Dataset Information

Cardiovascular Effects of Combining Subcutaneous or Intravenous Esketamine and the MAO Inhibitor Tranylcypromine for the Treatment of Depression: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

(Es)ketamine and monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), e.g., tranylcypromine, are therapeutic options for treatment-resistant major depression. Simultaneous administration is currently not recommended because of concern about hypertensive crises.

Objective

Our objective was to evaluate whether changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate (HR) during esketamine administration differed between patients who concomitantly received tranylcypromine and those who did not.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing cardiovascular monitoring data from inpatients treated for severe depression in unipolar, bipolar, and schizoaffective disorder. Primary outcomes were change in mean BP and HR during the first hour after intravenous or subcutaneous esketamine administration compared with baseline, controlled for confounders. Secondary analyses quantify differences in absolute BP during esketamine treatment and comparisons of BP peaks, temporal effects, and intraindividual comparisons before and after tranylcypromine initiation.

Results

Our analysis included 509 esketamine administrations in 43 patients, 14 of whom concomitantly received tranylcypromine. Controlling for creatinine and age, mean ± standard deviation (SD) BP changes were significantly increased by concomitant tranylcypromine treatment (ΔSBP: F[1,503] = 86.73, p < 0.001; ΔDBP: F[1,503] = 55.71, p < 0.001), but HR remained unaffected. Mean SBP change during esketamine administration was 2.96 ± 18.11 mmHg in patients receiving tranylcypromine (TCP+) and -8.84 ± 11.31 mmHg in those who did not (TCP-). Changes in DBP were -2.81 ± 11.20 mmHg for TCP+ and -10.77 ± 9.13 mmHg for TCP-. Moreover, we found a significant dose-response relationship between tranylcypromine dose and BP (SBP: B = 0.35, standard error [SE] = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12-0.60, p = 0.004; adjusted R² = 0.11, p = 0.008; DBP: B = 0.21, SE = 0.08, 95% CI 0.06-0.36, p = 0.007; adjusted R² = 0.08; p = 0.023).

Conclusions

Although statistically significant changes in BP were identified in patients receiving tranylcypromine and esketamine, these changes were clinically insignificant. Thus, combining esketamine and this MAOI appears to be safe at standard doses. The dose-response relationship calls for caution with higher doses of tranylcypromine.

SUBMITTER: Ludwig VM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8354966 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study evaluated efficacy and safety of intravenous subanesthetic doses of esketamine using an administration time of 10 minutes in patients with treatment-resistant depression and bipolar depression.A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients who met the inclusion criteria for treatment-resistant depression and bipolar depression according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria, and these patients received rapid infusion of esketamine between June 2012 and December 2015. The Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was administered to measure and score depressive symptom severity before infusion and at 24 hours, 72 hours, and 7 days after infusion. In addition, Clinical Global Impression scale was administered before and 7 days after esketamine infusion.Esketamine was administered to 30 patients. A total of 27 patients met the inclusion criteria and had MADRS evaluation data, which showed that 23 had unipolar and 4 had bipolar depression. Thirteen patients (48.1%) showed therapeutic response (MADRS reduction ≥50%) within 1 week (7 days) of intervention. Remission (MADRS <7) was observed in 10 patients (37.0%) in the same period. Therapeutic response and remission frequencies were seen in 16 (59.3%) and 11 (40.7%) patients, respectively, within 24 hours following drug infusion. The most relevant side effect observed during the esketamine infusion was dissociative symptoms ranging from mild to severe, which was reported by 11.1% of patients as a very disturbing experience.This study was done retrospectively, had a small sample size, and there was no comparative group.The present study demonstrates that rapid infusion of esketamine is possibly not the optimal choice to administer this drug for treatment-resistant depression due to tolerability reasons. Further controlled studies are required to investigate efficacy, safety, and tolerability profiles among the different types of ketamines and methods of using this drug in depressed patients.

Project description:RationaleKetamine is the first widely used substance with rapid-onset antidepressant action. However, there are uncertainties regarding its potential urothelial toxicity, particularly after repeated application. In the context of rising recreational ketamine use, severe side effects affecting the human urinary tract have been reported. It is assumed that ketamine interacts with bladder urothelial cells and induces apoptosis.ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess whether single or repeated doses of esketamine used in an antidepressant indication are associated with urinary toxicity.MethodsWe included male and female inpatients with a current episode of depression and a diagnosis of recurrent depressive disorder, bipolar disorder or schizoaffective disorder according to ICD-10 criteria (n = 25). The esketamine treatment schedule involved a maximum of 3× weekly dosing at 0.25-0.5 mg/kg i.v. or s.c. The primary outcome was the change in urine toxicity markers (leukocytes, erythrocytes, protein and free haemoglobin). Description of demographic, clinical and laboratory data was conducted using means, standard deviations, frequencies and percentages. Changes in urinary toxicity markers over time were evaluated using linear mixed models with gender as a covariate.ResultsThe participants received an average of 11.4 (SD 8) esketamine treatments, and an average number of 11.2 (SD 8) urine samples were analysed over the course of treatment. Neither urinary leukocyte concentration (F(20; 3.0) = 3.1; p = 0.2) nor erythrocyte concentration (F(20;2.2) = 4.1; p = 0.2) showed a significant trend towards increase during the course of esketamine treatment. Similarly, free haemoglobin and protein concentrations, which were analysed descriptively, did not display a rise during treatment. There was a significant improvement in depression ratings after esketamine treatment (p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to focus on urothelial toxicity of esketamine used in antidepressant indication and dose. The results indicate that the use of single or repeated doses of esketamine is unlikely to cause urothelial toxicity. The results are in need of confirmation as sample size was small.

Project description:IntroductionFor prophylaxis of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, replacement therapy with human C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) treatment is approved and available as intravenous [C1-INH(IV)] (Cinryze®) and subcutaneous [C1-INH(SC)] HAEGARDA® preparations. In the absence of a head-to-head comparative study of the two treatment modalities, an indirect comparison of data from 2 independent but similar clinical trials was undertaken.MethodsTwo similar randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies were identified which evaluated either C1-INH(SC) (COMPACT; NCT01912456; 16 weeks) or C1-INH(IV) (CHANGE; NCT01005888; 14 weeks) vs. placebo (on-demand treatment only) for routine prevention of HAE attacks. Individual patient data from each trial were used to conduct an indirect comparison of treatment effects. Attack reductions (absolute and percent of mean/median number of monthly HAE attacks reduction over placebo) were compared between the two C1-INH formulations at approved/recommended doses: C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg twice weekly (n = 45) and 1000 U of C1-INH(IV) twice weekly (n = 22). Point estimates were adjusted using mixed and quantile regression models that controlled for study design.ResultsThe absolute mean monthly numbers of HAE attack reductions were 3.6 (95% CI 2.9, 4.2) for C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg vs. placebo and 2.3 (1.4, 3.3) for C1-INH(IV) vs. placebo; between-product difference, 1.3 (0.1, 2.4; P = 0.034). The mean percent reduction in monthly attack rate was significantly greater with C1-INH(SC) as compared with C1-INH(IV) (84% vs. 51%; P < 0.001). The percentages of subjects experiencing ≥ 50%, ≥ 70%, and ≥ 90% reductions in monthly HAE attack rates versus placebo were significantly higher with C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to C1-INH(IV) 1000 U (≥ 50% reduction: 91% vs. 50%, odds ratio [OR] = 10.33, P = 0.003; ≥ 70% reduction: 84% vs. 46%, OR = 6.19, P = 0.005; ≥ 90% reduction: 57% vs. 18%, OR = 6.04, P = 0.007).ConclusionWithin the limitations of an indirect study comparison, this analysis suggests greater attack reduction with twice-weekly C1-INH(SC) 60 IU/kg as compared to twice-weekly C1-INH(IV) 1000 U for the routine prevention of HAE attacks.