Search

Short leukocyte telomere length (LTL) may be associated with several psychiatric disorders, including major depressive disorder (MDD). Short LTL has previously been associated with poor response to psychiatric medications in bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, but no studies have prospectively assessed the relationship of LTL to SSRI response in MDD. We assessed pre-treatment LTL, depression severity (using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS]), and self-reported positive and negative affect in 27 healthy, unmedicated adults with MDD. Subjects then underwent open-label treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant for eight weeks, after which clinical ratings were repeated. Analyses were corrected for age, sex and BMI. "Non-responders" to treatment (HDRS improvement

Background: Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who do not adequately respond to antidepressant treatment (ADT) may benefit from adjunctive atypical antipsychotics; however, certain agents target specific symptoms of depression and not the full syndrome. The aim of this analysis was to examine the effects of brexpiprazole, adjunct to ADT, on the core symptoms of MDD, defined using Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) items.Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind studies of adjunctive brexpiprazole in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs (n = 1056). Efficacy was assessed using the MADRS core symptom subscale (MADRS6) and individual items (apparent sadness, reported sadness, inner tension, lassitude, inability to feel, and pessimistic thoughts).Results: At Week 6, adjunctive brexpiprazole showed a greater effect than adjunctive placebo on the MADRS6 (within-group Cohen's d effect sizes: brexpiprazole, 1.05; placebo, 0.71; p < 0.001 between groups) and on each of the six core symptoms (effect sizes: brexpiprazole, 0.64-0.94; placebo, 0.39-0.64; all p < 0.001). At Week 2, adjunctive brexpiprazole already showed a greater effect than adjunctive placebo on the MADRS6, and on five of the core symptoms (all p < 0.01).Limitations: This was a post hoc analysis of studies that were not designed for this purpose. Correction for multiple comparisons was not performed.Conclusions: Brexpiprazole, as adjunct to ADT, produced a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement on the core symptoms of MDD. Brexpiprazole is thought to exert its effects in MDD by treating the core symptoms of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The authors sought to determine the relative morbidity and mortality associated with drugs used to treat depression and to examine specific clinical effects associated with serious outcomes.Method: The National Poison Data System, which receives exposure reports from regional poison centers serving the United States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, was queried for single drug exposures in individuals 12 years and older during the period 2000-2014. Medications included were antidepressants, atypical antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, lithium, and other medications used in the treatment of depression. The main outcomes were the morbidity index (the number of serious outcomes per 1,000 exposures) and the mortality index (the number of fatal outcomes per 10,000 exposures).Results: During this 15-year period, there were 962,222 single substance exposures to the 48 medications studied. Serious outcomes rose 2.26-fold and in linear fashion over the 15 years. While tricyclic and monoamine oxidase inhibitor medications were associated with high morbidity and mortality, several newer agents also appeared hazardous. Lithium, quetiapine, olanzapine, bupropion, and carbamazepine were associated with high morbidity indices. Lithium, venlafaxine, bupropion, quetiapine, olanzapine, ziprasidone, valproic acid, carbamazepine, and citalopram were associated with higher mortality indices.Conclusions: Serious outcomes after overdose or nonintentional exposures to medications used to treat depression have risen dramatically over the past 15 years. The present data suggest that the morbidity and mortality risks vary substantially among these medications. These differences become important when selecting treatments for patients with depression, especially those at increased risk for suicide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Predictors of response to ESK+AD and AD+PBO were identified in patients with TRD. • ESK+AD treatment, younger age, employment, and low anxiety predicted response. • Fewer failed ADs in the current episode and early response also predicted response. • Odds of achieving response were 68% higher with ESK+AD versus AD+PBO (P = 0.003). • Our findings may identify patients mostly likely to benefit from ESK+AD treatment. This exploratory post hoc analysis of two pooled 4-week, phase 3, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled studies that compared esketamine nasal spray plus a newly initiated oral antidepressant (ESK+AD; n = 310) with a newly initiated oral AD plus placebo nasal spray (AD+PBO; n = 208) in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) examined baseline patient demographic and psychiatric characteristics as potential predictors of response (≥50% reduction from baseline in Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] total score) and remission (MADRS total score ≤12) at day 28. Overall, younger age, any employment, fewer failed ADs in the current depressive episode, and reduction in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score at day 8 were significant positive predictors of response and remission at day 28. Treatment assignment was an important predictor of both response and remission. Patients treated with ESK+AD had 68% and 55% increased odds of achieving response and remission, respectively, versus those treated with AD+PBO. In the ESK+AD group, attainment of response and remission was more likely in patients who were employed, without significant anxiety at baseline, and who experienced a reduction in CGI-S score at day 8. Identification of predictors of response and remission may facilitate identification of those patients with TRD most likely to benefit from ESK+AD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02417064 (clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02417064) and NCT02418585 (clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02418585) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a research study on antidepressants and its efficacy for the treatment of late-life major depressive disorder (MDD). Study subjects include elderly and late-life patients with MDD in a randomized placebo-controlled trials for antidepressants including amitriptyline, imipramine and clomipramine and compared them with various studies. Conclusions indicated there is antidepressant efficacy in late-life MDD and reduced efficacy in MDD patients 65 years old and older.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of antidepressants in people with depression and dementia. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on a literature search of Medline and Cochrane Trials Registry for acute-phase, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design, random-assignment trials of antidepressants marketed in the United States. SETTING: Outpatient clinics, inpatient units, residential settings. PARTICIPANTS: People with criterion-based diagnoses of dementia and depression. MEASUREMENTS: Numbers of participants randomized; baseline and end point depression scale scores; and response, remission, and discontinuation rates were extracted. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for response and remission rates, change scores using standardized mean differences, and discontinuation rates. Sensitivity analyses were planned to examine effects of depression diagnosis, severity, and trial duration. RESULTS: Seven trials with 330 participants met selection criteria. The odds ratio (OR) for six trials reporting response rates with antidepressant and placebo was 2.12 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.95-4.70; Z=1.84, P=.07). The OR for five trials reporting remission rates was 1.97 (95% CI=0.85-4.55; Z=1.59, P=.11). Both analyses demonstrated heterogeneity. The standardized mean difference in trials was 0.29 (95% CI=0.02-0.60, Z=1.86, P=.06). This analysis did not demonstrate significant heterogeneity. Adverse event discontinuation rates (9.0%) were not significantly higher with drug than placebo (6.0%), and were low. CONCLUSION: The evidence for antidepressant treatment of people with depression and dementia, although suggestive, does not confirm efficacy. All of the trials were significantly underpowered to detect differences, resulting in inconclusive findings. Variable trial methods, comorbid conditions, and differences in antidepressants employed further confounded findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Uncontrolled antidepressant trials suggest that anxious patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) are less responsive to antidepressant treatment than less anxious patients. The objective of this study is to determine whether specific antidepressant effects, estimated by drug-placebo differences, are reduced in anxious depression during treatment of MDD with duloxetine. Methods: This is a retrospective secondary pooled analysis of all placebo-controlled trials of duloxetine at therapeutic doses conducted by the sponsor in outpatients with nonpsychotic unipolar MDD, using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). Anxious depression was defined by ≥7 on the anxiety/somatization factor of the HAMD. Response was defined as ≥50% improvement from baseline to endpoint on the HAMD. Remission was defined as an endpoint HAMD≤7. Analyses were performed in the intent-to-treat sample with at least one post-treatment rating. Results: Eleven trials included 2,841 patients of whom 1,326 were classified as anxious and 1,515 as nonanxious. Change on the HAMD was greater with duloxetine than placebo in both anxious (9.91 versus 7.55, P<.001) and nonanxious (6.65 versus 5.23, P<.001) patients. Level of anxiety had no effect on the drug–placebo differences. Response and remission rates were significantly greater in duloxetine than placebo-treated patients and drug–placebo differences were unaffected by anxious status. Use of HAMD items psychic and somatic anxiety to define anxious subgroups had similar outcomes. Conclusions: Duloxetine was more effective than placebo in achieving response and remission in both anxious and nonanxious patients. Anxious status did not affect the magnitude of the drug effect. Depression and Anxiety, 2010. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Although antipsychotic agents have a long history of use in depression, their effectiveness in treating core symptoms of depression such as loss of interest has been questioned. Adjunctive aripiprazole is beneficial for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder but its effects on specific symptoms have not been reported. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of aripiprazole on core symptoms of depression. Methods: This is a post-hoc, pooled analysis of two trials of aripiprazole augmentation of standard antidepressants (ADT) in patients with major depression. Patients with an inadequate response to ADT received adjunctive aripiprazole (n =373) or placebo (n =368) for 6weeks. Change on four subscales of the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) that capture core depression symptoms was determined and change on individual HAM-D items also was assessed. The magnitude of within-group change for the subscales and individual items was expressed as effect size (ES) and between-group significance tested with ANCOVA. The magnitude of change was also examined comparing the response rates for aripiprazole and placebo on HAM-D17 and the four subscales. Change on three composite subscales — anxiety, insomnia and drive was also examined. Results: Within-group change on the four core subscales was substantial (ES=1.1–1.2) and similar to that for the 17-item HAM-D total score. Between-group comparisons indicated mean change and response rates were significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole than placebo for each core subscale (all p <0.01). Individual HAM-D17 items showing the greatest change from baseline with adjunctive aripiprazole: depressed mood (within-group ES=1.03) work and activities (ES=0.86), guilt (ES=0.77) and psychic anxiety (ES=0.67) are the same symptoms identified by each of the core subscales and each of these items differed significantly from change on that item with placebo (p <0.01). On three composite scales, adjunctive aripiprazole was significantly more effective than placebo with respect to mean change for anxiety, insomnia and drive (all p <0.001). Conclusions: Aripiprazole augmentation of standard ADT results in significant, clinically meaningful changes in the core symptoms of depression. It is also associated with significant change in anxiety, insomnia, and drive components of the 17-item HAM-D. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective Previous studies of mixed aged and older adult samples with major depressive disorder (MDD) reported reduced depression response in anxious patients, but a systematic review and analysis has not been performed. Our aim was to determine if anxiety predicts antidepressant response in previously identified placebo-controlled trials of second generation antidepressants for late-life depression. Method From a previous systematic review that identified ten randomized, placebo-controlled trials of community dwelling patients aged 60 or older with major depression, anxious patients were identified by a score ≥7 on the anxiety/somatization factor of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Response was defined as 50% or greater improvement on the HDRS or the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to calculate Odds Ratios (OR). Results Data were available from eight trials having ten drug-placebo contrasts that included 2322 anxious and 1387 non-anxious patients. The odds ratio for response to drug compared to placebo in anxious patients was 1.57 (95% CI 1.15, 2.14; z = 2.86, n = 10, p < 0.001), in non-anxious patients was 1.44 (95% CI 1.15, 1.80, z = 3.21, n = 10, p < 0.001), and did not differ between groups. Pooled response rates to drug and placebo respectively were 49.4% vs 37.4% in anxious patients and 44.2 vs 35.5% in non-anxious patients. Conclusions In randomized, placebo-controlled trials, anxiety in late-life depression was not associated with decreased response to second generation antidepressants. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which investigated the effectiveness of adjunctive aripiprazole as an antidepressant therapy (ADT) for patients with DSM-IV major depressive disorder with baseline anxious/atypical features. The study defined anxious depression using a Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, while atypical depression was defined using a criteria on the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Report. Study researchers concluded that adjunctive aripiprazole is effective in patients with major depression.

Objective: Second-generation antidepressants are commonly used to treat major depression in late-life. This systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the evidence for efficacy of second-generation antidepressants in late-life major depression. Methods: The Cochrane Library (2006 [3]), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2006), and meeting presentations were searched for trials of second-generation antidepressants (nontricyclics) marketed in the United States. Published and unpub- lished placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials in outpatients 60 years and older, with nonpsychotic, unipolar major depression were selected. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were extracted. Outcomes were expressed as odds ratios (OR), risk differences, and weighted mean differences. Results: Ten unique trials (four unpublished) with 13 contrasts met selection criteria. Trials were 6-12 weeks duration, and included 2,377 patients who received active drug and 1,788 received placebo. The ORs by meta-analysis for response and remission were 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-1.57, z = 5.45, N = 13, p <0.001) and 1.27 (CI 1.12-1.44, z = 3.67, N = 13, p <0.001), respectively, with significant heterogeneity for response and remission among the trials. Mean pooled response rates for antide-pressant and placebo were 44.4% and 34. 7%, respectively. The OR for response was significantly higher in the 10-12 week trials (OR = 1.73, CI 1.42-2.09, z = 5.51, N = 5, p <0.001) than the 6-8week trials (OR = 1.22, CI1.05-1.42, z = 2.60, N = 8, p = 0.01). ORs for discontinuation for any reason and for adverse events were significantly higher with drugs than with placebo. Conclusions: Antidepressants are more effective than placebo in elderly depressed subjects although effects are modest and vary. Identification of the characteristics of responders and nonresponders will be crucial to improving treatment outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Treatment studies of depression in residential care are limited. Reports of predictors of response are rare. In the largest nursing home prospective antidepressant trial reported, we examined predictors of response. Methods This was a 12-week open-label study of mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets performed in 30 US nursing homes. Subjects were men and women aged ≥70, with a Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) score ≥10, who had a depressive disorder that required antidepressant treatment. Mirtazapine was started at 15 mg at bedtime, and adjusted to 15–45 mg/day. A 16-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used to assess depression at baseline, weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 or early termination. Results One hundred and twenty-four patients received at least one dose of study drug and of these, 119 had at least one post-drug assessment. Mean age was 82.9 years and 72% were female. Response rates at 12 weeks were 47% on the HAMD and 54% on the CGI. Age, sex, MMSE score, medical burden, history of prior depression, and baseline HAMD severity were not significantly associated with HAMD response (≥50% improvement) and in most cases correlations were trivial, <0.1. Advanced age, medical burden, and cognitive impairment did not predict adverse events. Conclusions In this sample of depressed nursing home residents treated with mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets, advanced age, medical illness, and cognitive impairment did not predict response. The findings suggest that these variables need not be viewed as obstacles to treatment. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine effects of sertraline on suicidal thinking and behavior in patients with late-life major depression. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an eight-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized trial of a multi- center trial at 66 clinical sites. Outpatients ≥60 years of age with major depression and a Hamilton Depression Rating (HAMD) score ≥18 were included. Intervention was sertraline 50-100 mg/day or placebo for eight weeks. Measurements were 17-item HAMD administered at baseline and two-week intervals. HAMD Item 3 used to assess suicidal ideation (SI) and behavior. Reports of serious adverse events (SAEs), adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation, and spontaneously reported adverse events reviewed. Results: A total of 747 patients received at least one dose of medication, and 728 had at least one posttreatment assessment. Mean age (±5D) was 69.8 ± 67 years (range: 59-97 years) and 56% were female. There were no completed suicides or suicide at- tempts during the double-blind trial. One SAE, hospitalization, was associated with SI in a patient on sertraline. No other AEs were associated with SI or behavior. HAMD Item 3 ratings progressively declined during the trial with significantly lower values for sertraline than placebo (Z= 2.41, p <0.02). In 248 patients with HAMD Item 3 of zero at baseline, the percentage of patients whose Item 3 ratings increased during treatment did not differ in the two groups (22.4% versus 25.8% for sertraline and placebo, respectively.) Conclusion: Sertraline was associated with significantly lower HAMD Item 3 scores than placebo during treatment. There was no evidence of greater emergent suicidal thinking or behavior with sertraline than placebo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Treatment studies of depression in the very oldest patients are infrequent. For these reasons, this study of mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets was carried out in nursing home residents ≥85 years old with physician-diagnosed depression. The naturalistic conditions of the study allowed us to include patients with cognitive impairment, concomitant medications and comorbid illness. Methods This was a subgroup analysis of nursing home residents ≥85 years old who took part in a larger 12-week open-label trial. Patients were eligible if they had physician-diagnosed depression, and a Mini-Mental State Exam score ≥10. The physician or nurse coordinator obtained data from healthcare professionals in daily contact with the patient to complete the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, a modified 16-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D), and the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD). Treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded. Results Of the 50 patients enrolled at 23 sites, 72% completed the 12-week trial. The mean age of the participants was 89.3 years. The mean HAM-D score declined from 16.9 at baseline to 7.3 at endpoint (ITT, LOCF analysis) For the CSDD, the mean score declined from 15.1 to 7.1. The percentage of responders on the CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) scale increased at each assessment reaching 55% at endpoint. Only 10% of the patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. There was a mean increase in weight of 1.32 lbs (0.6 kg) at day 84. Conclusion Although lacking a placebo control, this naturalistic study suggests that mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets were effective and well tolerated in this sample of depressed nursing home residents ≥85 years of age. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We examined two previously published studies comparing a norepinephrine (NE) selective agent, reboxetine, and a serotonin (5-HT) selective agent, fluoxetine, to determine if these agents have different effects on individual depressive symptoms. Methods: Both studies were 8-week, double-blind, comparison studies of men and women with DSM III-R major depression. Within-group effect sizes for individual symptom change on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) were determined in the observed case samples and in patients for whom the symptom was relatively severe at baseline. We required that any significant differences in one sample be cross-validated in the second. Results: Two hundred fifty-three subjects in study I and 168 subjects in study II were randomized to reboxetine or fluoxetine. In both samples, depressed mood, decreased interest, and psychic anxiety had the greatest change. Effect sizes for all HAMD symptoms were similar for the two drugs. No difference between groups in one sample was replicated in the second. Among subjects with severe symptoms, no significant differences were cross-validated. Conclusions: Reboxetine and fluoxetine appear to have similar effects on depressive symptoms. These data suggest that NE and 5-HT selective antidepressant drugs act through the same final common pathway and challenge the belief that symptom differences are useful for antidepressant selection. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

: BackgroundAlthough several antidepressants are now available, all have limited efficacy and a delayed onset of action. The current study was undertaken as a proof of the concept that combining norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake inhibition would be more effective and act more rapidly than either drug alone.: MethodsInpatients with nonpsychotic unipolar major depression and a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) score of at least 18 after 1 week of hospitalization without antidepressant medication were randomized to 6 weeks of treatment with fluoxetine (FLX) 20 mg/day, desipramine (DMI) adjusted to an adequate plasma level, or the combination of FLX 20 mg/day and DMI, given under double-blind conditions. Twenty-four-hour DMI levels were used to rapidly adjust DMI dose to achieve a therapeutic level and to anticipate the enzyme-inhibiting effects of FLX. Treatment-resistant patients were stratified. Patients were rated with the HAMD and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).: ResultsThirty-nine patients began treatment. One patient withdrew consent. The DMI–FLX combination was significantly more likely to result in remission on the MADRS than either FLX or DMI alone [53.8% vs. 7.1% and 0%, respectively; χ2(2) = 13.49, p = .001]. The advantage for combined treatment was not explained by history of treatment resistance or by drug plasma concentrations. Rapid response, at 1 or 2 weeks, was neither statistically nor meaningfully greater with combined treatment.: ConclusionsThis study supports the hypothesis that the combination of a noradrenergic and serotonergic agent is more likely to result in remission than either selective agent alone during a 6-week treatment period. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article discusses the effectiveness of adjunctive ziprasidone in treatment for major depression and adjunctive atypical antipsychotics. Information about the randomized controlled trial in patients who received adjunctive ziprasidone, is provided. An overview on the comparison of ziprasidone with other atypical antipsychotics, is also examined.

Treatment of refractory depression is a common challenge for mental health professionals. To assure optimal treatment, the clinician should first determine that adequate dosage has been employed for an adequate duration. Next there are a variety of augmentation strategies or alternative antidepressants that could be considered. This report reviews the evidence supporting these strategies, describes their implementation, compares their effectiveness, and offers suggestions for approaching the array of treatments available. Depression and Anxiety 5:165–174, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examined the value of the dexamethasone suppression test (DST) for predicting response of patients with unipolar, non psychotic major depression to 1 week of hospitalization without antidepressant drugs and to a 4-week trial of desipramine at a fixed plasma level. The rates of response to hospitalization without drug treatment (defined as a score of 12 or less on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) were not significantly different for the patients with a positive DST and those with a negative DST. This finding differs from those of prior studies of the DST and response to placebo. The responses of the DST-positive and DST-negative patients to desipramine also did not differ, a finding that replicates those in some prior reports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses research on the effectiveness of antidepressant treatment in elderly patients with long duration of illness. It references a study by J. C. Nelson et al published in an issue of the "American Journal of Psychiatry." The place-controlled trials assessed several factors associated with the disease including cognitive impairment and baseline depression in patients aged 60 and older. Result showed that the second-generation antidepressant treatment was better than the placebo.

This article presents an overview of the study regarding anxious depression. The study demonstrates that among 2,876 patients with major depression, those who were more anxious were more likely to experience adverse events and were less likely to respond and remit during citalopram treatment. The difference in response rates between anxious and nonanxious groups in the Sequenced Treatment Alternative to Relieve Depression sample is 41.7 percent and 52.8 percent, respectively, considering the magnitude of differences observed in recent placebo-controlled trials in depression and antidepressant comparison studies.

Deals with the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the treatment of depression. Studies which demonstrated that interruption of the synthesis of 5-HT or norepinephrine compromised the antidepressant effect of drugs; Effectiveness of antidepressants that combine noradrenergic and serotonergic mechanisms; Mechanism of action of the mirtazapine drug.

Background: Less than half of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) respond to their first antidepressant trial. Our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) remains poor, and there is no reliable method of predicting treatment response.Methods: Thirty-seven MDD subjects and 41 healthy controls, somatically healthy and medication-free for at least six weeks, were recruited, and plasma serotonin (5-HT) levels were assessed at baseline. Twenty-six of the MDD subjects were then treated in an open-label manner with clinically appropriate doses of sertraline for 8 weeks, after which plasma 5-HT levels were again assessed. Response to treatment was defined as an improvement of 50% or more on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.Results: Non-responders to sertraline treatment had significantly lower pre-treatment 5-HT levels compared to both healthy controls and responders (F = 4.4, p = 0.004 and p = 0.036, respectively). There was a significant decrease in 5-HT levels over treatment in all MDD subjects (t = 6.2, p = 0.000003). The decrease was significantly more prominent in responders compared to non-responders (t = 2.1, p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in post-treatment 5-HT levels between responders and non-responders.Limitations: The study had a modest sample size. 5-HT levels in plasma may not reflect 5-HT levels in the brain.Conclusions: The results indicate that SSRI response may be facilitated by adequate baseline plasma 5-HT content and that successful SSRI treatment is associated with greater decreases in circulating 5-HT. Plasma 5-HT content may be a predictor of SSRI treatment outcome. Potential underlying mechanisms are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: There is a paucity of evidence for outcome predictors in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) not responding to initial antidepressant therapy (ADT). This post-hoc analysis evaluated whether MDD severity affects response to adjunctive aripiprazole. Methods: Data from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive aripiprazole in adults with MDD and inadequate response to 1 to 3 ADT trials were pooled and stratified based on Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score (mild, ≤24; moderate, 25–30; severe, ≥31). Treatment differences in change in MADRS total score and rates of response (≥50% MADRS improvement) and remission (response with MADRS total score ≤10) were analyzed at endpoint. Adverse events were assessed within each subgroup. Results: Aripiprazole produced greater improvement than placebo in the MADRS total score regardless of MDD severity at baseline (between-treatment difference [95% CI]: mild, −2.5 [−4.0 to −1.1]; moderate, −3.2 [−4.9 to −1.6]; severe, −4.5 [−6.8 to −2.2]). Compared with placebo, adjunctive aripiprazole increased the likelihood of response in all subgroups (risk ratio [95% CI]: mild, 1.50 [1.15, 1.95]; moderate, 1.51 [1.09, 2.11]; severe, 1.95 [1.23, 3.10]). Common treatment-emergent adverse events included akathisia and restlessness. Limitations: The original studies were not designed to assess the efficacy of adjunctive aripiprazole by baseline severity, and this post-hoc analysis was not powered to evaluate differences in severity subgroups. Conclusions: In patients who failed to respond to initial ADT, adjunctive aripiprazole was more effective than placebo in mild, moderate, and severe MDD strata. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00095823, NCT00105196, and NCT00095758. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objectives: The “neurotrophin hypothesis” of depression posits a role of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in depression, although it is unknown whether BDNF is more involved in the etiology of depression or in the mechanism of action of antidepressants. It is also unknown whether pre-treatment serum BDNF levels predict antidepressant response. Methods: Thirty un-medicated depressed subjects were treated with escitalopram (N=16) or sertraline (N=14) for 8weeks. Twenty-five of the depressed subjects completed 8weeks of antidepressant treatment and had analyzable data. Twenty-eight healthy controls were also studied. Serum for BDNF assay was obtained at baseline in all subjects and after 8weeks of treatment in the depressed subjects. Depression ratings were obtained at baseline and after 8weeks of treatment in the depressed subjects. Results: Pre-treatment BDNF levels were lower in the depressed subjects than the controls (p=0.001) but were not significantly correlated with pre-treatment depression severity. Depression ratings improved with SSRI treatment (p<0.001), and BDNF levels increased with treatment (p=0.005). Changes in BDNF levels were not significantly correlated with changes in depression ratings. However, pre-treatment BDNF levels were directly correlated with antidepressant responses (p<0.01), and “Responders” to treatment (≥50% improvement in depression ratings) had higher pre-treatment BDNF levels than did “Non-responders” (p<0.05). Conclusions: These results confirm low serum BDNF levels in un-medicated depressed subjects and confirm antidepressant-induced increases in BDNF levels, but they suggest that antidepressants do not work simply by correcting BDNF insufficiency. Rather, these findings are consistent with a permissive or facilitatory role of BDNF in the mechanism of action of antidepressants. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

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 Kingdom’s 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. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Plasma activity of dopamine β-hydroxylase (DβH), the enzyme that converts dopamine to norepinephrine, is reportedly lower in patients with unipolar major depression with psychotic features (UDPF) than in those with nonpsychotic unipolar major depression (UD). Plasma DβH is under genetic control by the structural locus encoding DβH protein, DBH. This study tested the hypothesis that diagnosis-specific allelic variation at DBH accounts for lower plasma DβH in UDPF.Methods: Plasma DβH activity was measured in samples from patients with UDPF (n = 33) and UD (n = 45). Genotypes were determined at several functional DBH polymorphisms, including C-1021T, a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the proximal 5′ region that associates with variation in plasma DβH activity.Results: Mean plasma DβH activity was significantly lower in UDPF than in UD. Genotyping at DBH did not reveal genetic associations distinguishing UDPF from UD. A two-way analysis of variance showed significant effects of genotype and diagnostic group but no significant interaction.Conclusions: Although the effects of the diagnosis of UDPF, and of DBH allele status, on plasma DβH activity were replicated, the lower plasma DβH in patients with UDPF was not accounted for by DBH genotype. Several explanations for this result are possible. First, other variants at DBH, or at other loci, could account for the findings. Second, nongenetic factors could account for the differences in plasma DβH. In this regard, we hypothesize that abnormal regulation of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function in UDPF lowers expression of DβH protein, which could in turn alter the ratio of dopamine and norepinephrine in noradrenergic neurons, thereby promoting development of psychotic symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]