Dataset Information

Efficacy, quality of life, and acceptability outcomes of atypical antipsychotic augmentation treatment for treatment-resistant depression: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a debilitating and costly mental disorder. Although commercially available antidepressants have proliferated over the last 20 years, a substantial number of patients either do not respond adequately to these drugs or are unable to tolerate their adverse effects. One common approach has been to augment conventional antidepressants with an adjunctive agent, but the optimal selection of atypical antipsychotic agents for adjunctive treatment of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) remains controversial.

Methods/design

An electronic literature search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, LiLACS, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for studies will be conducted with no restrictions on language, publication year, or publication type. Several clinical trial registry agencies, pharmaceutical company websites, and FDA reports will also be reviewed. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with atypical antipsychotic augmentation treatment for treatment-resistant depression will be considered. Data will be independently extracted by two reviewers. Traditional pairwise meta-analyses will be performed for RCTs that directly compare different treatment arms. Then, Bayesian network meta-analyses will be performed to compare the relative efficacy and acceptability of different atypical antipsychotic agents (and doses). A sensitivity analysis will be performed by excluding studies classified as a small sample size, having a high placebo effect.

Discussion

This systematic review and network meta-analysis will comparatively analyze the efficacy, quality of life, and acceptability profiles of atypical antipsychotic medications used for the adjunctive treatment of TRD. The findings should provide clinically relevant implications for comprehensively understanding the risk-benefit profiles of these adjunctive treatments.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD 42014009666.

SUBMITTER: Liu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4234739 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy, quality of life, and acceptability outcomes of atypical antipsychotic augmentation treatment for treatment-resistant depression: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Liu Yiyun Y Zhou Xinyu X Qin Bin B Del Giovane Cinzia C Zhang Yuqing Y Xie Peng P

Systematic reviews 20141105

<h4>Background</h4>Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a debilitating and costly mental disorder. Although commercially available antidepressants have proliferated over the last 20 years, a substantial number of patients either do not respond adequately to these drugs or are unable to tolerate their adverse effects. One common approach has been to augment conventional antidepressants with an adjunctive agent, but the optimal selection of atypical antipsychotic agents for adjunctive treatment of t ...[more]

PMID: 25373601

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAtypical antipsychotic medications are widely prescribed for the adjunctive treatment of depression, yet their total risk-benefit profile is not well understood. We thus conducted a systematic review of the efficacy and safety profiles of atypical antipsychotic medications used for the adjunctive treatment of depression.Methods and findingsWe included randomized trials comparing adjunctive antipsychotic medication to placebo for treatment-resistant depression in adults. Our literature search (conducted in December 2011 and updated on December 14, 2012) identified 14 short-term trials of aripiprazole, olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC), quetiapine, and risperidone. When possible, we supplemented published literature with data from manufacturers' clinical trial registries and US Food and Drug Administration New Drug Applications. Study duration ranged from 4 to 12 wk. All four drugs had statistically significant effects on remission, as follows: aripiprazole (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.48-2.73), OFC (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.01-2.0), quetiapine (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.33-2.42), and risperidone (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.31-4.30). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 19 for OFC and nine for each other drug. All drugs with the exception of OFC also had statistically significant effects on response rates, as follows: aripiprazole (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.58-2.72; NNT, 7), OFC (OR, 1.30, 95% CI, 0.87-1.93), quetiapine (OR, 1.53, 95% CI, 1.17-2.0; NNT, 10), and risperidone (OR, 1.83, 95% CI, 1.16-2.88; NNT, 8). All four drugs showed statistically significant effects on clinician-rated depression severity measures (Hedges' g ranged from 0.26 to 0.48; mean difference of 2.69 points on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale across drugs). On measures of functioning and quality of life, these medications produced either no benefit or a very small benefit, except for risperidone, which had a small-to-moderate effect on quality of life (g?=?0.49). Treatment was linked to several adverse events, including akathisia (aripiprazole), sedation (quetiapine, OFC, and aripiprazole), abnormal metabolic laboratory results (quetiapine and OFC), and weight gain (all four drugs, especially OFC). Shortcomings in study design and data reporting, as well as use of post hoc analyses, may have inflated the apparent benefits of treatment and reduced the apparent incidence of adverse events.ConclusionsAtypical antipsychotic medications for the adjunctive treatment of depression are efficacious in reducing observer-rated depressive symptoms, but clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously in light of (1) the small-to-moderate-sized benefits, (2) the lack of benefit with regards to quality of life or functional impairment, and (3) the abundant evidence of potential treatment-related harm. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Treatment-resistant depression affects millions of people worldwide and is a leading cause of disability and suicide. Studies of treatment-resistant depression outcomes have traditionally focused on depressive symptoms and functional impairment. Quality of life (QoL) has not been well described. We aimed to measure QoL in individuals with treatment-resistant depression and to determine how QoL was related to traditional measures of symptoms and social functioning. METHODS:We used a reliable, cross-culturally validated questionnaire, the abbreviated World Health Organization Quality of Life scale (WHOQOL-BREF), to prospectively measure QoL in 79 patients with treatment-resistant depression who were referred for electroconvulsive therapy at a United States tertiary-care medical center. QoL was characterized in four domains: physical, psychological, social, and environmental. QoL domains were examined for association with demographic variables, patient-reported depressive symptoms, functional impairment, and childhood adversity, as well as clinician-rated scales. RESULTS:Relative to published international norms, mean QoL scores were low in physical (standardized score, z?=?-2.0), psychological (z?=?-2.6), and social (z?=?-1.0) domains, but not in the environmental domain (z?=?0.2). After controlling for age and income, patient-rated depressive symptoms correlated with physical (Pearson correlation, r?=?-0.26) and psychological (r?=?-0.43) QoL, whereas adverse childhood experiences correlated with environmental QoL (r?=?-0.33). Patient-rated functional impairment correlated modestly with all domains (r?=?-0.25 to -0.39). Surprisingly, QoL correlated very weakly with clinician-rated measures. These modest associations of QoL with other clinical scales were confirmed in multiple regression analyses. LIMITATIONS:We used a single QoL instrument, which did not allow us to directly compare the WHOQOL-BREF scale with other commonly used instruments. Our sample was recruited from a single academic medical center in the Midwest region of the United States and was largely Caucasian. These factors may limit generalizability to other settings and ethnicities. CONCLUSION:Among individuals with treatment-resistant depression, QoL is lowest in the psychological and physical domains. QoL is only modestly correlated with patient-rated symptoms and functioning, and even more weakly correlated with clinician-rated scales, indicating that measures of symptoms and functioning cannot serve as QoL proxies. QoL should be assessed when caring for patients with treatment-resistant depression. When developing novel biological, psychological, and social interventions for treatment-resistant depression, QoL should be targeted as a distinct clinical outcome.

Project description:BackgroundThe benefits and risks of augmenting or switching antidepressants in older adults with treatment-resistant depression have not been extensively studied.MethodsWe conducted a two-step, open-label trial involving adults 60 years of age or older with treatment-resistant depression. In step 1, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to augmentation of existing antidepressant medication with aripiprazole, augmentation with bupropion, or a switch from existing antidepressant medication to bupropion. Patients who did not benefit from or were ineligible for step 1 were randomly assigned in step 2 in a 1:1 ratio to augmentation with lithium or a switch to nortriptyline. Each step lasted approximately 10 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in psychological well-being, assessed with the National Institutes of Health Toolbox Positive Affect and General Life Satisfaction subscales (population mean, 50; higher scores indicate greater well-being). A secondary outcome was remission of depression.ResultsIn step 1, a total of 619 patients were enrolled; 211 were assigned to aripiprazole augmentation, 206 to bupropion augmentation, and 202 to a switch to bupropion. Well-being scores improved by 4.83 points, 4.33 points, and 2.04 points, respectively. The difference between the aripiprazole-augmentation group and the switch-to-bupropion group was 2.79 points (95% CI, 0.56 to 5.02; P = 0.014, with a prespecified threshold P value of 0.017); the between-group differences were not significant for aripiprazole augmentation versus bupropion augmentation or for bupropion augmentation versus a switch to bupropion. Remission occurred in 28.9% of patients in the aripiprazole-augmentation group, 28.2% in the bupropion-augmentation group, and 19.3% in the switch-to-bupropion group. The rate of falls was highest with bupropion augmentation. In step 2, a total of 248 patients were enrolled; 127 were assigned to lithium augmentation and 121 to a switch to nortriptyline. Well-being scores improved by 3.17 points and 2.18 points, respectively (difference, 0.99; 95% CI, -1.92 to 3.91). Remission occurred in 18.9% of patients in the lithium-augmentation group and 21.5% in the switch-to-nortriptyline group; rates of falling were similar in the two groups.ConclusionsIn older adults with treatment-resistant depression, augmentation of existing antidepressants with aripiprazole improved well-being significantly more over 10 weeks than a switch to bupropion and was associated with a numerically higher incidence of remission. Among patients in whom augmentation or a switch to bupropion failed, changes in well-being and the occurrence of remission with lithium augmentation or a switch to nortriptyline were similar. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; OPTIMUM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02960763.).

Project description:ImportanceRandomized controlled trials have demonstrated increased all-cause mortality in elderly patients with dementia treated with newer antipsychotics. It is unknown whether this risk generalizes to non-elderly adults using newer antipsychotics as augmentation treatment for depression.ObjectiveThis study examined all-cause mortality risk of newer antipsychotic augmentation for adult depression.DesignPopulation-based new-user/active comparator cohort study.SettingNational healthcare claims data from the US Medicaid program from 2001-2010 linked to the National Death Index.ParticipantsNon-elderly adults (25-64 years) diagnosed with depression who after ≥3 months of antidepressant monotherapy initiated either augmentation with a newer antipsychotic or with a second antidepressant. Patients with alternative indications for antipsychotic medications, such as schizophrenia, psychotic depression, or bipolar disorder, were excluded.ExposureAugmentation treatment for depression with a newer antipsychotic or with a second antidepressant.Main outcomeAll-cause mortality during study follow-up ascertained from the National Death Index.ResultsThe analytic cohort included 39,582 patients (female = 78.5%, mean age = 44.5 years) who initiated augmentation with a newer antipsychotic (n = 22,410; 40% = quetiapine, 21% = risperidone, 17% = aripiprazole, 16% = olanzapine) or with a second antidepressant (n = 17,172). The median chlorpromazine equivalent starting dose for all newer antipsychotics was 68mg/d, increasing to 100 mg/d during follow-up. Altogether, 153 patients died during 13,328 person-years of follow-up (newer antipsychotic augmentation: n = 105, follow-up = 7,601 person-years, mortality rate = 138.1/10,000 person-years; antidepressant augmentation: n = 48, follow-up = 5,727 person-years, mortality rate = 83.8/10,000 person-years). An adjusted hazard ratio of 1.45 (95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 2.06) indicated increased all-cause mortality risk for newer antipsychotic augmentation compared to antidepressant augmentation (risk difference = 37.7 (95%CI, 1.7 to 88.8) per 10,000 person-years). Results were robust across several sensitivity analyses.ConclusionAugmentation with newer antipsychotics in non-elderly patients with depression was associated with increased mortality risk compared with adding a second antidepressant. Though these findings require replication and cannot prove causality, physicians managing adults with depression should be aware of this potential for increased mortality associated with newer antipsychotic augmentation.

Project description:Treatment-resistant major depression is common and potentially life-threatening in elderly people, in whom little is known about the benefits and risks of augmentation pharmacotherapy. We aimed to assess whether aripiprazole is associated with a higher probability of remission than is placebo.We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at three centres in the USA and Canada to test the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole augmentation for adults aged older than 60 years with treatment-resistant depression (Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] score of ?15). Patients who did not achieve remission during a pre-trial with venlafaxine extended-release (150-300 mg/day) were randomly assigned (1:1) to the addition of aripiprazole (target dose 10 mg [maximum 15 mg] daily) daily or placebo for 12 weeks. The computer-generated randomisation was done in blocks and stratified by site. Only the database administrator and research pharmacists had knowledge of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was remission, defined as an MADRS score of 10 or less (and at least 2 points below the score at the start of the randomised phase) at both of the final two consecutive visits, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00892047.From July 20, 2009, to Dec 30, 2013, we recruited 468 eligible participants, 181 (39%) of whom did not remit and were randomly assigned to aripiprazole (n=91) or placebo (n=90). A greater proportion of participants in the aripiprazole group achieved remission than did those in the placebo group (40 [44%] vs 26 [29%] participants; odds ratio [OR] 2·0 [95% CI 1·1-3·7], p=0·03; number needed to treat [NNT] 6·6 [95% CI 3·5-81·8]). Akathisia was the most common adverse effect of aripiprazole (reported in 24 [26%] of 91 participants on aripiprazole vs 11 [12%] of 90 on placebo). Compared with placebo, aripiprazole was also associated with more Parkinsonism (15 [17%] of 86 vs two [2%] of 81 participants), but not with treatment-emergent suicidal ideation (13 [21%] of 61 vs 19 [29%] of 65 participants) or other measured safety variables.In adults aged 60 years or older who do not achieve remission from depression with a first-line antidepressant, the addition of aripiprazole is effective in achieving and sustaining remission. Tolerability concerns include the potential for akathisia and Parkinsonism.National Institute of Mental Health, UPMC Endowment in Geriatric Psychiatry, Taylor Family Institute for Innovative Psychiatric Research, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute.

Project description:Introduction: It is a basic principle of the "psychedelic" treatment model that the quality of the acute experience mediates long-term improvements in mental health. In the present paper we sought to test this using data from a clinical trial assessing psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). In line with previous reports, we hypothesized that the occurrence and magnitude of Oceanic Boundlessness (OBN) (sharing features with mystical-type experience) and Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED) (similar to anxiety) would predict long-term positive outcomes, whereas sensory perceptual effects would have negligible predictive value. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients with treatment resistant depression underwent treatment with psilocybin (two separate sessions: 10 and 25 mg psilocybin). The Altered States of Consciousness (ASC) questionnaire was used to assess the quality of experiences in the 25 mg psilocybin session. From the ASC, the dimensions OBN and DED were used to measure the mystical-type and challenging experiences, respectively. The Self-Reported Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms (QIDS-SR) at 5 weeks served as the endpoint clinical outcome measure, as in later time points some of the subjects had gone on to receive new treatments, thus confounding inferences. In a repeated measure ANOVA, Time was the within-subject factor (independent variable), with QIDS-SR as the within-subject dependent variable in baseline, 1-day, 1-week, 5-weeks. OBN and DED were independent variables. OBN-by-Time and DED-by-Time interactions were the primary outcomes of interest. Results: For the interaction of OBN and DED with Time (QIDS-SR as dependent variable), the main effect and the effects at each time point compared to baseline were all significant (p = 0.002 and p = 0.003, respectively, for main effects), confirming our main hypothesis. Furthermore, Pearson's correlation of OBN with QIDS-SR (5 weeks) was specific compared to perceptual dimensions of the ASC (p < 0.05). Discussion: This report further bolsters the view that the quality of the acute psychedelic experience is a key mediator of long-term changes in mental health. Future therapeutic work with psychedelics should recognize the essential importance of quality of experience in determining treatment efficacy and consider ways of enhancing mystical-type experiences and reducing anxiety. Trial Registration: ISRCTN, number ISRCTN14426797, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14426797.

Dataset Information

Efficacy, quality of life, and acceptability outcomes of atypical antipsychotic augmentation treatment for treatment-resistant depression: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Publications

Efficacy, quality of life, and acceptability outcomes of atypical antipsychotic augmentation treatment for treatment-resistant depression: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets