George I. Papakostas

Atypical Antipsychotic Augmentation in Major Depressive Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVE The authors sought to determine by meta-analysis the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive atypical antipsychotic agents in major depressive disorder. METHOD Searches were conducted of MEDLINE/PubMed (1966 to January 2009), the Cochrane database, abstracts of major psychiatric meetings since 2000, and online trial registries. Manufacturers of atypical antipsychotic agents without online registries were contacted. Trials selected were acute-phase, parallel-group, double-blind controlled trials with random assignment to adjunctive atypical antipsychotic or placebo. Patients had nonpsychotic unipolar major depressive disorder that was resistant to prior antidepressant treatment. Response, remission, and discontinuation rates were either reported or obtained. Data were extracted by one author and checked by the second. Data included study design, number of patients, patient characteristics, methods of establishing treatment resistance, drug doses, duration of the adjunctive trial, depression scale used, response and remission rates, and discontinuation rates for any reason or for adverse events. RESULTS Sixteen trials with 3,480 patients were pooled using a fixed-effects meta-analysis. Adjunctive atypical antipsychotics were significantly more effective than placebo (response: odds ratio=1.69, 95% CI=1.46-1.95, z=7.00, N=16, p<0.00001; remission: odds ratio=2.00, 95% CI=1.69-2.37, z=8.03, N=16, p<0.00001). Mean odds ratios did not differ among the atypical agents and were not affected by trial duration or method of establishing treatment resistance. Discontinuation rates for adverse events were higher for atypical agents than for placebo (odds ratio=3.91, 95% CI=2.68-5.72, z=7.05, N=15, p<0.00001). CONCLUSIONS Atypical antipsychotics are effective augmentation agents in major depressive disorder but are associated with an increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events.

Are antidepressant drugs that combine serotonergic and noradrenergic mechanisms of action more effective than the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in treating major depressive disorder? A meta-analysis of studies of newer agents.

BACKGROUND Recent studies suggest that the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with newer antidepressant drugs that simultaneously enhance norepinephrine and serotonin neurotransmission might result in higher response and remission rates than the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The goal of our work was to compare response rates among patients with MDD treated with either of these two broad categories of antidepressant drugs. METHODS Medline/Pubmed, EMBase, clinical trial registries, program syllabi from major psychiatric meetings held since 1995, and documents from relevant pharmaceutical companies were searched for double-blind, randomized trials comparing a newer serotonergic-noradrenergic antidepressant drug (venlafaxine, duloxetine, milnacipran, mirtazapine, mianserin, or moclobemide) with an SSRI for MDD. RESULTS Ninety-three trials (n = 17,036) were combined using a random-effects model. Treatment with serotonergic + noradrenergic antidepressant drugs was more likely to result in clinical response than the SSRIs (risk ratio [RR] = 1.059; response rates 63.6% versus 59.3%; p = .003). There was no evidence for heterogeneity among studies combined (p = 1.0). Excluding each individual agent did not significantly alter the pooled RR. With the exception of duloxetine (.985), RRs for response for each individual serotonergic + noradrenergic antidepressant drug were within the 95% confidence interval of the pooled RR (1.019-1.101). CONCLUSIONS Serotonergic-noradrenergic antidepressant drugs seem to have a modest efficacy advantage compared with SSRIs in MDD. With the Number Needed to Treat (NNT) statistic as one indicator of clinical significance, nearly 24 patients would need to be treated with dual-action antidepressant drugs instead of SSRIs in order to obtain one additional responder. This difference falls well below the mark of NNT = 10 suggested by the United Kingdoms National Institute of Clinical Excellence but nonetheless might be of public health relevance given the large number of depressed patients treated with SSRI /serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) antidepressant drugs. Further research is needed to examine whether larger differences between classes of antidepressant drugs might exist in specific MDD sub-populations or for specific MDD symptoms.

A Detailed Examination of Cytokine Abnormalities in Major Depressive Disorder

Recent technological advances offer an opportunity to further elucidate the complex cytokine network in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Twenty cytokines were simultaneously assessed in 49 individuals with MDD and 49 age and gender matched controls. Multiple pro-inflammatory and two anti-inflammatory cytokines were significantly elevated in the MDD sample, including an antidepressant naïve subset. These data support a generalized chronic inflammatory state in MDD, and implicate additional cytokines and chemokines previously linked to cardiovascular disease.

Treatment of SSRI-Resistant Depression: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Within- Versus Across-Class Switches

BACKGROUND Two broad treatment options exist for switching antidepressants for depressed patients who fail to respond to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI): either a second course of SSRI therapy or a different class of antidepressants. The goal of the present work was to conduct a meta-analysis of studies comparing these two switch strategies. METHODS Several sources were searched for randomized clinical trials comparing these two switch strategies. RESULTS Data from four clinical trials (n = 1496) were combined using a random-effects model. Patients randomized to switch to a non-SSRI antidepressant (bupropion, mirtazapine, venlafaxine) were more likely to experience remission than patients switched to a second SSRI (risk ratio = 1.29, p = .007). Pooled remission rates were 28% (for non-SSRIs) and 23.5% (for SSRIs). There was also a nonsignificant trend (p = .1) in the rate of discontinuation due to intolerance favoring the within-class switch strategy (risk ratio = 1.23). There was no difference in response rates between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest a modest yet statistically significant advantage in remission rates when switching patients with SSRI-resistant depression to a non-SSRI rather than an SSRI antidepressant. With the number needed to treat (NNT) statistic as one indicator of clinical significance, nearly 22 SSRI nonresponders would need to be switched to a non-SSRI rather than a second SSRI antidepressant to obtain one additional remitter. This difference falls well below the mark of NNT = 10 suggested by the United Kingdoms National Institute of Clinical Excellence but nonetheless might be of public health relevance given the large number of SSRI-resistant patients switched to an SSRI versus a non-SSRI antidepressant.

S-Adenosyl Methionine (SAMe) Augmentation of Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors for Antidepressant Nonresponders With Major Depressive Disorder: A Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE Despite the progressive increase in the number of antidepressants, many patients with major depressive disorder continue to be symptomatic. Clearly, there is an urgent need to develop better tolerated and more effective treatments for this disorder. The use of S-adenosyl methionine (SAMe), a naturally occurring molecule that serves as a methyl donor in human cellular metabolism, as adjunctive treatment for antidepressant nonresponders with major depressive disorder represents one such effort toward novel pharmacotherapy development. METHOD Participants were 73 serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) nonresponders with major depressive disorder enrolled in a 6-week, double-blind, randomized trial of adjunctive oral SAMe (target dose: 800 mg/twice daily). Patients continued to receive their SRI treatment at a stable dose throughout the 6-week trial. The primary outcome measure for the study was the response rates according to the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D). RESULTS The HAM-D response and remission rates were higher for patients treated with adjunctive SAMe (36.1% and 25.8%, respectively) than adjunctive placebo (17.6% versus 11.7%, respectively). The number needed to treat for response and remission was approximately one in six and one in seven, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of SAMe- versus placebo-treated patients who discontinued the trial for any reason (20.6% versus 29.5%, respectively), due to adverse events (5.1% versus 8.8%, respectively), or due to inefficacy (5.1% versus 11.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS These preliminary results suggest that SAMe can be an effective, well-tolerated, and safe adjunctive treatment strategy for SRI nonresponders with major depressive disorder and warrant replication.

Dopaminergic-based pharmacotherapies for depression

The serendipitous discovery of the precursors of two of the major contemporary antidepressant families during the late 1950s, iproniazid for the monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and imipramine for the tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), has guided the subsequent development of antidepressant compounds with predominantly serotonergic, noradrenergic or combined serotonergic and noradrenergic activity. Unfortunately, however, many depressed patients continue to remain symptomatic despite adequate treatment with pharmacologic agents currently available. When one reviews the list of pharmacologic agents currently approved for the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), it is apparent that relatively few treatments with dopaminergic activity have been developed to date. Therefore, developing effective antidepressant treatments with pro-dopaminergic properties which also possess a relatively wide safety margin may further improve the standard of care for depression. In the present article we will briefly review studies focusing on the role of dopamine in depression followed by a comprehensive review of pharmacotherapies for depression with pro-dopaminergic activity.

l-Methylfolate as Adjunctive Therapy for SSRI-Resistant Major Depression: Results of Two Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Sequential Trials

OBJECTIVE The authors conducted two multicenter sequential parallel comparison design trials to investigate the effect of L-methylfolate augmentation in the treatment of major depressive disorder in patients who had a partial response or no response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). METHOD In the first trial, 148 outpatients with SSRI-resistant major depressive disorder were enrolled in a 60-day study divided into two 30-day periods. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:3:3 ratio, to receive L-methylfolate for 60 days (7.5 mg/day for 30 days followed by 15 mg/day for 30 days), placebo for 30 days followed by L-methylfolate (7.5 mg/day) for 30 days, or placebo for 60 days. SSRI dosages were kept constant throughout the study. In the second trial, with 75 patients, the design was identical to the first, except that the l-methylfolate dosage was 15 mg/day during both 30-day periods. RESULTS In the first trial, no significant difference was observed in outcomes between the treatment groups. In the second trial, adjunctive L-methylfolate at 15 mg/day showed significantly greater efficacy compared with continued SSRI therapy plus placebo on both primary outcome measures (response rate and degree of change in depression symptom score) and two secondary outcome measures of symptom severity. The number needed to treat for response was approximately six in favor of adjunctive L-methylfolate at 15 mg/day. L-Methylfolate was well tolerated, with rates of adverse events no different from those reported with placebo. CONCLUSIONS Adjunctive L-methylfolate at 15 mg/day may constitute an effective, safe, and relatively well tolerated treatment strategy for patients with major depressive disorder who have a partial response or no response to SSRIs.

Tolerability of modern antidepressants.

Treatment-resistant depression can be attributed to multiple causes, including nonadherence to medication and medical and psychiatric comorbidities. Selecting the appropriate strategy for a patient with treatment-resistant depression, whether it be a single antidepressant, a combination of medications, or a nonpharmacologic method, depends on a correct determination of the cause of the patients resistance to treatment.

Efficacy of antidepressants for late-life depression: a meta-analysis and meta-regression of placebo-controlled randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE Late-life depression is an important public health issue, given the growing proportion of the elderly relative to the general population in the developed world. The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in elderly patients. DATA SOURCES PubMed/MEDLINE was searched for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants for treatment of both adult (nonelderly) MDD (patients aged < 65 years) and late-life MDD (patients aged ≥ 55 years). The search was limited to articles published between January 1, 1980, and March 3, 2010 (inclusive). The year 1980 was used as a cutoff in our search to decrease diagnostic variability, since the DSM-III was introduced in 1980. Our search cross-referenced the term placebo with each of the following antidepressants: amitriptyline, nortriptyline, imipramine, desipramine, clomipramine, trimipramine, protriptyline, dothiepin, doxepin, lofepramine, amoxapine, maprotiline, amineptine, nomifensine, bupropion, phenelzine, tranylcypromine, isocarboxazid, moclobemide, brofaromine, fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, zimelidine, tianeptine, trazodone, nefazodone, agomelatine, venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, milnacipran, reboxetine, mirtazapine, and mianserin. We also reviewed the reference lists of all studies identified through the PubMed/MEDLINE search. STUDY SELECTION Articles were selected that reported on randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants used as monotherapy for treatment of MDD and that met numerous a priori criteria pertaining to MDD diagnosis criteria, study duration, study design, drug formulation, original data, age thresholds, primary and secondary outcome measures, and exclusions of other disorders. Final inclusion of articles was determined by consensus between the authors. Seventy-four articles were found eligible for inclusion in our analysis (15 late-life MDD trials and 59 adult MDD trials). RESULTS Antidepressants were found to be efficacious for late-life MDD (age 55 and older; P < .0001), although there was evidence for heterogeneity across studies (Q22 = 67.302, P < .001). However, antidepressants were not found to be efficacious in the subset of studies using age thresholds of 65 years or older (older late-life MDD) (P = .265). Finally, when we controlled for study design characteristics, antidepressant but not placebo response rates were lower among late-life MDD patients than among adult MDD patients. CONCLUSIONS The present meta-analysis suggests that antidepressants are efficacious in late-life MDD, but significant study heterogeneity suggests that other factors may contribute to these findings. A secondary analysis raises the possibility that efficacy of these agents may be reduced in trials involving patients aged 65 years or older. Why antidepressants may be less efficacious in elderly versus younger subjects remains unclear.

Cholesterol in mood and anxiety disorders: review of the literature and new hypotheses

Cholesterol plays an integral role in the structure and function of the cell membrane and may also affect neurotransmission in the central nervous system. Previous work has identified abnormalities in serum cholesterol levels in patients with mood and anxiety disorders as well as in suicidal patients. However, the biological significance of these abnormalities remains to be clarified. An understanding of how serum cholesterol relates to the pathophysiology of mood disorders may generate biological markers that predict treatment response as well as targets for novel therapeutic strategies. In this article, we review the literature studying the significance of cholesterol in mood and anxiety disorders, with an emphasis on new studies focusing on the adverse impact of hypercholesterolemia on the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). We then propose possible mechanisms that would account for the relationship between elevated cholesterol and treatment non-response in MDD.