The co-administration of quetiapine or placebo to cognitive-behavior therapy in treatment refractory depression: a preliminary trial

Antipsychotic Monotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Although several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of antipsychotic monotherapy (APM) versus placebo in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), no meta-analysis has examined this topic. We conducted a systematic literature search using MEDLINE and Embase to identify relevant RCTs and performed a meta-analysis to compare the following outcomes between APM and placebo: response and remission rates, study discontinuation due to all causes, lack of efficacy, and adverse events, changes in total scores on depression severity scales, and individual adverse event rates. A total of 13 studies were identified, with 14 comparisons involving 3,197 participants that met the eligibility criteria. There were significant differences between APM and placebo in response and remission rates and changes in the primary depression severity scale in favor of APM, and study discontinuation due to adverse events and several individual adverse events in favor of placebo. No significant difference was observed in discontinuation due to all causes. APM could have antidepressant effects in the acute phase of MDD, although clinicians should be aware of an increased risk of some adverse events.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

LIMITATIONS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Cognitive behavioral therapy for treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a common psychotherapy characterized as treating mental diseases, such as depression. Though multiple studies have reported its effect in treatment-resistant depression, no qualified meta-analysis has ever assessed this effect before. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of CBT for treatment-resistant depression patients and its continuous effect. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to February 2018 for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A total of six RCTs involving 847 participants were included. Pooled analysis indicated that CBT was an efficient invention in reducing depression symptoms. Besides, CBT was also superior to control group in increasing response and remission rates. These effects could take effect at post-treatment, and last for 6 months, or even 1 year long. No publication bias was detected. These findings suggested that compared with routine antidepressant treatment, CBT has greater potential in taking immediate effect and has better mid-term and long-term prognosis.

Psychological therapies for treatment-resistant depression in adults

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are a first-line treatment for adults with moderate to severe major depression. However, many people prescribed antidepressants for depression don't respond fully to such medication, and little evidence is available to inform the most appropriate 'next step' treatment for such patients, who may be referred to as having treatment-resistant depression (TRD). National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance suggests that the 'next step' for those who do not respond to antidepressants may include a change in the dose or type of antidepressant medication, the addition of another medication, or the start of psychotherapy. Different types of psychotherapies may be used for TRD; evidence on these treatments is available but has not been collated to date.Along with the sister review of pharmacological therapies for TRD, this review summarises available evidence for the effectiveness of psychotherapies for adults (18 to 74 years) with TRD with the goal of establishing the best 'next step' for this group.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of psychotherapies for adults with TRD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (until May 2016), along with CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO via OVID (until 16 May 2017). We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify unpublished and ongoing studies. There were no date or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with participants aged 18 to 74 years diagnosed with unipolar depression that had not responded to minimum four weeks of antidepressant treatment at a recommended dose. We excluded studies of drug intolerance. Acceptable diagnoses of unipolar depression were based onthe Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) or earlier versions, International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10, Feighner criteria, or Research Diagnostic Criteria. We included the following comparisons.1. Any psychological therapy versus antidepressant treatment alone, or another psychological therapy.2. Any psychological therapy given in addition to antidepressant medication versus antidepressant treatment alone, or a psychological therapy alone.Primary outcomes required were change in depressive symptoms and number of dropouts from study or treatment (as a measure of acceptability).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data, assessed risk of bias in duplicate, and resolved disagreements through discussion or consultation with a third person. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses when appropriate. We summarised continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs), and dichotomous outcomes using risk ratios (RRs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials (n = 698; most participants were women approximately 40 years of age). All studies evaluated psychotherapy plus usual care (with antidepressants) versus usual care (with antidepressants). Three studies addressed the addition of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) to usual care (n = 522), and one each evaluated intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy (ISTDP) (n = 60), interpersonal therapy (IPT) (n = 34), or group dialectical behavioural therapy (DBT) (n = 19) as the intervention. Most studies were small (except one trial of CBT was large), and all studies were at high risk of detection bias for the main outcome of self-reported depressive symptoms.A random-effects meta-analysis of five trials (n = 575) showed that psychotherapy given in addition to usual care (vs usual care alone) produced improvement in self-reported depressive symptoms (MD -4.07 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.07 to -1.07 on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scale) over the short term (up to six months). Effects were similar when data from all six studies were combined for self-reported depressive symptoms (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.14; n = 635). The quality of this evidence was moderate. Similar moderate-quality evidence of benefit was seen on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Scale (PHQ-9) from two studies (MD -4.66, 95% CI 8.72 to -0.59; n = 482) and on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) from four studies (MD -3.28, 95% CI -5.71 to -0.85; n = 193).High-quality evidence shows no differential dropout (a measure of acceptability) between intervention and comparator groups over the short term (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.24; six studies; n = 698).Moderate-quality evidence for remission from six studies (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.46 to 2.52; n = 635) and low-quality evidence for response from four studies (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.7; n = 556) indicate that psychotherapy was beneficial as an adjunct to usual care over the short term.With the addition of CBT, low-quality evidence suggests lower depression scores on the BDI scale over the medium term (12 months) (RR -3.40, 95% CI -7.21 to 0.40; two studies; n = 475) and over the long term (46 months) (RR -1.90, 95% CI -3.22 to -0.58; one study; n = 248). Moderate-quality evidence for adjunctive CBT suggests no difference in acceptability (dropout) over the medium term (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.47; two studies; n = 549) and lower dropout over long term (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.97; one study; n = 248).Two studies reported serious adverse events (one suicide, two hospitalisations, and two exacerbations of depression) in 4.2% of the total sample, which occurred only in the usual care group (no events in the intervention group).An economic analysis (conducted as part of an included study) from the UK healthcare perspective (National Health Service (NHS)) revealed that adjunctive CBT was cost-effective over nearly four years.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence shows that psychotherapy added to usual care (with antidepressants) is beneficial for depressive symptoms and for response and remission rates over the short term for patients with TRD. Medium- and long-term effects seem similarly beneficial, although most evidence was derived from a single large trial. Psychotherapy added to usual care seems as acceptable as usual care alone.Further evidence is needed on the effectiveness of different types of psychotherapies for patients with TRD. No evidence currently shows whether switching to a psychotherapy is more beneficial for this patient group than continuing an antidepressant medication regimen. Addressing this evidence gap is an important goal for researchers.

Role of glutamate receptors and glial cells in the pathophysiology of treatment-resistant depression

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) causes substantial socioeconomic burden. Although a consensus on the definition of TRD has not yet been reached, it is certain that classic monoaminergic antidepressants are ineffective for TRD. One decade ago, many researchers found ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antagonist, to be an alternative to classic monoaminergic antidepressants. The major mechanisms of action of ketamine rapidly induce synaptogenesis in the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) pathway. Although excessive glutamatergic neurotransmission and consequent excitotoxicity were considered a major cause of TRD, recent evidence suggests that the extrasynaptic glutamatergic receptor signal pathway mainly contributes to the detrimental effects of TRD. Glial cells such as microglia and astrocytes, early life adversity, and glucocorticoid receptor dysfunction participate in complex cross-talk. An appropriate reuptake of glutamate at the astrocyte is crucial for preventing 'spill-over' of synaptic glutamate and binding to the extrasynaptic NMDA receptor. Excessive microglial activation and the inflammatory process cause astrocyte glutamatergic dysfunction, which in turn activates microglial function. Early life adversity and glucocorticoid receptor dysfunction result in vulnerability to stress in adulthood. A maladaptive response to stress leads to increased glutamatergic release and pro-inflammatory cytokines, which then activate microglia. However, since the role of inflammatory mediators such as pro-inflammatory cytokines is not specific for depression, more disease-specific mechanisms should be identified. Last, although much research has focused on ketamine as an alternative antidepressant for TRD, its long-lasting effectiveness and adverse events have not been rigorously demonstrated. Additionally, evidence suggests that substantial brain abnormalities develop in ketamine abusers. Thus, more investigations for ketamine and other novel glutamatergic agents are needed.

Second Generation Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: An Update

Less than one third of patients who suffer from major depressive disorder (MDD) report remission following antidepressant treatments requiring more diverse treatment approaches. Augmentation of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) has been increasingly recognized as an important treatment option. The authors have previously provided a comprehensive review of SGAs for the treatment of MDD in 2013. Since then, numerous additional clinical trials have been conducted to investigate diverse issues regarding the utility of SGAs in MDD. Moreover, a new SGA, brexpiprazole, was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration in July 2015 for the treatment of MDD as an augmentation agent to antidepressants. Thus, the aim of this study was to provide a concise update of all the available SGAs for the treatment of MDD, in particular on the additional clinical trials which have been published since 2013.

