No evidence for switching the antidepressant: systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs of a common therapeutic strategy

Esketamine Treatment for Depression in Adults: A PRISMA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Intranasal esketamine has been approved as an adjunctive therapy for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder with acute suicidal ideation and behavior. The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available data on its efficacy against depression and suicidality as well as its side effects.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched with the keyword "esketamine" on March 24, 2024, using the PRISMA method. Data processing and statistical analysis were performed with R, version 4.3.3, and the meta-analysis was performed with the METAFOR package.

RESULTS

Of 1,115 articles initially identified, 87 were included for analysis and discussion. At weeks 2-4, randomized controlled trials were mostly negative or failed; however, the meta-analysis returned a weak but significant positive effect for depression (effect size range, 0.15-0.23 at weeks 2-4), similar to augmentation strategies with atypical antipsychotics for treatment-resistant depression. The effect size concerning suicidality was not significant at any time point. The sensitivity analysis produced the same results.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings suggest that esketamine's efficacy as an add-on to antidepressants is modest in treatment-resistant depression (similar to augmentation strategies with atypical antipsychotics) and is absent against suicidality itself. These findings need to be considered in light of esketamine's abuse potential and the fact that long-term effects are still not fully known. Some alarming signs concerning deaths and emerging suicidality during the testing phase are discussed, along with other regulatory issues.

Comparative effectiveness research trial for antidepressant incomplete and non-responders with treatment resistant depression (ASCERTAIN-TRD) a randomized clinical trial

Further research is needed to help improve both the standard of care and the outcome for patients with treatment-resistant depression. A particularly critical evidence gap exists with respect to whether pharmacological or non-pharmacological augmentation is superior to antidepressant switch, or vice-versa. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of augmentation with aripiprazole or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation versus switching to the antidepressant venlafaxine XR (or duloxetine for those not eligible to receive venlafaxine) for treatment-resistant depression. In this multi-site, 8-week, randomized, open-label study, 278 subjects (196 females and 82 males, mean age 45.6 years (SD 15.3)) with treatment-resistant depression were assigned in a 1:1:1 fashion to treatment with either of these three interventions; 235 subjects completed the study. 260 randomized subjects with at least one post-baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating (MADRS) assessment were included in the analysis. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (score change (standard error (se)) = -17.39 (1.3) (p = 0.015) but not aripiprazole augmentation (score change (se) = -14.9 (1.1) (p = 0.069) was superior to switch (score change (se) = -13.22 (1.1)) on the MADRS. Aripiprazole (mean change (se) = -37.79 (2.9) (p = 0.003) but not repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation (mean change (se) = -42.96 (3.6) (p = 0.031) was superior to switch (mean change (se) = -34.45 (3.0)) on the symptoms of depression questionnaire. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation was shown to be more effective than switching antidepressants in treatment-resistant depression on the study primary measure. In light of these findings, clinicians should consider repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation augmentation early-on for treatment-resistant depression.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02977299.

Antidepressant Strategies for Treatment of Acute Depressive Episodes Among Veterans

OBJECTIVE

The 2016 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Major Depressive Disorder offers consensus-based recommendations when response to the initial antidepressant medication is suboptimal; however, little is known about "real-world" pharmacological strategies used by providers treating depression in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System (VAHCS).

METHODS

We extracted pharmacy and administrative records of patients diagnosed with a depressive disorder and treated at the Minneapolis VAHCS between January 1, 2010 and May 11, 2021. Patients with bipolar disorder, psychosis-spectrum, or dementia diagnoses were excluded. An algorithm was developed to identify antidepressant strategies: monotherapy (MONO); optimization (OPM); switching (SWT); combination (COM); and augmentation (AUG). Additional data extracted included demographics, service utilization, other psychiatric diagnoses, and clinical risk for hospitalization and mortality.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 1298 patients, 11.3% of whom were female. The mean age of the sample was 51 years. Half of the patients received MONO, with 40% of those patients receiving inadequate doses. OPM was the most common next-step strategy. SWT and COM/AUG were used for 15.9% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. Overall, patients who received COM/AUG were younger. OPM, SWT, and COM/AUG occurred more frequently in psychiatric services settings and required a greater number of outpatient visits. The association between antidepressant strategies and risk of mortality became nonsignificant after accounting for age.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the veterans with acute depression were treated with a single antidepressant, while COM and AUG were rarely used. The age of the patient, and not necessarily greater medical risks, appeared to be a major factor in decisions about antidepressant strategies. Future studies should evaluate whether implementation of underutilized COM and AUG strategies early in the course of depression treatment are feasible.

Potential mechanisms underlying the therapeutic roles of sinisan formula in depression: Based on network pharmacology and molecular docking study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of depression has been increasing globally, which has brought a serious burden to society. Sinisan Formula (SNSF), a well-known formula of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), has been found to demonstrate an antidepressant effect. However, the therapeutic mechanism of this formula remains unclear. Thus, the present study aimed to explore the mechanism of SNSF in depression through network pharmacology combined with molecular docking methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bioactive compounds, potential targets of SNSF, and related genes of depression were obtained from public databases. Essential ingredients, potential targets, and signaling pathways were identified using bioinformatics analysis, including protein-protein interaction (PPI), the Gene Ontology (GO), and the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG). Subsequently, Autodock software was further performed for conducting molecular docking to verify the binding ability of active ingredients to targets.

RESULTS

A total of 91 active compounds were successfully identified in SNSF with the use of the comprehensive network pharmacology approach, and they were found to be closely connected to 112 depression-related targets, among which CREB1, NOS3, CASP3, TP53, ESR1, and SLC6A4 might be the main potential targets for the treatment of depression. GO analysis revealed 801 biological processes, 123 molecular functions, and 67 cellular components. KEGG pathway enrichment analysis indicated that neuroactive ligand-receptor interaction, serotonergic synapse pathways, dopaminergic synapse pathways, and GABAergic synapse pathways might have played a role in treating depression. Molecular docking suggested that beta-sitosterol, nobiletin, and 7-methoxy-2-methyl isoflavone bound well to the main potential targets.

CONCLUSION

This study comprehensively illuminated the active ingredients, potential targets, primary pharmacological effects, and relevant mechanism of the SNSF in the treatment of depression. SNSF might exert its antidepressant effects by regulating the signaling pathway of 5-hydroxytryptamine, dopamine, GABA, and neuroactive ligand receptor interactions. Still, more pharmacological experiments are needed for verification.

A Southeast Asia Consensus on the Definition and Management of Treatment-Resistant Depression

INTRODUCTION

Despite the abundance of literature on treatment-resistant depression (TRD), there is no universally accepted definition of TRD and available treatment pathways for the management of TRD vary across the Southeast Asia (SEA) region, highlighting the need for a uniform definition and treatment principles to optimize the management TRD in SEA.

METHODS

Following a thematic literature review and pre-meeting survey, a SEA expert panel comprising 13 psychiatrists with clinical experience in managing patients with TRD convened and utilized the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to develop consensus-based recommendations on the appropriate definition of TRD and principles for its management.

RESULTS

The expert panel agreed that "pharmacotherapy-resistant depression" (PRD) is a more suitable term for TRD and defined it as "failure of two drug treatments of adequate doses, for 4-8 weeks duration with adequate adherence, during a major depressive episode". A stepwise treatment approach should be employed for the management of PRD - treatment strategies can include maximizing dose, switching to a different class, and augmenting or combining treatments. Non-pharmacological treatments, such as electroconvulsive therapy and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, are also appropriate options for patients with PRD.

CONCLUSION

These consensus recommendations on the operational definition of PRD and treatment principles for its management can be adapted to local contexts in the SEA countries but should not replace clinical judgement. Individual circumstances and benefit-risk balance should be carefully considered while determining the most appropriate treatment option for patients with PRD.

Predictors of sick leave days in patients affected by major depressive disorder receiving antidepressant treatment in general practice setting in Germany

OBJECTIVE

To identify sick leave days (SLD) predictors after starting antidepressant (AD) treatment in patients affected by major depressive disorder (MDD), managed by general practitioners, with a focus on different AD therapeutic approaches.

METHODS

Retrospective study on German IQVIA^® Disease Analyser database. 19-64 year old MDD patients initiating AD treatment between July-2016 and June-2018 were grouped by therapeutic approach (AD monotherapy versus combination/switch/add-on). Data were analysed descriptively by AD therapeutic approach, while a zero-inflated Poisson (ZIP) multiple regression model was run to evaluate SLD predictors.

RESULTS

8,891 patients met inclusion criteria (monotherapy: 66%; combination/switch/add-on: 34%). All covariates had an influence on SLD after AD treatment initiation. Focussing on variables that physicians may more easily intervene to improve outcomes, it was found that the expected SLD number of combination/switch/add-on patients was 1.6 times that of monotherapy patients, and the expected SLD number of patients diagnosed with MDD before the decision to start AD treatment was 1.2 times that of patients not diagnosed with MDD.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient tailored approach in the selection of AD treatment at the time of MDD diagnosis may improve functional recovery and help to reduce the socio-economic burden of the disease.KEY POINTSFew studies previously investigated the effect of antidepressant treatment approaches on sick leave days in major depressive disorder.To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study evaluating the effect of different antidepressant treatment approaches on sick leave days in major depressive disorder in German patients.Patients receiving antidepressant monotherapy treatment seemed to lose fewer working days than patients receiving antidepressants combination/switch/add-on therapy, both before and after starting treatment, even if differences were more pronounced after treatment has started.The use of antidepressant monotherapy or combination/switch/add-on therapy was the strongest predictor of sick leave days after starting antidepressant treatment: the expected number of sick leave days for the combination/switch/add-on group was 1.6 times that of the monotherapy group.Among factors associated with increased sick leave days, antidepressant therapeutic approach and the promptness of starting the antidepressant treatment when major depressive disorder is diagnosed, are those on which physicians may more easily intervene to improve outcomes.Findings from the present study suggest that a patient tailored approach may improve functional recovery and help reducing the socio-economic burden of the disease.

Pharmacotherapy, drug-drug interactions and potentially inappropriate medication in depressive disorders

Introduction

The aim of this study was to describe the number and type of drugs used to treat depressive disorders in inpatient psychiatry and to analyse the determinants of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDI) and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM).

Methods

Our study was part of a larger pharmacovigilance project funded by the German Innovation Funds. It included all inpatients with a main diagnosis in the group of depressive episodes (F32, ICD-10) or recurrent depressive disorders (F33) discharged from eight psychiatric hospitals in Germany between 1 October 2017 and 30 September 2018 or between 1 January and 31 December 2019.

Results

The study included 14,418 inpatient cases. The mean number of drugs per day was 3.7 (psychotropic drugs = 1.7; others = 2.0). Thirty-one percent of cases received at least five drugs simultaneously (polypharmacy). Almost one half of all cases received a combination of multiple antidepressant drugs (24.8%, 95% CI 24.1%–25.5%) or a treatment with antidepressant drugs augmented by antipsychotic drugs (21.9%, 95% CI 21.3%–22.6%). The most frequently used antidepressants were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, followed by serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and tetracyclic antidepressants. In multivariate analyses, cases with recurrent depressive disorders and cases with severe depression were more likely to receive a combination of multiple antidepressant drugs (Odds ratio recurrent depressive disorder: 1.56, 95% CI 1.41–1.70, severe depression 1.33, 95% CI 1.18–1.48). The risk of any pDDI and PIM in elderly patients increased substantially with each additional drug (Odds Ratio: pDDI 1.32, 95% CI: 1.27–1.38, PIM 1.18, 95% CI: 1.14–1.22) and severity of disease (Odds Ratio per point on CGI-Scale: pDDI 1.29, 95% CI: 1.11–1.46, PIM 1.27, 95% CI: 1.11–1.44), respectively.

Conclusion

This study identified potential sources and determinants of safety risks in pharmacotherapy of depressive disorders and provided additional data which were previously unavailable. Most inpatients with depressive disorders receive multiple psychotropic and non-psychotropic drugs and pDDI and PIM are relatively frequent. Patients with a high number of different drugs must be intensively monitored in the management of their individual drug-related risk-benefit profiles.

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program: An Update on Unipolar Nonpsychotic Depression

BACKGROUND

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program presents evidence-based recommendations considering efficacy, tolerability, safety, and cost. Two previous algorithms for unipolar nonpsychotic depression were published in 1993 and 1998. New studies over the last 20 years suggest that another update is needed.

METHODS

The references reviewed for the previous algorithms were reevaluated, and a new literature search was conducted to identify studies that would either support or alter the previous recommendations. Other guidelines and algorithms were consulted. We considered exceptions to the main algorithm, as for pregnant women and patients with anxious distress, mixed features, or common medical and psychiatric comorbidities.

SUMMARY

For inpatients with severe melancholic depression and acute safety concerns, electroconvulsive therapy (or ketamine if ECT refused or ineffective) may be the first-line treatment. In the absence of an urgent indication, we recommend trialing venlafaxine, mirtazapine, or a tricyclic antidepressant. These may be augmented if necessary with lithium or T3 (triiodothyronine). For inpatients with non-melancholic depression and most depressed outpatients, sertraline, escitalopram, and bupropion are reasonable first choices. If no response, the prescriber (in collaboration with the patient) has many choices for the second trial in this algorithm because there is no clear preference based on evidence, and there are many individual patient considerations to take into account. If no response to the second medication trial, the patient is considered to have a medication treatment-resistant depression. If the patient meets criteria for the atypical features specifier, a monoamine oxidase inhibitor could be considered. If not, reconsider (for the third trial) some of the same options suggested for the second trial. Some other choices can also considered at this stage. If the patient has comorbidities such as chronic pain, obsessive-compulsive disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or posttraumatic stress disorder, the depression could be secondary; evidence-based treatments for those disorders would then be recommended.

Pharmacological interventions for treatment-resistant depression in adults

BACKGROUND

Although antidepressants are often a first-line treatment for adults with moderate to severe depression, many people do not respond adequately to medication, and are said to have treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Little evidence exists to inform the most appropriate 'next step' treatment for these people.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of standard pharmacological treatments for adults with TRD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR) (March 2016), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science (31 December 2018), the World Health Organization trials portal and ClinicalTrials.gov for unpublished and ongoing studies, and screened bibliographies of included studies and relevant systematic reviews without date or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with participants aged 18 to 74 years with unipolar depression (based on criteria from DSM-IV-TR or earlier versions, International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10, Feighner criteria or Research Diagnostic Criteria) who had not responded to a minimum of four weeks of antidepressant treatment at a recommended dose. Interventions were: (1) increasing the dose of antidepressant monotherapy; (2) switching to a different antidepressant monotherapy; (3) augmenting treatment with another antidepressant; (4) augmenting treatment with a non-antidepressant. All were compared with continuing antidepressant monotherapy. We excluded studies of non-standard pharmacological treatments (e.g. sex hormones, vitamins, herbal medicines and food supplements).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers used standard Cochrane methods to extract data, assess risk of bias, and resolve disagreements. We analysed continuous outcomes with mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated a relative risk (RR) and 95% CI. Where sufficient data existed, we conducted meta-analyses using random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (2731 participants). Nine were conducted in outpatient settings and one in both in- and outpatients. Mean age of participants ranged from 42 - 50.2 years, and most were female. One study investigated switching to, or augmenting current antidepressant treatment with, another antidepressant (mianserin). Another augmented current antidepressant treatment with the antidepressant mirtazapine. Eight studies augmented current antidepressant treatment with a non-antidepressant (either an anxiolytic (buspirone) or an antipsychotic (cariprazine; olanzapine; quetiapine (3 studies); or ziprasidone (2 studies)). We judged most studies to be at a low or unclear risk of bias. Only one of the included studies was not industry-sponsored. There was no evidence of a difference in depression severity when current treatment was switched to mianserin (MD on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) = -1.8, 95% CI -5.22 to 1.62, low-quality evidence)) compared with continuing on antidepressant monotherapy. Nor was there evidence of a difference in numbers dropping out of treatment (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.94 to 4.59, low-quality evidence; dropouts 38% in the mianserin switch group; 18% in the control). Augmenting current antidepressant treatment with mianserin was associated with an improvement in depression symptoms severity scores from baseline (MD on HAM-D -4.8, 95% CI -8.18 to -1.42; moderate-quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in numbers dropping out (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.72; low-quality evidence; 19% dropouts in the mianserin-augmented group; 38% in the control). When current antidepressant treatment was augmented with mirtazapine, there was little difference in depressive symptoms (MD on Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) -1.7, 95% CI -4.03 to 0.63; high-quality evidence) and no evidence of a difference in dropout numbers (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.62; dropouts 2% in mirtazapine-augmented group; 3% in the control). Augmentation with buspirone provided no evidence of a benefit in terms of a reduction in depressive symptoms (MD on Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) -0.30, 95% CI -9.48 to 8.88; low-quality evidence) or numbers of drop-outs (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.53; low-quality evidence; dropouts 11% in buspirone-augmented group; 19% in the control). Severity of depressive symptoms reduced when current treatment was augmented with cariprazine (MD on MADRS -1.50, 95% CI -2.74 to -0.25; high-quality evidence), olanzapine (MD on HAM-D -7.9, 95% CI -16.76 to 0.96; low-quality evidence; MD on MADRS -12.4, 95% CI -22.44 to -2.36; low-quality evidence), quetiapine (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.18; I2 = 6%, high-quality evidence), or ziprasidone (MD on HAM-D -2.73, 95% CI -4.53 to -0.93; I2 = 0, moderate-quality evidence) compared with continuing on antidepressant monotherapy. However, a greater number of participants dropped out when antidepressant monotherapy was augmented with an antipsychotic (cariprazine RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.41; quetiapine RR 1.57, 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.17; ziprasidone RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.55) compared with antidepressant monotherapy, although estimates for olanzapine augmentation were imprecise (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.69). Dropout rates ranged from 10% to 39% in the groups augmented with an antipsychotic, and from 12% to 23% in the comparison groups. The most common reasons for dropping out were side effects or adverse events. We also summarised data about response and remission rates (based on changes in depressive symptoms) for included studies, along with data on social adjustment and social functioning, quality of life, economic outcomes and adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A small body of evidence shows that augmenting current antidepressant therapy with mianserin or with an antipsychotic (cariprazine, olanzapine, quetiapine or ziprasidone) improves depressive symptoms over the short-term (8 to 12 weeks). However, this evidence is mostly of low or moderate quality due to imprecision of the estimates of effects. Improvements with antipsychotics need to be balanced against the increased likelihood of dropping out of treatment or experiencing an adverse event. Augmentation of current antidepressant therapy with a second antidepressant, mirtazapine, does not produce a clinically important benefit in reduction of depressive symptoms (high-quality evidence). The evidence regarding the effects of augmenting current antidepressant therapy with buspirone or switching current antidepressant treatment to mianserin is currently insufficient. Further trials are needed to increase the certainty of these findings and to examine long-term effects of treatment, as well as the effectiveness of other pharmacological treatment strategies.

Management of depressive symptoms in peri- and postmenopausal women: EMAS position statement

INTRODUCTION

Globally, the total number of people with depression exceeds 300 million, and the incidence rate is 70 % greater in women. The perimenopause is considered to be a time of increased risk for the development of depressive symptoms and major depressive episodes.

AIM

The aim of this position statement is to provide a comprehensive model of care for the management of depressive symptoms in perimenopausal and early menopausal women, including diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. The model integrates the care provided by all those involved in the management of mild or moderate depression in midlife women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature review and consensus of expert opinion.

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS

Awareness of depressive symptoms, early detection, standardized diagnostic procedures, personalized treatment and a suitable follow-up schedule need to be integrated into healthcare systems worldwide. Recommended treatment comprises antidepressants, psychosocial therapies and lifestyle changes. Alternative and complementary therapies, although widely used, may help with depression, but a stronger evidence base is needed. Although not approved for this indication, menopausal hormone therapy may improve depressive symptoms in peri- but not in postmenopausal women, especially in those with vasomotor symptoms.

Effect of antidepressant switching between nortriptyline and escitalopram after a failed first antidepressant treatment among patients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

For patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) experiencing side-effects or non-response to their first antidepressant, little is known regarding the effect of switching between a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) and a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI).AimsTo compare the switch between the TCA nortriptyline and the SSRI escitalopram.

METHOD

Among 811 adults with MDD treated with nortriptyline or escitalopram for up to 12 weeks, 108 individuals switched from nortriptyline to escitalopram or vice versa because of side-effects or non-response (trial registration: EudraCT No.2004-001723-38 (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu/) and ISRCTN No.03693000 (http://www.controlled-trials.com)). Patients were followed for up to 26 weeks after switching and response was measured with the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating scale (MADRS). We performed adjusted mixed-effects linear regression models with full information maximum likelihood estimation reporting β-coefficients with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Switching antidepressants resulted in a significant decrease in MADRS scores. This was present for switchers from escitalopram to nortriptyline (n = 36, β = -0.38, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.25, P<0.001) and from nortriptyline to escitalopram (n = 72, β = -0.34, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.26, P<0.001). Both switching options resulted in significant improvement among individuals who switched because of non-response or side-effects. The results were supported by analyses on other rating scales and symptom dimensions.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that switching from a TCA to an SSRI or vice versa after non-response or side-effects to the first antidepressant may be a viable approach to achieve response among patients with MDD.Declarations of interestK.J.A. holds an Alberta Centennial Addiction and Mental Health Research Chair, funded by the Government of Alberta. K.J.A. has been a member of various advisory boards, received consultancy fees and honoraria, and has received research grants from various companies including Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals Research and Development and Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited. D.S. has served on advisory boards for, and received unrestricted grants from, Lundbeck and AstraZeneca. A.F. and P.M. have received honoraria for participating in expert panels for Lundbeck and GlaxoSmithKline.

Results of the European Group for the Study of Resistant Depression (GSRD) - basis for further research and clinical practice

Objectives: The overview outlines two decades of research from the European Group for the Study of Resistant Depression (GSRD) that fundamentally impacted evidence-based algorithms for diagnostics and psychopharmacotherapy of treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Methods: The GSRD staging model characterising response, non-response and resistance to antidepressant (AD) treatment was applied to 2762 patients in eight European countries. Results: In case of non-response, dose escalation and switching between different AD classes did not show superiority over continuation of original AD treatment. Predictors for TRD were symptom severity, duration of the current major depressive episode (MDE), suicidality, psychotic and melancholic features, comorbid anxiety and personality disorders, add-on treatment, non-response to the first AD, adverse effects, high occupational level, recurrent disease course, previous hospitalisations, positive family history of MDD, early age of onset and novel associations of single nucleoid polymorphisms (SNPs) within the PPP3CC, ST8SIA2, CHL1, GAP43 and ITGB3 genes and gene pathways associated with neuroplasticity, intracellular signalling and chromatin silencing. A prediction model reaching accuracy of above 0.7 highlighted symptom severity, suicidality, comorbid anxiety and lifetime MDEs as the most informative predictors for TRD. Applying machine-learning algorithms, a signature of three SNPs of the BDNF, PPP3CC and HTR2A genes and lacking melancholia predicted treatment response. Conclusions: The GSRD findings offer a unique and balanced perspective on TRD representing foundation for further research elaborating on specific clinical and genetic hypotheses and treatment strategies within appropriate study-designs, especially interaction-based models and randomized controlled trials.

Neuroplasticity and second messenger pathways in antidepressant efficacy: pharmacogenetic results from a prospective trial investigating treatment resistance

Genes belonging to neuroplasticity, monoamine, circadian rhythm, and transcription factor pathways were investigated as modulators of antidepressant efficacy. The present study aimed (1) to replicate previous findings in an independent sample with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), and (2) to perform a pathway analysis to investigate the possible molecular mechanisms involved. 220 patients with major depressive disorder who were non-responders to a previous antidepressant were treated with venlafaxine for 4-6 weeks and in case of non-response with escitalopram for 4-6 weeks. Symptoms were assessed using the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale. The phenotypes were response and remission to venlafaxine, non-response (TRDA) and non-remission (TRDB) to neither venlafaxine nor escitalopram. 50 tag SNPs in 14 genes belonging to the pathways of interest were tested for association with phenotypes. Molecular pathways (KEGG database) that included one or more of the genes associated with the phenotypes were investigated also in the STAR*D sample. The associations between ZNF804A rs7603001 and response, CREB1 rs2254137 and remission were replicated, as well as CHL1 rs2133402 and lower risk of TRD. Other CHL1 SNPs were potential predictors of TRD (rs1516340, rs2272522, rs1516338, rs2133402). The MAPK1 rs6928 SNP was consistently associated with all the phenotypes. The protein processing in endoplasmic reticulum pathway (hsa04141) was the best pathway that may explain the mechanisms of MAPK1 involvement in antidepressant response. Signals in genes previously associated with antidepressant efficacy were confirmed for CREB1, ZNF804A and CHL1. These genes play pivotal roles in synaptic plasticity, neural activity and connectivity.

Guideline adherence of antidepressant treatment in outpatients with major depressive disorder: a naturalistic study

Little is known about guideline adherence of naturalistic antidepressant drug therapy in outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The aim of the study was to analyze guideline adherence, especially regarding treatment length, treatment evaluation and medication change strategies. We investigated 889 patients with MDD who had been admitted for inpatient treatment and were enrolled in the early medication change trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00974155). We investigated all patients at screening visit regarding previous outpatient drug treatment in the index episode, which was assessed by structured interviews. Demographic variables were obtained from patients and patients' records. 51.0% of the patients had received previous drug treatment in the index episode, 56.6% were females, and their mean age was 40.0 years. In the 153 patients who were pharmacologically treated at least 8 weeks, medication was not changed in 129 (84.3%) patients. Patients who had a medication change in their index episode (n = 24, 15.7%) waited 71.1 weeks (±110.4) for their treatment optimization. Only 5 of those 153 patients (3.3%) had a dose increase, whereas 132 patients (86.3%) had no dose adaption at all. Antidepressant blood levels were measured in 46 patients (30.1%). We conclude that a large proportion of patients with MDD is not treated in adherence to treatment guidelines recommending treatment evaluation (e.g. therapeutic drug monitoring) and treatment change after 4 to 8 weeks in non-responders. Earlier treatment optimization may prevent long-term suffering of patients and may avoid inpatient treatment.

Pharmacological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders: summary of WFSBP guidelines

OBJECTIVE

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a severe mood disorder affecting individuals of all ages and is characterised by single or recurrent major depressive episodes. Key elements of acute and maintenance treatment of MDD include pharmacotherapy, and psychological approaches such as psychoeducation and adherence monitoring.

METHODS

This summary of the 'Practice guidelines for the biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders' comprises acute, continuation and maintenance treatment developed by an international Task Force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP), and focuses on pharmacological treatment options.

RESULTS

A variety of different antidepressants are available for the effective acute and prophylactic treatment of depressed patients. Randomised placebo-controlled efficacy studies indicate that all major classes of antidepressants are effective in acute treatment but also in preventing recurrence of depression showing about a two-fold higher relapse rate with placebo treatment. Evidence suggests that the 'newer' antidepressants have superior long-term effectiveness due to better tolerability and safety profile compared to traditional antidepressants, e.g., the tricyclic antidepressants (TCA).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite progress in the availability of different treatment options there is still a substantial proportion of patients who do not achieve full remission. Several add-on pharmacological treatment options are among the best-evidenced strategies for refractory depressed patients.

Management of Depression in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review

Background

Depression is a frequent psychiatric condition in Parkinson's disease (PD). The treatment of depression has been examined in several randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, but no clear guidelines are available.

Methods

We carried out a systematic review of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for depression in patients with PD using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched main medical databases up to December 12, 2016, and included randomized controlled trials, patient-control studies, and case series with data on treatment modality, outcome measures, and side effects.

Results

Selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants may have efficacy for the treatment of depression in patients with PD, although the evidence is not strong. The antidepressant efficacy of dopamine agonists is still controversial, and initial results were positive for pramipexole but not for rotigotine. Cognitive-behavioral therapy showed promising results in two recent randomized controlled trials, but further evidence is required. Studies using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation produced conflicting results, and the efficacy results for this treatment have been inconsistent. On the other hand, electroconclusive therapy produced strong positive results in patients with severe depression, but no randomized controlled trials are available.

Conclusion

Selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitors and cognitive-behavioral therapy are currently first-line treatments for depression in patients with PD, although the evidence is still weak. The heterogeneity among contributory factors for depression in PD should be considered for the most effective treatment of depression in this condition.

Evidence-based pharmacotherapy of treatment-resistant unipolar depression

Treatment resistance to the antidepressive pharmacotherapy represents one of the most important clinical challenges in the pharmacological management of unipolar depression. In this review, we aimed to summarise the evidence for various pharmacological treatment options in therapy-resistant unipolar depression derived from clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and treatment guidelines. The first measure in case of insufficient response to the initial antidepressant monotherapy contains the debarment of 'pseudo-resistance', potentially caused by inadequate dose and treatment duration of the antidepressant, insufficient plasma levels, non-compliance of the patient regarding medication intake or relevant psychiatric and/or somatic comorbidities. Applying a dose escalation of the current antidepressant cannot be generally recommended as evidence-based treatment option and the efficacy depends on the class of antidepressants. There is no compelling evidence for a switch to another, new antidepressant compound after insufficient response to a previous antidepressant. The combination of two antidepressants should be preferentially established with antidepressants characterised by different mechanisms of action (e.g. reuptake inhibitors together with presynaptic autoreceptor inhibitors). At present, the most convincing body of evidence exists for the augmentation of antidepressants with second-generation antipsychotic drugs and lithium. Hence, both strategies are consistently advised by treatment guidelines as pharmacological first-line strategy in treatment-resistant depression.

Pharmacological treatment strategies in unipolar depression in European tertiary psychiatric treatment centers - A pharmacoepidemiological cross-sectional multicenter study

This multicenter, cross-sectional study with retrospective assessment of treatment response evaluated the current prescription trends and pharmacological treatment strategies applied in European university/academic psychiatric centers in unipolar depression. Altogether, 1181 adult in- and outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) were enrolled in 9 academic sites in 8 European countries. Socio-demographic, clinical, and medication information were retrieved and the present symptom severity was assessed by the Montgomery and Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). The symptom improvement during the current MDD episode was covered by retrospective MADRS measurements. Beyond descriptive statistics, analyses of variance (ANOVA) and Spearman correlation analyses were accomplished to determine the influence of symptom severity and treatment response on the prescription patterns. 53.4% of all MDD patients received a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and 23.6% a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) as first-line treatment. The majority of participants (59.4%) were treated with polypharmaceutical strategies (median: 2 psychiatric compounds per patient) and for the number of individual drugs we found a significant correlation with the current MADRS total score and the MADRS total score change during the present depressive episode. Benzodiazepines (33.2% of patients), antidepressants (29.0%), antipsychotics (24.2%), and mood stabilizers (10.1%) were the most frequently prescribed adjunctive agents. There were no significant differences between the different psychopharmacological classes used as augmentors in terms of symptom severity and treatment response. In summary, this international cross-sectional study revealed the widespread use of polypharmaceutical treatment strategies in European tertiary psychiatric treatment centers for the management of MDD.

Are the ICD-10 or DSM-5 diagnostic systems able to define those who will benefit from treatment for depression?

Two widely used diagnostic systems, the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), are reviewed for their ability to define those who will benefit from active treatment rather than placebo. Both systems suffer from a weakness in defining symptoms sufficiently clearly to separate depression from normal mood variations in the general population. Consequently, normal individuals may be medicalized and defined as suffering from and treated for depression. Also, in mild depression, unlike moderate depression, a lack of significant separation of active treatment from placebo has been shown in individual double-blind, placebo-controlled studies and in meta-analyses of these treatment studies. Both systems would be more useful for treatment purposes if they provided a clearer symptomatic definition of moderate depression, as is widely used in pivotal regulatory standard efficacy studies.

Electroconvulsive therapy for depression in Parkinson's disease: systematic review of evidence and recommendations

AIM

We performed a systematic review of evidence regarding treatment of depression in Parkinson's disease (PD) utilizing electroconvulsive therapy.

METHODS

The search led to the inclusion of 43 articles, mainly case reports or case series, with the largest number of patients totaling 19.

RESULTS

The analysis included 116 patients with depression and PD; depression improved in 93.1%. Where motor symptoms' severity was reported, 83% of patients improved. Cognition did not worsen in the majority (94%). Many patients experienced delirium or transient confusion, sometimes necessitating discontinuation of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Little is known about maintenance ECT in this population.

CONCLUSION

ECT can benefit patients suffering from PD and depression. We recommend an algorithm for treatment of depression in PD, utilizing ECT sooner rather than later.

Combining Antidepressants in Acute Treatment of Depression: A Meta-Analysis of 38 Studies Including 4511 Patients

OBJECTIVE

Combining antidepressants (ADs) for therapy of acute depression is frequently employed, but randomized studies have yielded conflicting results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at determining efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched through March 2014 for controlled studies comparing combinations of ADs with AD monotherapy in adult patients suffering from acute depression. The prespecified primary outcome was standardized mean difference (SMD), secondary outcomes were response, remission, and dropouts.

RESULTS

Among 8688 articles screened, 38 studies were eligible, including 4511 patients. Combination treatment was statistically, significantly superior to monotherapy (SMD 0.29; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.42). During monotherapy, slightly fewer patients dropped out due to adverse events (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.53 to 1.53). Studies were heterogeneous (I(2) = 63%), and there was indication of moderate publication bias (fail-safe N for an effect of 0.1:44), but results remained robust across prespecified secondary outcomes and subgroups, including analyses restricted to randomized controlled trials and low risk of bias studies. Meta-regression revealed an association of SMD with difference in imipramine-equivalent dose. Combining a reuptake inhibitor with an antagonist of presynaptic α2-autoreceptors was superior to other combinations.

CONCLUSION

Combining ADs seems to be superior to monotherapy with only slightly more patients dropping out. Combining a reuptake inhibitor with an antagonist of presynaptic α2-autoreceptors seems to be significantly more effective than other combinations. Overall, our search revealed a dearth of well-designed studies.

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance for the management of mood disorders, based on scientific evidence supplemented by expert clinical consensus and formulate recommendations to maximise clinical salience and utility.

METHODS

Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed and EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (MDC) (e.g., books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Information was reviewed and discussed by members of the MDC and findings were then formulated into consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous successive consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, the public, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders.

RESULTS

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders (Mood Disorders CPG) provide up-to-date guidance and advice regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The Mood Disorders CPG is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mood Disorder CPG is the first Clinical Practice Guideline to address both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.

MOOD DISORDERS COMMITTEE

Professor Gin Malhi (Chair), Professor Darryl Bassett, Professor Philip Boyce, Professor Richard Bryant, Professor Paul Fitzgerald, Dr Kristina Fritz, Professor Malcolm Hopwood, Dr Bill Lyndon, Professor Roger Mulder, Professor Greg Murray, Professor Richard Porter and Associate Professor Ajeet Singh.

INTERNATIONAL EXPERT ADVISORS

Professor Carlo Altamura, Dr Francesco Colom, Professor Mark George, Professor Guy Goodwin, Professor Roger McIntyre, Dr Roger Ng, Professor John O'Brien, Professor Harold Sackeim, Professor Jan Scott, Dr Nobuhiro Sugiyama, Professor Eduard Vieta, Professor Lakshmi Yatham.

AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND EXPERT ADVISORS

Professor Marie-Paule Austin, Professor Michael Berk, Dr Yulisha Byrow, Professor Helen Christensen, Dr Nick De Felice, A/Professor Seetal Dodd, A/Professor Megan Galbally, Dr Josh Geffen, Professor Philip Hazell, A/Professor David Horgan, A/Professor Felice Jacka, Professor Gordon Johnson, Professor Anthony Jorm, Dr Jon-Paul Khoo, Professor Jayashri Kulkarni, Dr Cameron Lacey, Dr Noeline Latt, Professor Florence Levy, A/Professor Andrew Lewis, Professor Colleen Loo, Dr Thomas Mayze, Dr Linton Meagher, Professor Philip Mitchell, Professor Daniel O'Connor, Dr Nick O'Connor, Dr Tim Outhred, Dr Mark Rowe, Dr Narelle Shadbolt, Dr Martien Snellen, Professor John Tiller, Dr Bill Watkins, Dr Raymond Wu.

What to expect from a third step in treatment resistant depression: A prospective open study on escitalopram

OBJECTIVES

Only few studies investigated treatment strategies for treatment resistant depression (TRD). The objective of this multicentre study was to evaluate TRD patients who did not respond to at least two antidepressants.

METHODS

A total of 417 patients, who failed to respond to a previous retrospectively assessed antidepressant (AD1), were firstly included in a 6-week venlafaxine treatment (AD2); secondly, those who failed to respond were treated for further 6 weeks with escitalopram (AD3).

RESULTS

Out of 417 patients who had failed to respond to previous treatment (AD1), 334 completed treatment with venlafaxine to prospectively define TRD. In the intent to treat (ITT) population in the first phase of the trial (AD2), responders to venlafaxine were 151 (36.21%) out of which remitters were 83 (19.90%). After phase one, 170 non-responders, defined as TRD, were included in the second phase and 157 completed the course. Of the 170 ITT entering the second phase (AD3), responders to escitalopram were 71 (41.76%) out of which remitters were 39 (22.94%). After the third treatment, patients showed a dropout rate of 7.65% and a rate of presence of at least one serious adverse event of 19.18%.

CONCLUSIONS

Relevant rates of response and remission may be observed after a third line treatment in patients resistant to two previous treatments. A relevant limitation of this study was represented by the design: naturalistic, non-randomized, open-label, without a control sample and with unblinded raters.

Chronic and treatment resistant depression: diagnosis and stepwise therapy

BACKGROUND

The 12-month prevalence of depression in Europe is approximately 7%; depression becomes chronic in 15-25% of sufferers. One-third to one-half do not respond to an initial trial of drug therapy lasting several weeks.

METHODS

Selective literature review, including consideration of the German National Disease Management Guideline Unipolar Depression.

RESULTS

At the end of an initial trial of treatment with an antidepressant drug, usually lasting four weeks, its efficacy should be evaluated systematically. In case of non-response, the following options have been found useful: measurement of the serum drug level, dose escalation (but not for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs]), lithium augmentation, the addition of a second-generation antipsychotic (atypical neuroleptic), and any one of several defined combinations of antidepressants. There is no empirical evidence for switching to another antidepressant. Electroconvulsive therapy is the most effective treatment for refractory depression. Cognitive behavioral therapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, psychoanalysis and psychodynamic psychotherapy have also been found useful. The cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP) was developed specifically for the treatment of chronic depression.

CONCLUSION

The structured application of treatments of documented efficacy, in a stepwise treatment algorithm that gives equal weight to drugs and psychotherapy, is the best way to prevent or overcome treatment resistance and chronification.

Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder: A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, prospective study

No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥ 14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n = 52) or SW (n = 49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of -8.7 (p < 0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p = 0.0086) and remitters (p = 0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60% and 54%, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6% and 19.6%, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.

Anxiolytic and antidepressant like effects of natural food flavour (E)-methyl isoeugenol

(E)-methyl isoeugenol (MIE) is a natural food flavour that constitutes 93.7% of an essential oil from Pimenta pseudocaryophyllus leaf. The leaf extracts of this species are used as a calming agent. As a ubiquitous food additive, the application of MIE for treating mood disorders appears to be globally attractive. Hence, we sought to evaluate general pharmacological activities, anticonvulsant, anxiolytic and antidepressant effects and the possible mechanisms of MIE actions. Administration of MIE was carried out prior to the exposure of a male Swiss mice to general behavioural tests, barbiturate sleep, PTZ-induced convulsion, light dark box (LDB), elevated plus maze (EPM), wire hanging, open field (OF) and forced swimming test (FST). The involvement of monoamine system was studied by mice pretreatment with WAY100635 (antagonist of 5-HT1A), α-methyl-p-tyrosine (AMPT; depletor of catecholamine) or p-chlorophenylalanine (PCPA; depletor of serotonin storage). There was no record of neurotoxic effect or animal's death during the course of general pharmacological tests. MIE at 250 and 500 mg kg(-1) potentiated the hypnotic effect of sodium pentobarbital. However, MIE did not protect against PTZ-induced convulsion. Except for MIE at 500 mg kg(-1), parameters evaluated in the LDB, EPM and OF demonstrated an anxiolytic like property of MIE. This effect was blocked by WAY100635 pretreatment. MIE at 500 mg kg(-1) elicited a reduction in locomotor activity of the mice in the OF. Anti-immobility effect of MIE 250 mg kg(-1) in the FST suggested an antidepressive like property. Unlike AMPT, pretreatment with PCPA reversed the antidepressant like effect of MIE. Our findings demonstrated anxiolytic and antidepressant like properties of (E)-methyl isoeugenol and suggested the participation of serotonergic pathways.

Therapeutic modalities for treatment resistant depression: focus on vagal nerve stimulation and ketamine

Treatment resistant depression (TRD) is a global health concern affecting a large proportion of depressed patients who then require novel therapeutic options. One such treatment option that has received some attention in the past several years is vagal nerve stimulation (VNS). The present review briefly describes the relevance of this treatment in the light of other existing pharmacological and non-pharmacological options. It then summarizes clinical findings with respect to the efficacy of VNS. The anatomical rationale for its efficacy and other potential mechanisms of its antidepressant effects as compared to those employed by classical antidepressant drugs are discussed. VNS has been approved in some countries and has been used for patients with TRD for quite some time. A newer, fast-acting, non-invasive pharmacological option called ketamine is currently in the limelight with reference to TRD. This drug is currently in the investigational phase but shows promise. The clinical and preclinical findings related to ketamine have also been summarized and compared with those for VNS. The role of neurotrophin factors, specifically brain derived neurotrophic factor and its receptor, in the beneficial effects of both VNS and ketamine have been highlighted. It can be concluded that both these therapeutic modalities, while effective, need further research that can reveal specific targets for intervention by novel drugs and address concerns related to side-effects, especially those seen with ketamine.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders, part 1: update 2013 on the acute and continuation treatment of unipolar depressive disorders

OBJECTIVES

This 2013 update of the practice guidelines for the biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders was developed by an international Task Force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP). The goal has been to systematically review all available evidence pertaining to the treatment of unipolar depressive disorders, and to produce a series of practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful based on the available evidence. The guidelines are intended for use by all physicians seeing and treating patients with these conditions.

METHODS

The 2013 update was conducted by a systematic update literature search and appraisal. All recommendations were approved by the Guidelines Task Force.

RESULTS

This first part of the guidelines (Part 1) covers disease definition, classification, epidemiology, and course of unipolar depressive disorders, as well as the management of the acute and continuation phase treatment. It is primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including antidepressants, other psychopharmacological medications, electroconvulsive therapy, light therapy, adjunctive and novel therapeutic strategies) of adults.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there is a variety of evidence-based antidepressant treatment options available. Nevertheless there is still a substantial proportion of patients not achieving full remission. In addition, somatic and psychiatric comorbidities and other special circumstances need to be more thoroughly investigated. Therefore, further high-quality informative randomized controlled trials are urgently needed.

Acute antidepressive efficacy of lithium monotherapy, not citalopram, depends on recurrent course of depression

Studies of the 1970s and 1980s showed lithium monotherapy to be an effective treatment of acute unipolar major depressive disorder (MDD) and hence as a potential alternative to monoaminergic antidepressants.The objective was to conduct the first comparison of a lithium monotherapy with a modern antidepressant in the acute treatment of MDD. Results were compared with citalopram's efficacy as shown in a different but methodologically identical study (including same researchers, same time, and same place).Thirty patients with an acute MDD (Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition [DSM IV] I) were treated with lithium monotherapy (study 1) or with citalopram monotherapy (study 2, N = 32) for 4 weeks.Response rates (decrease in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score >50%) were 50% for lithium and 72% for citalopram (P = 0.12). Citalopram-treated subjects showed a greater decrease in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores (significant at 2 weeks). In the lithium study, only patients with a recurrent episode (DSM-IV: 296.3) responded (15/22), as opposed to none of 8 patients with a first/single episode (DSM-IV: 296.2) (P = 0.002). Patients with a single episode responded significantly more often to citalopram than to lithium (P = 0.007). Both drugs were well tolerated. Only one patient (citalopram) terminated the study prematurely owing to adverse effects.Our results do not support the use of lithium as an alternative to SSRI in the treatment of acute MDD. The finding of a better response to lithium in patients with a recurrent depression has not been reported before and warrants replication. The comparison is limited by the lack of a randomized double-blind design.

Meta-review of depressive subtyping models

BACKGROUND

Increasing dissatisfaction with the non-specificity of major depression has led many to propose more specific depressive subtyping models. The present meta-review seeks to map dominant depressive subtype models, and highlight definitions and overlaps.

METHODS

A database search in Medline and EMBASE of proposed depressive subtypes, and limited to reviews published between 2000 and 2011, was undertaken. Of the more than four thousand reviews, 754 were judged as potentially relevant and provided the base for the present selective meta-review.

RESULTS

Fifteen subtype models were identified. The subtypes could be divided into five molar categories of (1) symptom-based subtypes, such as melancholia, psychotic depression, atypical depression and anxious depression, (2) aetiologically-based subtypes, exemplified by adjustment disorders, early trauma depression, reproductive depression, perinatal depression, organic depression and drug-induced depression, (3) time of onset-based subtypes, as illustrated by early and late onset depression, as well as seasonal affective disorder, (4) gender-based (e.g. female) depression, and (5) treatment resistant depression. An overview considering definition, bio-psycho-social correlates and the evidence base of treatment options for each subtype is provided.

LIMITATIONS

Despite the large data base, this meta-review is nevertheless narrative focused.

CONCLUSIONS

Subtyping depression is a promising attempt to overcome the non-specificity of many diagnostic constructs such as major depression, both in relation to their intrinsic non-specificity and failure to provide treatment-specific information. If a subtyping model is to be advanced it would need, however, to demonstrate differential impacts of causes and treatments.

European Group for the Study of Resistant Depression (GSRD)--where have we gone so far: review of clinical and genetic findings

The primary objective of this review is to give an overview of the main findings of the European multicenter project "Patterns of Treatment Resistance and Switching Strategies in Affective Disorder", performed by the Group for the Study of Resistant Depression (GSRD). The aim was to study methodological issues, operational criteria, clinical characteristics, and genetic variables associated with treatment resistant depression (TRD), that is failure to reach response after at least two consecutive adequate antidepressant trials. The primary findings of clinical variables associated with treatment resistance include comorbid anxiety disorders as well as non-response to the first antidepressant received lifetime. Although there is a plethora of hints in textbooks that switching the mechanism of action should be obtained in case of nonresponse to one medication, the results of the GSRD challenge this notion by demonstrating in retrospective and prospective evaluations that staying on the same antidepressant mechanism of action for a longer time is more beneficial than switching, however, when switching is an option there is no benefit to switch across class. The GSRD candidate gene studies found that metabolism status according to cytochrome P450 gene polymorphisms may not be helpful to predict response and remission rates to antidepressants. Significant associations with MDD and antidepressant treatment response were found for COMT SNPs. Investigating the impact of COMT on suicidal behaviour, we found a significant association with suicide risk in MDD patients not responding to antidepressant treatment, but not in responders. Further significant associations with treatment response phenotypes were found with BDNF, 5HTR2A and CREB1. Additional investigated candidate genes were DTNBP1, 5HT1A, PTGS2, GRIK4 and GNB3.

Major depressive disorder: new clinical, neurobiological, and treatment perspectives

In this Seminar we discuss developments from the past 5 years in the diagnosis, neurobiology, and treatment of major depressive disorder. For diagnosis, psychiatric and medical comorbidity have been emphasised as important factors in improving the appropriate assessment and management of depression. Advances in neurobiology have also increased, and we aim to indicate genetic, molecular, and neuroimaging studies that are relevant for assessment and treatment selection of this disorder. Further studies of depression-specific psychotherapies, the continued application of antidepressants, the development of new treatment compounds, and the status of new somatic treatments are also discussed. We address two treatment-related issues: suicide risk with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and the safety of antidepressants in pregnancy. Although clear advances have been made, no fully satisfactory treatments for major depression are available.

Impact of citalopram on the HPA system. A study of the combined DEX/CRH test in 30 unipolar depressed patients

BACKGROUND

Dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) system is one of the best replicated pathophysiological findings in depression. However, studies on the influence of treatment on the HPA system have partly yielded inconsistent results.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of citalopram monotherapy on the HPA system of mainly drug naïve patients with major depression by means of the combined DEX/CRH test.

METHODS

The DEX/CRH test was conducted twice in 30 patients (25 drug naïve for the index episode) with major depression (single episode or unipolar recurrent; SCID I- and II-confirmed): directly before the start of a citalopram monotherapy (day 0) and four weeks thereafter (day 28).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients responded (≥50% reduction in the HDRS(21)-score), and 17 of them also reached criteria of remission (HDRS ≤ 7). Baseline (dexamethasone-suppressed) and CRH-stimulated ACTH concentrations significantly decreased from day 0 to day 28. CRH-stimulated cortisol concentrations also fell, although not significantly, but baseline cortisol concentrations exhibited a significant increase from day 0 to day 28.

CONCLUSIONS

The blunting of the ACTH response in the DEX/CRH test under citalopram is in line with what has been observed in most studies with antidepressants. However, the partial rise in cortisol concentrations indicates an increase in the sensitivity of the adrenal cortex to ACTH. State-dependent alterations in the volume and the ACTH responsiveness of the adrenal gland have repeatedly been reported in depressed subjects, which indicates the possibility that SSRIs such as citalopram might exhibit a direct or indirect effect on the adrenal cortex.

Therapeutic options in treatment-resistant depression

The phenomenon of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), described as the occurrence of an inadequate response after an adequate treatment with antidepressant agents (in terms of dose, duration, and adherence), is very common in clinical practice. It has been broadly defined in the context of unipolar major depression, but alternative definitions for bipolar depression have also been suggested. In both cases, there is a remarkable lack of consensus amongst professionals concerning its operative definition. A relatively wide variety of treatment options for unipolar TRD are available, whilst the evidence is very scanty for bipolar TRD. TRD is associated to poor clinical, functional, and social outcomes. Several novel therapeutic options are currently being investigated as promising alternatives, targeting the neurotransmitter system outside of the standard monoamine hypothesis. Augmentation or combination with lithium or atypical antipsychotics appears as a valid option for both conditions, and the same occurs with electroconvulsive therapy. Other non-pharmacological strategies such as deep brain stimulation may be promising alternatives for the future. The use of cognitive behaviour therapy is recommended for unipolar TRD, but there is no evidence supporting its use in bipolar TRD.

Switching antidepressant class does not improve response or remission in treatment-resistant depression

OBJECTIVE

The management of treatment-resistant depression is a much debated issue. In particular, the evidence supporting the commonly suggested sequential use of antidepressants from 2 different pharmacological classes is weak. This retrospective study was undertaken to investigate whether there is a better response in nonresponders switched to a different class of antidepressants (across-class) compared with nonresponders switched to an antidepressant from the same class (within-class).

METHODS

Three hundred forty patients with primary major depressive disorder were recruited in the context of a European multicenter project. Subjects whose current depressive episode had failed to respond to a first antidepressant trial of adequate dose and duration were included.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in response or remission rates between the across-class and within-class groups after controlling for possible confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

In depressed nonresponders to a previous antidepressant treatment, switching to a different class of antidepressants was not associated with a better response or remission rate.

Citalopram versus desipramine in treatment resistant depression: effect of continuation or switching strategies: a randomized open study

OBJECTIVES. Evidence in favour of switching between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and tricyclic (TCA) antidepressants in treatment resistant depression has been tested in a few studies only, consequently a prospective study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of switching strategies. METHODS. One hundred eighty-nine patients who failed to respond to a previous antidepressant were randomised to four arms: firstly they received citalopram or desipramine for a 4-week period; secondly, those who failed to respond were treated for a further 4-week period with the same antidepressant (citalopram-citalopram and desipramine-desipramine arms) or switched to the alternate one (citalopram-desipramine and desipramine-citalopram arms). RESULTS. There was no difference in the first 4-week phase between patients receiving citalopram versus desipramine in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scores. In the second 4-week phase remitter rates were higher among non-switched patients (P = 0.04). Moreover, considering HRSD and MADRS, switched patients reported significantly higher scores (P ≤ 0.02 for both scales at each time-point). CONCLUSIONS. This study supports the thesis that switching from an SSRI to a TCA (and vice versa) in non-responders to a 4-week trial of an SSRI/TCA is not associated with improved response. The result goes in the opposite direction to that predicted by current guidelines.

A systematic review of duloxetine and venlafaxine in major depression, including unpublished data

OBJECTIVE

To determine the short-term antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine and venlafaxine vs. each other, placebo, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and tri- and tetracyclic antidepressants (TCAs) in adults with major depression.

METHOD

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials identified through bibliographical databases and other sources, including unpublished manufacturer reports.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies including venlafaxine arms (n = 12,816), 14 including duloxetine arms (n = 4,528), and two direct comparisons (n = 836) were analysed. Twenty-three studies were previously unpublished. In the meta-analysis, both duloxetine and venlafaxine showed superior efficacy (higher remission and response rates) and inferior tolerability (higher discontinuation rates due to adverse events) to placebo. Venlafaxine had superior efficacy in response rates but inferior tolerability to SSRIs (OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.07-1.35 and 1.38, 95% CI 1.15-1.66, respectively), and no differences in efficacy and tolerability to TCAs. Duloxetine did not show any advantages over other antidepressants and was less well tolerated than SSRIs and venlafaxine (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.10-2.13 and OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.16-2.78, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Rather than being a first-line option, venlafaxine appears to be a valid alternative in patients who do not tolerate or respond to SSRIs or TCAs. Duloxetine does not seem to be indicated as a first-line treatment.