Diane Warden

Difference in Treatment Outcome in Outpatients With Anxious Versus Nonanxious Depression: A STAR*D Report

OBJECTIVE About half of outpatients with major depressive disorder also have clinically meaningful levels of anxiety. The authors conducted a secondary data analysis to compare antidepressant treatment outcomes for patients with anxious and nonanxious major depression in Levels 1 and 2 of the STAR*D study. METHOD A total of 2,876 adult outpatients with major depressive disorder, enrolled from 18 primary and 23 psychiatric care sites, received citalopram in Level 1 of STAR*D. In Level 2, a total of 1,292 patients who did not remit with or tolerate citalopram were randomly assigned either to switch to sustained-release bupropion (N=239), sertraline (N=238), or extended-release venlafaxine (N=250) or to continue taking citalopram and receive augmentation with sustained-release bupropion (N=279) or buspirone (N=286). Treatment could last up to 14 weeks in each level. Patients were designated as having anxious depression if their anxiety/somatization factor score from the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) was 7 or higher at baseline. Rates of remission and response as well as times to remission and response were compared between patients with anxious depression and those with nonanxious depression. RESULTS In Level 1 of STAR*D, 53.2% of patients had anxious depression. Remission was significantly less likely and took longer to occur in these patients than in those with nonanxious depression. Ratings of side effect frequency, intensity, and burden, as well as the number of serious adverse events, were significantly greater in the anxious depression group. Similarly, in Level 2, patients with anxious depression fared significantly worse in both the switching and augmentation options. CONCLUSIONS Anxious depression is associated with poorer acute outcomes than nonanxious depression following antidepressant treatment.

Residual symptoms after remission of major depressive disorder with citalopram and risk of relapse: a STAR*D report

BACKGROUND Many patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who experience full symptomatic remission after antidepressant treatment still have residual depressive symptoms. We describe the types and frequency of residual depressive symptoms and their relationship to subsequent depressive relapse after treatment with citalopram in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial. METHOD Participants in primary (n=18) and psychiatric (n=23) practice settings were openly treated with citalopram using measurement-based care for up to 14 weeks and follow-up for up to 1 year. We assessed 943 (32.8% of 2876) participants who met criteria for remission to determine the proportions with individual residual symptoms and any of the nine DSM-IV criterion symptom domains to define a major depressive episode. At each visit, the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) and the self-report Frequency, Intensity, and Burden of Side Effects Rating (FIBSER) scale were used to assessed depressive symptoms and side-effects respectively. RESULTS More than 90% of remitters had at least one residual depressive symptom (median=3). The most common were weight increase (71.3%) and mid-nocturnal insomnia (54.9%). The most common residual symptom domains were sleep disturbance (71.7%) and appetite/weight disturbance (35.9%). Those who remitted before 6 weeks had fewer residual symptoms at study exit than did later remitters. Residual sleep disturbance did not predict relapse during follow-up. Having a greater number of residual symptom domains was associated with a higher probability of relapse. CONCLUSIONS Patients with remission of MDD after treatment with citalopram continue to experience selected residual depressive symptoms, which increase the risk of relapse.

Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED): Acute and Long-Term Outcomes of a Single-Blind Randomized Study

OBJECTIVE Two antidepressant medication combinations were compared with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor monotherapy to determine whether either combination produced a higher remission rate in first-step acute-phase (12 weeks) and long-term (7 months) treatment. METHOD The single-blind, prospective, randomized trial enrolled 665 outpatients at six primary and nine psychiatric care sites. Participants had at least moderately severe nonpsychotic chronic and/or recurrent major depressive disorder. Escitalopram (up to 20 mg/day) plus placebo, sustained-release bupropion (up to 400 mg/day) plus escitalopram (up to 20 mg/day), or extended-release venlafaxine (up to 300 mg/day) plus mirtazapine (up to 45 mg/day) was delivered (1:1:1 ratio) by using measurement-based care. The primary outcome was remission, defined as ratings of less than 8 and less than 6 on the last two consecutive applications of the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Report. Secondary outcomes included side effect burden, adverse events, quality of life, functioning, and attrition. RESULTS Remission and response rates and most secondary outcomes were not different among treatment groups at 12 weeks. The remission rates were 38.8% for escitalopram-placebo, 38.9% for bupropion-escitalopram, and 37.7% for venlafaxine-mirtazapine, and the response rates were 51.6%-52.4%. The mean number of worsening adverse events was higher for venlafaxine-mirtazapine (5.7) than for escitalopram-placebo (4.7). At 7 months, remission rates (41.8%-46.6%), response rates (57.4%-59.4%), and most secondary outcomes were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS Neither medication combination outperformed monotherapy. The combination of extended-release venlafaxine plus mirtazapine may have a greater risk of adverse events.

STAR*D: revising conventional wisdom.

The STAR*D (Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression) study used a series of sequenced, randomized treatment trials following a first and, if needed, subsequent treatment steps to define the tolerability and effectiveness of various options in both acute and longer term treatment. Adult outpatients (n = 4041) with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder, substantial chronic and recurrent depression, and co-morbid psychiatric and general medical conditions were enrolled in 41 representative primary and specialty care settings. About one-third of participants remitted in first step treatment with citalopram, 50% of these within 6 weeks. Poorer outcomes were associated with minority status, socioeconomic disadvantage, more axis I and III co-morbid disorders, lower function and quality of life, and anxious and melancholic features. In step 2 medication switch, there were no significant differences in remission among within-class, out-of-class or dual-action agents: sertraline (27%), bupropion-sustained release (26%) and venlafaxine-extended release (25%). In step 2 medication augmentation of citalopram, there was no significant difference in remission between bupropion-sustained release (39%) and buspirone (33%), although participants using bupropion-sustained release had greater symptom reduction and better tolerability. There were no significant differences in remission in step 2 between cognitive therapy and medication treatment in either the switch (31% vs 27%) or augmentation (31% vs 33%) strategies, although participants in cognitive therapy augmentation had a longer time to remission than those in medication augmentation (55 vs 40 days). In step 3, there were no differences in remission between a switch to mirtazapine (8%) or nortriptyline (12%), or between augmentation with lithium (13%) or T3 (triiodothyronine, liothyronine) [25%], although more participants discontinued lithium due to adverse effects than discontinued T3. In the fourth step, there was no difference in remission between tranylcypromine (14%) or venlafaxine-extended release plus mirtazapine (16%), although the combination treatment had fewer adverse effects and had the advantages of not requiring a washout period or diet restrictions. Participants requiring more than two well delivered treatments may be characterized as treatment resistant given the substantially lower remission rates after that point. Treatment resistance was associated with more concurrent axis I or III co-morbid conditions, socioeconomic disadvantage, chronicity and melancholic or anxious features. However, if participants remained in treatment for up to four steps, about 67% reached remission. Times to remission were not substantially longer for later treatment steps. The importance of reaching remission is highlighted by the lower relapse rates in naturalistic follow-up for participants entering in remission compared with those entering with response but not remission (step 1: 34% vs 59%; step 2: 47% vs 68%; step 3: 42% vs 76%; step 4: 50% vs 83%). Clinical decision making based on the itemized measurement of symptoms and adverse effects at each treatment visit was feasible in STAR*D’s real world settings and resulted in adequate dosages and durations of treatment that generally exceeded those typically found in practice settings. Although switch and augmentation strategies could not be directly compared due to the equipoise stratified randomized design, the higher remission rates at step 2 with medication augmentation are intriguing and merit further study.

The Montgomery Asberg and the Hamilton ratings of depression: a comparison of measures.

The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD(17)) and the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) are two widely used clinician-rated symptom scales. A 6-item version of the HRSD (HRSD(6)) was created by Bech to address the psychometric limitations of the HRSD(17). The psychometric properties of these measures were compared using classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT) methods. IRT methods were used to equate total scores on any two scales. Data from two distinctly different outpatient studies of nonpsychotic major depression: a 12-month study of highly treatment-resistant patients (n=233) and an 8-week acute phase drug treatment trial (n=985) were used for robustness of results. MADRS and HRSD(6) items generally contributed more to the measurement of depression than HRSD(17) items as shown by higher item-total correlations and higher IRT slope parameters. The MADRS and HRSD(6) were unifactorial while the HRSD(17) contained 2 factors. The MADRS showed about twice the precision in estimating depression as either the HRSD(17) or HRSD(6) for average severity of depression. An HRSD(17) of 7 corresponded to an 8 or 9 on the MADRS and 4 on the HRSD(6). The MADRS would be superior to the HRSD(17) in the conduct of clinical trials.

Maximizing the Adequacy of Medication Treatment in Controlled Trials and Clinical Practice: STAR * D Measurement-Based Care

The success of well-developed protocols has been limited in real-world practice, where even effective strategies have not been sufficient to meet patient needs in routine clinical care owing to Axis I and III comorbidities. The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial required that antidepressant medication treatment be optimal regarding dose and duration, yet accommodate flexibility to ensure safety given the wide range of comorbid general medical and psychiatric disorders allowed in the trial. The objective of this study was to develop a measurement-based care (MBC) approach and an automated feedback system to ensure adequate and safe antidepressant treatment delivery suitable for both clinical research and routine practice. Ratings of depressive symptom severity and side-effect frequency, intensity, and burden were obtained at each treatment visit using the MBC system that (1) guided medication dose adjustments and treatment duration, (2) documented clinician adherence to treatment recommendations, and (3) provided prompt feedback to clinicians to enhance appropriate treatment decisions. Physician adherence to protocol-specific treatment was monitored based on measured symptoms and side-effect burden, and dose and duration of antidepressant at each critical decision point during the acute phase treatment of major depression. Feedback was provided at the point of care by the clinical coordinators, assisted by Web-based reports following each treatment visit. On the basis of the first treatment step with citalopram, over 85% of treatment encounters had appropriate fidelity to recommendations. Most deviations from treatment recommendations occurred late in treatment and were often justifiable. MBC proved to be feasible and effective in busy primary and psychiatric settings. This approach signals a paradigm shift toward the use of measurement-based clinical decisions, both at the point of care and following each visit, to deliver optimal pharmacotherapy for depression.

Selecting Among Second-Step Antidepressant Medication Monotherapies: Predictive Value of Clinical, Demographic, or First-Step Treatment Features

CONTEXT Little is known about selecting among second-step medications for major depressive disorder after intolerance or lack of remission with an initial selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. OBJECTIVE To determine whether sociodemographic, clinical, or first-step treatment features predict remission with or intolerance overall or differentially to any 1 of 3 second-step medications after an unsatisfactory outcome with citalopram hydrobromide. DESIGN An equipoise stratified randomized study. Participants were recruited from July 17, 2001, through April 20, 2004. SETTING Public or private sector primary care (n = 18) and psychiatric care (n = 23) settings across the United States. PARTICIPANTS Representative outpatients aged 18 to 75 years with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (N = 727). INTERVENTIONS Sustained-release bupropion hydrochloride was started at 150 mg/d and incrementally increased to 400 mg/d. Sertraline hydrochloride was started at 50 mg/d and incrementally increased to 200 mg/d. Extended-release venlafaxine hydrochloride was started at 37.5 mg/d and incrementally increased to 375 mg/d. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Self-Rated and the Frequency, Intensity, and Burden of Side Effects Rating. RESULTS Remission was more likely among participants who were white, employed, cohabiting or married, or privately insured or who had prior intolerance to citalopram or at least a response to citalopram, and no prior suicide attempts. Remission was less likely among participants with concurrent generalized anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, panic, or posttraumatic stress disorders; social phobia; anxious or melancholic features; or more severe depression. Intolerance was less likely for Hispanic participants, but more likely for participants with previous suicide attempts or intolerance to citalopram. Participants with concurrent substance use were less likely to remit (odds ratio, 0.37) and more likely not to tolerate extended-release venlafaxine. Intolerance to citalopram was associated with intolerance to sertraline (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Clinical, demographic, and treatment history were of little value in recommending 1 medication vs another as a second-step treatment for major depressive disorder. Participants most likely to remit in the second step had less Axis I psychiatric disorder comorbidity, less social disadvantage, and at least a response to citalopram in the first step. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00021528.

Sex Differences in Response to Citalopram: A STAR*D Report

OBJECTIVE Controversy exists as to whether women with depression respond better to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) than men. The purpose of this report was to determine whether men and women differ in their responses to treatment with the SSRI citalopram using a large sample of real world patients from primary and psychiatric specialty care settings. METHOD As part of the sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR *D) study, 2876 participants were treated with citalopram for up to 12-14 weeks. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and outcomes were gathered and compared between men and women. RESULTS At baseline, women were younger, had more severe depressive symptoms and were more likely to have: early onset; previous suicide attempt(s); a family history of depression, alcohol abuse or drug abuse; atypical symptom features; and one or more of several concurrent psychiatric disorders. Despite greater baseline severity and more Axis I comorbidities, women were more likely to reach remission and response with citalopram than men. CONCLUSIONS Women have a better response to the SSRI citalopram than men, which may be due to sex-specific biological differences particularly in serotonergic systems.

Residual symptoms in depressed outpatients who respond by 50% but do not remit to antidepressant medication.

Little is known about the quantity or quality of residual depressive symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who have responded but not remitted with antidepressant treatment. This report describes the residual symptom domains and individual depressive symptoms in a large representative sample of outpatients with nonpsychotic MDD who responded without remitting after up to 12 weeks of citalopram treatment in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study. Response was defined as 50% or greater reduction in baseline 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) by treatment exit, and remission as a final QIDS-SR16 of less than 6. Residual symptom domains and individual symptoms were based on the QIDS-SR16 and classified as either persisting from baseline or emerging during treatment. Most responders who did not remit endorsed approximately 5 residual symptom domains and 6 to 7 residual depressive symptoms. The most common domains were insomnia (94.6%), sad mood (70.8%), and decreased concentration (69.6%). The most common individual symptoms were midnocturnal insomnia (79.0%), sad mood (70.8%), and decreased concentration/decision making (69.6%). The most common treatment-emergent symptoms were midnocturnal insomnia (51.4%) and decreased general interest (40.0%). The most common persistent symptoms were midnocturnal insomnia (81.6%), sad mood (70.8%), and decreased concentration/decision making (70.6%). Suicidal ideation was the least common treatment-emergent symptom (0.7%) and the least common persistent residual symptom (17.1%). These findings suggest that depressed outpatients who respond by 50% without remitting to citalopram treatment have a broad range of residual symptoms. Individualized treatments are warranted to specifically address each patients residual depressive symptoms.

Concurrent anxiety and substance use disorders among outpatients with major depression: Clinical features and effect on treatment outcome

BACKGROUND Depressed patients often present with comorbid anxiety and/or substance use disorder. This report compares the four groups defined by the disorders (anxiety disorder, substance use disorder, both, and neither) in terms of baseline clinical and sociodemographic features, and in terms of outcomes following treatment with citalopram (a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor). METHODS The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial enrolled 2838 outpatients with non-psychotic major depressive disorder (MDD) from 18 primary and 23 psychiatric care clinics. Clinical and sociodemographic features were assessed at baseline. These baseline features and the treatment outcomes following treatment with citalopram were compared among the four groups. RESULTS Participants with non-psychotic MDD and comorbid anxiety and/or substance use disorder showed several distinctive baseline sociodemographic and clinical features. They also showed greater depression severity; length of illness; likelihood of anxious, atypical or melancholic features; more intolerance/attrition; and worse remission/response outcomes with treatment. Participants with either anxiety or substance use disorder showed outcomes generally intermediate between those with both and those with neither. CONCLUSIONS Comorbid anxiety and/or substance use disorder are clinically identifiable, and their presence may define distinct MDD subgroups that have more problems and worse pharmacological treatment outcomes. They may benefit from more aggressive, multi-faceted treatment and psychosocial rehabilitation targeted at reducing their psychological comorbidity and functional impairment.