Role of quetiapine beyond its clinical efficacy in bipolar disorder: From neuroprotection to the treatment of psychiatric disorders (Review)

The aim of the present review was to discuss the following aspects of treatment with quetiapine in psychiatric disorders: i) Neurocognition and functional recovery in bipolar disorder (BD); ii) neuroprotective profile in different models; and iii) potential off-label indications. A PubMed search was conducted of articles published in English between 2000 and 2012 on quetiapine, cross-referenced with the terms ‘anxiety’, ‘attention deficit disorder’, ‘borderline personality disorder’, ‘dementia’, ‘insomnia’, ‘major depressive disorder’ (MDD), ‘obsessive-compulsive disorder’, ‘post-traumatic stress disorder’, ‘remission’, ‘cognition’, ‘neurobiology’, ‘neuroprotection’, ‘efficacy’ and ‘effectiveness’. Articles were selected from meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials and open trials, and the results were summarized. Quetiapine, when studied in off-label conditions, has shown efficacy as a monotherapy in MDD and general anxiety disorder. Quetiapine also appears to exhibit a small beneficial effect in dementia. The review of other conditions was affected by methodological limitations that precluded any definitive conclusions on the efficacy or safety of quetiapine. Overall, the present review shows evidence supporting a potential role for quetiapine in improving cognition, functional recovery and negative symptoms in a cost-effective manner in BD. These benefits of quetiapine are potentially associated with its well-described neuroprotective effects; however, further studies are clearly warranted.

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.

Effects of sustained administration of quetiapine alone and in combination with a serotonin reuptake inhibitor on norepinephrine and serotonin transmission

Quetiapine is now used in the treatment of unipolar and bipolar disorders, both alone and in combination with other medications. In the current study, the sustained administration of quetiapine and N-Desalkyl quetiapine (NQuet) in rats in a 3 : 1 mixture (hQuetiapine (hQuet)) was used to mimic quetiapine exposure in patients because rats do not produce the latter important metabolite of quetiapine. Sustained administration of hQuet for 2 and 14 days, respectively, significantly enhanced the firing rate of norepinephrine (NE) neurons by blocking the cell body α₂-adrenergic autoreceptors on NE neurons, whether it was given alone or with a serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitor. The 14-day regimen of hQuet enhanced the tonic activation of postsynaptic α₂- but not α₁-adrenergic receptors in the hippocampus. This increase in NE transmission was attributable to increased firing of NE neurons, the inhibition of NE reuptake by NQuet, and the attenuated function of terminal α₂-adrenergic receptors on NE terminals. Sustained administration of hQuet for 2 and 14 days, respectively, significantly inhibited the firing rate of 5-HT, whether it was given alone or with a 5-HT reuptake inhibitor, because of the blockade of excitatory α₁-adrenergic receptors on 5-HT neurons. Nevertheless, the 14-day regimen of hQuet enhanced the tonic activation of postsynaptic 5-HT(1A) receptors in the hippocampus. This increase in 5-HT transmission was attributable to the attenuated inhibitory function of the α₂-adrenergic receptors on 5-HT terminals and possibly to direct 5-HT(1A) receptor agonism by NQuet. The enhancement of NE and 5-HT transmission by hQuet may contribute to its antidepressant action in mood disorders.

If at first you don't succeed: a review of the evidence for antidepressant augmentation, combination and switching strategies

Major depressive disorder is a common and disabling illness that leads to significant reductions in quality of life and considerable cost to society. Despite numerous advances in the pharmacological treatment of depression, many patients remain ill despite initial treatment. Beyond first-line treatment, current guidelines recommend either augmentation or switching of the initial antidepressant. In this narrative review, we summarize the data from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses in order to concisely discuss how the impact of current research can be translated into clinical practice and, ultimately, into lasting improvements in patient outcomes. The augmentation strategies reviewed are lithium, thyroid hormone, pindolol, psychostimulants and second-generation antipsychotics. The data on switching from first-line antidepressants to other antidepressants are also reviewed, and include switching within the same class, switching to other first-line antidepressant classes and switching to less commonly prescribed antidepressants. Finally, the strategy of antidepressant combinations is examined. Overall, the strength of evidence supporting a trial of augmentation or a switch to a new agent is very similar, with remission rates between 25% and 50% in both cases. Our review of the evidence suggests several conclusions. First, although it is true that adjunctive lithium and thyroid hormone have established efficacy, we can only be confident that this is true for use in combination with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), and the trials were done in less treatment-resistant patients than those who typically receive TCAs today. Of these two options, triiodothyronine augmentation seems to offer the best benefit/risk ratio for augmentation of modern antidepressants. After failure of a first-line selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), neither a switch within class nor a switch to a different class of antidepressant is unequivocally supported by the data, although switching from an SSRI to venlafaxine or mirtazapine may potentially offer greater benefits. Interestingly, switching from a newer antidepressant to a TCA after a poor response to the former is not supported by strong evidence. Of all strategies to augment response to new-generation antidepressants, quetiapine and aripiprazole are best supported by the evidence, although neither the cost effectiveness nor the longer-term benefit of these strategies has been established. The data to guide later steps in the treatment of resistant depression are sparse. Given the wide variety of options for the treatment of major depressive disorder, and the demonstrated importance of truly adequate treatment to the long-term outcomes of patients facing this illness, it is clear that further well conducted studies are needed.

Aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy for patients with major depressive disorder: overview and implications of clinical trial data

Aripiprazole was initially approved to treat schizophrenia and later approved for bipolar mania, as a monotherapy and an adjunctive therapy (manic or mixed episodes), and for irritability associated with autism. Aripiprazole is a partial agonist at dopamine D(2) and D(3) and serotonin 5-HT(1A) receptors, and is an antagonist at 5-HT(2A) receptors. This profile, and convincing preliminary data from small-scale studies, provided the rationale for the large-scale exploration of aripiprazole for unipolar depression. Recently, three 6-week, large-scale, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy for aripiprazole as an adjunctive therapy to antidepressants for treating major depressive disorder (MDD). In November 2007, aripiprazole was approved by the US FDA as an adjunctive therapy to antidepressants for treating MDD, with support from two of the above-mentioned trials. In the trials, aripiprazole was demonstrated to be safe and well tolerated, and showed a minimal trend for weight gain over the course of a 6-week treatment. The incidence of akathisia was higher than that reported in studies of patients with schizophrenia; however, most cases were mild to moderate and infrequently lead to discontinuation (5/1090 from all three trials). This comprehensive review provides an overview of the data from all three 6-week studies (including a pooled analysis) and from an unpublished 52-week, open-label extension study, to inform physicians and facilitate reasonable treatment decisions. In addition, specific issues associated with the use of aripiprazole as an adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD, including possible early treatment effect, appropriate timing of therapy initiation, appropriate dosing and duration of treatment, possible differential effect on depressive subgroups and long-term tolerability, are also discussed.

Emerging targets for antidepressant therapies

Despite adequate antidepressant monotherapy, the majority of depressed patients do not achieve remission. Even optimal and aggressive therapy leads to a substantial number of patients who show minimal and often only transient improvement. In order to address this substantial problem of treatment-resistant depression, a number of novel targets for antidepressant therapy have emerged as a consequence of major advances in the neurobiology of depression. Three major approaches to uncover novel therapeutic interventions are: first, optimizing the modulation of monoaminergic neurotransmission; second, developing medications that act upon neurotransmitter systems other than monoaminergic circuits; and third, using focal brain stimulation to directly modulate neuronal activity. We review the most recent data on novel therapeutic compounds and their antidepressant potential. These include triple monoamine reuptake inhibitors, atypical antipsychotic augmentation, and dopamine receptor agonists. Compounds affecting extra-monoamine neurotransmitter systems include CRF(1) receptor antagonists, glucocorticoid receptor antagonists, substance P receptor antagonists, NMDA receptor antagonists, nemifitide, omega-3 fatty acids, and melatonin receptor agonists. Focal brain stimulation therapies include vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), magnetic seizure therapy (MST), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS).