Dataset Information

Melancholic Features in Bipolar Depression and Response to Lamotrigine: A Pooled Analysis of Five Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A pilot study suggested lamotrigine may be more effective for bipolar depression with melancholic features. We tested this hypothesis in a pooled analysis of 5 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials of lamotrigine for acute bipolar depression.

Methods

The pooled sample consisted of 1072 adult outpatients. Depressive symptoms were assessed for 7 to 10 weeks with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. The outcome measure was end-trial response (score reduction ≥ 50%). Melancholic features were assessed with both the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and baseline depression scale items, according to DSM criteria.

Results

The item-based melancholic specifier was associated with numerically larger treatment effects, although subgroup-treatment interactions in logistic regression models did not reach statistical significance. The small subgroup of patients with severe psychomotor retardation also appeared to benefit from lamotrigine. However, the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV melancholic specifier was not associated with larger treatment effects. Baseline depression severity was inconsistently associated with response, depending on which scale was used to define severity. The 2 melancholia variables had poor agreement despite having similar prevalences.

Conclusions

Our results do not clearly support the original hypothesis but do reinforce the importance of replicating secondary analyses of clinical trials with additional data.

SUBMITTER: Peters EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8083162 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Depressive symptoms associated with bipolar disorder negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The efficacy of lurasidone in reducing depressive symptoms has been previously demonstrated. The objective of this study was to examine the direct and indirect effect (mediated through improvement in depression symptoms) of lurasidone in improving patient HRQoL.A secondary analysis of data was conducted of two 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials assessing the effect of lurasidone (lurasidone monotherapy [20-60 mg/day or 80-120 mg/day]; lurasidone adjunctive to lithium or valproate [20-120 mg/day]) in patients with bipolar depression. Patient HRQoL was measured using the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (Q-LES-Q SF). Depression symptoms were measured using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to estimate the effect of lurasidone on improvement in the Q-LES-Q SF percentage maximum score from baseline to 6 weeks. Path analysis was used to evaluate the total effect (?1), as well as the indirect (?2*?3) and direct (?4) effect of lurasidone on Q-LES-Q SF change through improvements in MADRS.A total of 340 and 485 patients from the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy, respectively, were included in the analysis. At 6-weeks, ANCOVA analyses demonstrated that lurasidone provided significant improvement in adjusted mean Q-LES-Q SF scores in comparison to placebo for monotherapy (22.9 and 22.7 vs. 15.2, both p?<?0.01) and adjunctive therapy (23.1 vs. 17.9, p?=?0.01). Path analyses indicated that lurasidone treatment predicted MADRS improvement (monotherapy: ?2?=?-0.44, p?<?0.001; adjunctive therapy: ?2?=?-0.34, p?=?0.003), which subsequently predicted improvement in Q-LES-Q SF (monotherapy: ?3?=?-0.73, p?<?0.001; adjunctive therapy: ?3?=?-0.75, p?<?0.001); however, the effect of lurasidone on improvement in Q-LES-Q SF was largely mediated by change in MADRS (monotherapy: ?4?=?0.11, p?=?0.13; adjunctive therapy: ?4?=?0.02, p?=?0.77).Lurasidone as a monotherapy and adjunctive to lithium or valproate is an effective treatment for improving HRQoL in patients with bipolar depression. However, improvement in HRQoL was not independent of improvement in depression, indicating that the effect of lurasidone on improving patient HRQoL may act through a reduction in depressive symptoms associated with bipolar disorder.Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT00868699 and NCT00868452 (both registered March 23, 2009).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Depression in people with bipolar disorder is a major cause of long-term disability, possibly leading to early mortality and currently, limited safe and effective therapies exist. Although existing monotherapies such as quetiapine have limited proven efficacy and practical tolerability, treatment combinations may lead to improved outcomes. Lamotrigine is an anticonvulsant currently licensed for the prevention of depressive relapses in individuals with bipolar disorder. A double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial (comparative evaluation of Quetiapine-Lamotrigine [CEQUEL] study) was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of lamotrigine plus quetiapine versus quetiapine monotherapy in patients with bipolar type I or type II disorders. OBJECTIVE:Because the original CEQUEL study found significant depressive symptom improvements, the objective of this study was to reanalyze CEQUEL data and determine an unbiased classification accuracy for active lamotrigine versus placebo. We also wanted to establish the time it took for the drug to provide statistically significant outcomes. METHODS:Between October 21, 2008 and April 27, 2012, 202 participants from 27 sites in United Kingdom were randomly assigned to two treatments; 101: lamotrigine, 101: placebo. The primary variable used for estimating depressive symptoms was based on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-self report version 16 (QIDS-SR16). The original CEQUEL study findings were confirmed by performing t test and linear regression. Multiple features were computed from the QIDS-SR16 time series; different linear and nonlinear binary classifiers were trained to distinguish between the two groups. Various feature-selection techniques were used to select a feature set with the greatest explanatory power; a 10-fold cross-validation was used. RESULTS:From weeks 10 to 14, the mean difference in QIDS-SR16 ratings between the groups was -1.6317 (P=.09; sample size=81, 77; 95% CI -0.2403 to 3.5036). From weeks 48 to 52, the mean difference was -2.0032 (P=.09; sample size=54, 48; 95% CI -0.3433 to 4.3497). The coefficient of variation (?/?) and detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA) exponent alpha had the greatest explanatory power. The out-of-sample classification accuracy for the 138 participants who reported more than 10 times after week 12 was 62%. A consistent classification accuracy higher than the no-information benchmark was obtained in week 44. CONCLUSIONS:Adding lamotrigine to quetiapine treatment decreased depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar disorder. Our classification model suggested that lamotrigine increased the coefficient of variation in the QIDS-SR16 scores. The lamotrigine group also tended to have a lower DFA exponent, implying a substantial temporal instability in the time series. The performance of the model over time suggested that a trial of at least 44 weeks was required to achieve consistent results. The selected model confirmed the original CEQUEL study findings and helped in understanding the temporal dynamics of bipolar depression during treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT Number 2007-004513-33; https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2007-004513-33/GB (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73sNaI29O).

Project description:BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an inflammatory autoimmune condition associated with an increased risk of developing depression and anxiety. Depression and anxiety are associated with worse outcomes in RA, but the magnitude of the effect of each condition on RA outcomes is unclear. It is also unknown how pharmacological treatment of depression affects RA outcomes.ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study was to investigate the association of comorbid depression and anxiety with remission in patients with RA. Secondary aims were to determine the association between comorbid depression and anxiety on patient-reported outcomes and the relationship between concomitant use of antidepressants and remission in patients with depression.DesignData from patients with moderate to severe RA were pooled from five randomised controlled trials investigating tocilizumab and conventional synthetic disease-modifying agents.MethodsRemission was defined as a clinical disease activity index (CDAI) of ⩽2.8 and simple disease activity index (SDAI) of ⩽3.3. The association between the time to reach remission and depression and anxiety was analysed using Cox proportional hazard analysis.ResultsIndividual patient data were available from 5502 subjects, of whom 511 had depression, 236 had anxiety and 387 were using antidepressants. Depression was significantly associated with reduced remission [adjusted HR (95% CI): 0.62 (0.48-0.80), p < 0.001 and adjusted HR (95% CI): 0.59 (0.44-0.79), p < 0.001] using CDAI and SDAI, respectively. Depression was associated with a lower likelihood of achieving more subjective outcomes (⩽1 physician global assessment, ⩽1 patient global assessment) and ⩽1 28-swollen joint count, but not ⩽1 28-tender joint count or C-reactive protein measurement. Treatment with antidepressants did not improve outcomes for patients with depression. Anxiety was not significantly associated with RA remission.ConclusionComorbid depression, but not anxiety, was associated with less frequent remission. Concomitant antidepressant use was not associated with improvements in RA outcomes in patients with depression.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine monotherapy for anxiety symptoms in patients with bipolar disorder experiencing depression in the BipOLar DEpRession (BOLDER I and II) studies. METHOD:A post hoc analysis of anxiety symptoms in 1,051 acutely depressed patients with bipolar I or II disorder (DSM-IV) from 2 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 8-week studies of quetiapine (300 or 600 mg once daily) was conducted. Anxiety symptoms were assessed using Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) total and psychic (items 1-6, 14) and somatic (items 7-13) anxiety subscale scores (mixed-model repeated measure and last-observation-carried-forward analysis of change from baseline at each assessment). The BOLDER I study was conducted between September 2002 and October 2003, and the BOLDER II study was conducted between June 2004 and August 2005. RESULTS:Mean baseline HARS total scores were similar across the treatment groups (300 mg/d: 18.9, 600 mg/d and placebo: both 18.6). There was a significantly greater improvement from baseline in mean HARS total scores at the first evaluation (week 1) in both quetiapine groups compared with placebo (300 mg/d: -4.6, P < .001 and 600 mg/d: -4.1, P = .003 vs placebo: -2.8). These improvements were sustained through week 8 with both quetiapine doses (300 mg/d: -10.1, P < .001 and 600 mg/d: -10.5, P < .001 vs placebo: -6.9). At week 8, there was also significant improvement from baseline in HARS psychic and somatic anxiety subscale scores compared with placebo (P < .001). The baseline severity of anxiety did not impact the improvement in depressive symptoms. Common adverse events included dry mouth, sedation, somnolence, and dizziness. CONCLUSIONS:In this pooled analysis, quetiapine monotherapy was more effective than placebo and generally well tolerated for the treatment of both depressive and anxiety symptoms in patients with bipolar disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00060489 (BOLDER I) and NCT00083954 (BOLDER II).