverse attitudes towards prescribing off-label drugs. Further education and sensitization in regions with impoverished knowledge would certainly assist in preventing the risks associated with the use of OLDP.