Rationale, design and methodology of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of escitalopram in prevention of Depression in Acute Coronary Syndrome (DECARD)

The effect of escitalopram in treating mild to moderate depressive disorder and improving the quality of life in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting - a double-blind randomized clinical trial

Introduction

Chronic depression and anxiety can be a risk factor for coronary aArtery bypass grafting (CABG) and is an emerging factor after coronary artery disease when the patient is admitted to the hospital and after surgery. We aimed to assess the effect of Escitalopram in treating mild to moderate depressive disorder and improving the quality of life in patients undergoing CABG.

Methods

In this randomized clinical trial, 50 patients undergoing CABG referred to Tehran Heart Hospital from January 2021 to May 2021 and were suffering from mild to moderate depression were randomly assigned to one of the two groups of Escitalopram or placebo. The level of depression was assessed based on Beck's depression inventory and the quality-of-life status and its domains were assessed based on the SF-36 questionnaire in 2 groups. Measurements were obtained at baseline and at four and eight weeks after treatment. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, paired, and Wilcoxon tests or ANOVA were used as appropriate.

Results

There was no significant difference between the level of depression between the two study groups at baseline (P=0.312). There was no significant difference between the quality of life and its domains in the two study groups at baseline (P=0.607). However, the most important effect of Escitalopram was reducing depression scores in the intervention group at weeks 4 and 8 after treatment compared to the placebo group (P<0.001). The quality of life and its domains were significantly higher in the Escitalopram group eight weeks after treatment (P=0.004). The amount of drug side effects at 2 and 4 weeks after treatment had no significant difference between the groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Escitalopram was effective in treating mild to moderate depressive disorder and improving quality of life in patients undergoing CABG.

Clinical trial registration

https://irct.behdasht.gov.ir/, identifier IRCT20140126016374N2.

Safety considerations for prescribing SSRI antidepressants to patients at increased cardiovascular risk

INTRODUCTION

With the development of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), a relatively uncomplicated treatment of depression and a safer alternative to tricyclic antidepressants was introduced. Any medical treatment has potential safety risks, however, and these risks should also be considered when prescribing SSRIs.

AREAS COVERED

The present review focuses on safety considerations when prescribing SSRIs to patients with previous stroke and myocardial infarction, as depression, and the need for antidepressant treatment, is common in these patients. At the same time, patients with stroke and myocardial infarction may be at increased risk of developing adverse events due to higher age, comorbidity, and co-medication. Specifically, the evidence of the risk of QT prolongation and bleeding versus thrombotic events will be discussed in the present review.

EXPERT OPINION

No medical treatment comes without risk and SSRIs are no exception. Depression, a common complication after vascular events, is a potentially life-threatening condition in itself and relevant and sufficient treatment is imperative. SSRIs are often the first medical treatment choice in the ambulatory setting, also in patients at increased cardiovascular risk. Relevant comorbidity and co-medication, however, should always be taken into account when initiating treatment and when choosing a specific SSRI.

Prevention of depression in adults with long-term physical conditions

BACKGROUND

Major depression is one of the world's leading causes of disability in adults with long-term physical conditions compared to those without physical illness. This co-morbidity is associated with a negative prognosis in terms of increased morbidity and mortality rates, increased healthcare costs, decreased adherence to treatment regimens, and a substantial decline in quality of life. Therefore, preventing the onset of depressive episodes in adults with long-term physical conditions should be a global healthcare aim. In this review, primary or tertiary (in cases of preventing recurrences in those with a history of depression) prevention are the focus. While primary prevention aims at preventing the onset of depression, tertiary prevention comprises both preventing recurrences and prohibiting relapses. Tertiary prevention aims to address a depressive episode that might still be present, is about to subside, or has recently resolved. We included tertiary prevention in the case where the focus was preventing the onset of depression in those with a history of depression (preventing recurrences) but excluded it if it specifically focused on maintaining an condition or implementing rehabilitation services (relapse prevention). Secondary prevention of depression seeks to prevent the progression of depressive symptoms by early detection and treatment and may therefore be considered a 'treatment,' rather than prevention. We therefore exclude the whole spectrum of secondary prevention.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, acceptability and tolerability of psychological or pharmacological interventions, in comparison to control conditions, in preventing depression in adults with long-term physical conditions; either before first ever onset of depressive symptoms (i.e. primary prevention) or before first onset of depressive symptoms in patients with a history of depression (i.e. tertiary prevention).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and two trials registries, up to 6 February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of preventive psychological or pharmacological interventions, specifically targeting incidence of depression in comparison to treatment as usual (TAU), waiting list, attention/psychological placebo, or placebo. Participants had to be age 18 years or older, with at least one long-term physical condition, and no diagnosis of major depression at baseline (primary prevention). In addition, we included studies comprising mixed samples of patients with and without a history of depression, which explored tertiary prevention of recurrent depression. We excluded other tertiary prevention studies. We also excluded secondary preventive interventions. Primary outcomes included incidence of depression, tolerability, and acceptability. Secondary outcomes included severity of depression, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs, with one trial on psychological interventions, and 10 trials on pharmacological interventions. Data analyses on the psychological intervention (problem-solving therapy compared to TAU) included 194 participants with age-related macular degeneration. Data analyses on pharmacological interventions included 837 participants comparing citalopram (one trial), escitalopram (three trials), a mixed sample of fluoxetine/nortriptyline (one trial), melatonin (one trial), milnacipran (one trial), and sertraline (three trials), each to placebo. Included types of long-term physical conditions were acute coronary syndrome (one trial), breast cancer (one trial), head and neck cancer (two trials), stroke (five trials), and traumatic brain injury (one trial). Psychological interventions Very low-certainty evidence of one study suggests that problem solving therapy may be slightly more effective than TAU in preventing the incidence of depression, immediately post-intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.95; 194 participants). However, there may be little to no difference between groups at six months follow-up (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.38; 190 participants; one study; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available regarding incidence of depression after six months. Regarding acceptability (drop-outs due to any cause), slightly fewer drop-outs occurred in the TAU group immediately post-intervention (OR 5.21, 95% CI 1.11 to 24.40; 206 participants; low-certainty evidence). After six months, however, the groups did not differ (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.58 to 4.77; 206 participants; low-certainty evidence). This study did not measure tolerability. Pharmacological interventions Post-intervention, compared to placebo, antidepressants may be beneficial in preventing depression in adults with different types of long-term physical conditions, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.49; 814 participants; nine studies; I2 =0%; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups both immediately and at six months follow-up (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.46; 23 participants; one study; very low-certainty evidence) as well as at six to 12 months follow-up (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.82; 233 participants; three studies; I2 = 49%; very low-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence from five studies regarding the tolerability of the pharmacological intervention. A total of 669 adverse events were observed in 316 participants from the pharmacological intervention group, and 610 adverse events from 311 participants in the placebo group. There was very low-certainty evidence that drop-outs due to adverse events may be less frequent in the placebo group (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.89; 561 participants; five studies; I2 = 0%). There was also very low-certainty evidence that drop-outs due to any cause may not differ between groups either post-intervention (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.73; 962 participants; nine studies; I2 = 28%), or at six to 12 months (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.86; 327 participants; three studies; I2 = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on evidence of very low certainty, our results may indicate the benefit of pharmacological interventions, during or directly after preventive treatment. Few trials examined short-term outcomes up to six months, nor the follow-up effects at six to 12 months, with studies suffering from great numbers of drop-outs and inconclusive results. Generalisation of results is limited as study populations and treatment regimes were very heterogeneous. Based on the results of this review, we conclude that for adults with long-term physical conditions, there is only very uncertain evidence regarding the implementation of any primary preventive interventions (psychological/pharmacological) for depression.

Prophylactic antidepressant treatment following acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Major depressive disorder is significantly increased in patients following acute coronary syndrome resulting in twofold increased mortality compared with patients without depression. The depression diagnosis is often missed leading to considerable undertreatment. This systematic review assesses the current evidence of primary prophylactic treatment of depression in patients after acute coronary syndrome. The study protocol was prospectively registered at PROSPERO (registration number CRD42015025587). A systematic review were conducted and reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Cochran Library was searched. Two independent reviewers screened the records. The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials on adult patients with acute coronary syndrome treated prophylactically with an antidepressant intervention of any kind. A validated assessment tool should measure depression and depressive symptoms. Languages were limited to articles written in English. Six articles were included. Four studies utilized different components of case and disease management, health coaching, or relaxational audiotapes as intervention compared with usual care or with no formal program of rehabilitation. None of the studies showed any significant prophylactic effect against depression. One study with a program of health education and counselling and another study with a pharmacological antidepressant showed significant prophylactic effect on depression and depressive symptoms. All six included studies were associated with high risk of bias. There is not strong evidence of the effects of any type of routine antidepressant prophylaxis in patients following acute coronary syndrome. Further high quality studies are warranted.

The effect of MElatonin on Depressive symptoms, Anxiety, CIrcadian and Sleep disturbances in patients after acute coronary syndrome (MEDACIS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Depression following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) constitutes a serious and debilitating problem. Approximately one in five patients will develop significant depression following ACS and less severe depressive symptoms are even more frequent. Furthermore, anxiety symptoms and sleep-wake disturbances are frequent. The objective of the MEDACIS trial is to investigate whether prophylactic treatment with melatonin has a preventive effect on depression, depressive and anxiety symptoms, sleep, and circadian disturbances following ACS.

METHODS/DESIGN

"The effect of MElatonin and Depressive symptoms, Anxiety, CIrcadian and Sleep disturbances in patients after acute coronary syndrome" trial (MEDACIS) is a multicenter, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. A total of 240 patients with ACS and no depressive symptoms will be included in the trial for treatment with either 25 mg melatonin or placebo for a 12-week period. Development and severity of depressive symptoms will be evaluated using Major Depression Inventory every 2 weeks with the purpose of investigating the potential preventive effect of melatonin on depressive symptoms.

DISCUSSION

Previously, only selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been investigated in a primary preventive setup in patients following ACS. However, SSRIs are associated with several side effects. An ideal intervention would constitute the highest degree of prevention of depressive symptoms with the lowest risk of side effects. In this regard, melatonin may have advantages due to its low toxicity as well as its proven anxiolytic and hypnotic effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02451293 . Registered on 12 May 2015. EudraCT nr. 2015-002116-32.

Prevention of depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome (DECARD) randomized trial: effects on and by self-reported health

AIM

Escitalopram may prevent depression following acute coronary syndrome. We sought to estimate the effects of escitalopram on self-reported health and to identify subgroups with higher efficacy.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a 12-month double-blind clinical trial randomizing non-depressed acute coronary syndrome patients to escitalopram (n = 120) or matching placebo (n = 120). The main outcomes were mean scores on Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) domains, and diagnosis of depression was adjusted for baseline SF-36 scores.

RESULTS

Escitalopram did not yield different SF-36 trajectories on any scale compared with placebo (P > 0.28). Efficacy of escitalopram may have been better among those scoring at least the normative score on general health perceptions (hazard ratio (HR) for depression 0.17 (95% confidence interval 0.02-1.42) ) or social functioning (HR = 0.12 (0.02-0.99) ) than in the full sample of patients (HR = 0.20 (0.04-0.90) ), although not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The SF-36 may be too broad an outcome measure in trials or treatments that seek to prevent depression following acute coronary syndrome. The SF-36 may, however, indicate who is more likely to benefit from treatment.

Cardiovascular safety of one-year escitalopram therapy in clinically nondepressed patients with acute coronary syndrome: results from the DEpression in patients with Coronary ARtery Disease (DECARD) trial

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are commonly used for treatment of depression in patients with cardiac diseases. However, evidence of cardiovascular (CV) safety from randomized trials is based on studies of no longer than 6-month duration. We examined the CV safety of 1-year treatment with Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor escitalopram compared with placebo in patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

The DECARD (DEpression in patients with Coronary ARtery Disease) trial assessed the prophylactic effect of escitalopram on depression after ACS. Two hundred forty patients were randomized to escitalopram 10-mg daily or matching placebo for 1 year. Serial measures of CV safety including clinical and biochemical parameters, 24-hour electrocardiogram monitor, resting electrocardiogram, and echocardiographic assessment were obtained.

RESULTS

Escitalopram and placebo groups were comparable at baseline with regard to age, gender, sociodemography, depression score, risk factor profile, severity of heart disease, and medications. Dropout rates defined as withdrawal for any reason or lost to follow-up during the 12-month study period was 27.2% in the escitalopram group and 23.4% in the placebo group (NS). There were no statistically significant differences between intervention groups in any of CV safety measures including the incidence of ventricular arrhythmia and episodes of ST-segment depression, length of QTc, and systolic and diastolic echocardiographic measures at the 12-month follow-up between groups. After 12 months, 16 and 13 major adverse events (death, recurrent ACS, or acute revascularization) were recorded in the escitalopram and placebo group, respectively (NS).

CONCLUSIONS

One-year escitalopram treatment was safe and well tolerated in patients with recent ACS.

Depression in patients with cardiovascular disease

It has been widely suggested that depression negatively affects patients with cardiovascular disease. There are several pathophysiological mechanisms as well as behavioral processes linking depression and cardiac events. Improvements in nursing and medical care have prolonged survival of this patient population; however, this beneficial outcome has led to increased prevalence of depression. Since mortality rates in chronic heart failure patients remain extremely high, it might be as equally important to screen for depression and there are several valid and reliable screening tools that healthcare personnel could easily employ to identify patients at greater risk. Consultation should be provided by a multidisciplinary team, consisting of cardiologists, psychiatrists, and hospital or community nurses so as to carefully plan, execute, and evaluate medical intervention and implement lifestyle changes. We aim to systematically review the existing knowledge regarding current definitions, prognostic implications, pathophysiological mechanisms, and current and future treatment options in patients with depression and cardiovascular disease, specifically those with heart failure.

A question about the potential cardiac toxicity of escitalopram

Previous reviews have focused on the potential cardiac toxicity of the racemic drug citalopram (Celexa(®)). Evaluating the safety of escitalopram (Lexapro(®)) is an important issue to consider, since it is the S-enantiomer of citalopram. Escitalopram has a small effect on the QTc interval. A prolonged QTc was seen in 2% to 14% of escitalopram overdose cases, without serious cardiac sequelae. The QTc prolongation effect of citalopram in beagle dogs has been attributed to the minor metabolite racemic didemethylcitalopram (DDCT). Whether the escitalopram minor metabolite S-DDCT has this effect is not known. Concentrations of S-DDCT are lower than DDCT, but for a broad range of doses of escitalopram and citalopram, the S-DDCT and DDCT concentrations are well below the QTc prolonging concentrations reported in dogs. There is no strong evidence from human and animal studies that the cardiac safety of escitalopram is significantly superior to that of citalopram.

Effects of escitalopram in prevention of depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome (DECARD)

OBJECTIVE

Depression is a major problem in patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with negative impact on survival and quality of life. No studies have examined prevention of post-ACS depression. We examined whether treatment with escitalopram can prevent post-ACS depression.

METHODS

We have conducted a randomised controlled trial. Between November 2004 and December 2007, 240 patients in 2 university hospitals in Copenhagen, Denmark, with ACS were randomised. Patients were randomised to a double-blind treatment with escitalopram or matching placebo for 1 year. Main outcome measure was the incidence of ICD-10 depressive episode.

RESULTS

Of 120 patients treated with escitalopram 2 developed depression versus 10 in placebo treated group (log rank, p=0.022). In multivariate analysis treatment with placebo and high Hamilton Depression Scale score at baseline were associated with development of depression. Patients were well matched at baseline.

CONCLUSION

Twelve months treatment with escitalopram prevented depression in post-ACS patients.

Effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors on platelet function: mechanisms, clinical outcomes and implications for use in elderly patients

Among the antidepressants, the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are often preferred to other classes of antidepressants in the treatment of depression in the elderly because of their better safety profile. Most of the known effects of SSRIs, either beneficial or adverse, are linked to their inhibitory action on the serotonin reuptake transporter (5-HTT). This reuptake mechanism is present not only in neurons but also in other cells such as platelets. Serotoninergic mechanisms seem to play an important role in haemostasis, and their importance in this regard has long been underestimated. Abnormal activation may lead to a pro-thrombotic state, as may occur in patients with major depressive disorder, whilst downregulation, as occurs in patients treated with SSRIs, may have two clinical consequences, both of particular interest in the elderly. On the one hand, there may be an increased risk of bleeding; on the other hand, a reduction in thrombotic risk may be possible. Polymorphism in the promoter region of the gene that transcribes the 5-HTT has been shown to have a relevant impact on its function and, in turn, on the beneficial and adverse effects of SSRIs. Bleeding has been a concern since the introduction of SSRIs, with multiple case reports published and communicated to the pharmacovigilance systems. The first epidemiological study was published in 1999 and since then, 34 epidemiological studies from different areas, most of them including elderly patients in their study populations, have been published with a variety of results. Broadly, the epidemiological evidence supports a moderately increased risk of bleeding associated with the use of SSRIs, which may be critically dependent on patient susceptibility and the presence of risk factors. The impairment of primary haemostasis induced by SSRIs may result, as a beneficial counterpart, in a reduction in the thrombotic risk. A small number of clinical trials and an increasing number of epidemiological studies that include elderly patients have been conducted to clarify whether SSRIs reduce the risk of primary and secondary ischaemic disorders. However, the results have been inconclusive with some studies suggesting a preventive effect and others no effect or even an increased risk. Behind such contradictory results may be the role of depression itself as a cardiovascular risk factor and, therefore, a major confounding factor. How to disentangle its effect from that of the antidepressants is the methodological challenge to be overcome in future studies. In this complex scenario, the elderly seem to be at a crossroads, because they are the group in which both the risks and the benefits can be the greatest. Studies performed to date have provided us with some clues that can help orient clinicians in taking the most appropriate course of action. For instance, as the gastrointestinal bleeding risk appears to increase with age, prudent advice in patients with a previous history of upper-gastrointestinal bleeding or peptic ulcer, and in those who take NSAIDs, oral anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs or corticosteroids, would be to suggest addition of an acid-suppressing agent to the drug regimen in those elderly patients in whom SSRIs are indicated.

State of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry in India: Current status and vision for future

Over the years Consultation-Liaison (C-L) psychiatry has contributed significantly to the growth of the psychiatry and has brought psychiatry very close to the advances in the medicine. It has also led to changes in the medical education and in the providing comprehensive management to the physically ill. In India, although the General Hospital Psychiatric units were established in 1930s, C-L Psychiatry has never been the main focus of training and research. Hence there is an urgent need to improve C-L Psychiatry services and training to provide best and optimal care to the patients and provide best education to the trainees.

Comparison of participants and non-participants in a randomized study of prevention of depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is higher than in the general population. In a study on prevention of post-ACS depression, more than half of eligible patients declined participation.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether symptoms of depression and anxiety in participants and non-participants predicted participation in the study.

METHODS

This substudy was conducted between May 2005 and April 2007. Patients with ACS, eligible for the study (n=302) were asked four questions on depression and anxiety from the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) screening questionnaire.

RESULTS

The PRIME-MD screening data were available on 232 patients (76.8% of eligible patients). Thirty-eight (35.5%) of 107 participants and 30 (24.0%) of 125 non-participants had a positive screening for depression (NS), and 47 (43.9%) participants and 55 (44%) non-participants were screened positive for anxiety (NS). Non-participants were older (P=0.002), while no significant differences in gender or cardiac diagnosis were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms of depression and anxiety were highly prevalent in patients after ACS but did not predict participation in the study of prevention of depression.

Impact and clinical management of depression in patients with coronary artery disease

The rates of major adverse coronary events, including recurrent ischemic events and death, in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) have been shown to be significantly increased in patients with depression. In addition, health care costs are higher and health-related quality of life is lower in depressed patients with CAD. Several pathophysiologic mechanisms have been proposed for the association of increased events seen in this population. Studies have focused on antidepressants (specifically, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and mirtazapine), psychotherapy (cognitive behavioral therapy and interpersonal psychotherapy), and a wide range of other nonpharmacologic interventions. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments are known to improve depressive symptoms in patients with CAD, but their effects on outcomes such as mortality and hospital admissions remain controversial. If treatment of depression is warranted, strategies should include sertraline or citalopram, with or without cognitive behavioral therapy, based on the known efficacy and safety of the drugs in this population. Nonpharmacologic therapy such as aerobic exercise has been shown to improve not only depression but also cardiovascular health. When selecting an appropriate antidepressant, clinicians should consider their patients' comorbid conditions and the potential for drug interactions, and treatment should be frequently monitored. Screening for depression in patients with cardiac disease should be instituted on a routine basis by using either case-finding or symptom-triggered approaches. Based on the high prevalence of depression and its known adverse effects in patients with CAD, future research is needed to help determine the role of antidepressants and nonpharmacologic strategies in improving outcomes in patients with both comorbidities.