-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in this population are few and often report conflicting results.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (aged 18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to June week 4 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 2017 week 27) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to July week 4 2017). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants, in adults (aged 18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We retrieved a total of 10 studies (885 participants), seven of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update we included one additional unpublished study. These new data contributed to the secondary analysis, while the results of the primary analysis remained unchanged.For acute-phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found no difference between antidepressants as a class and placebo on symptoms of depression measured both as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants; very low certainty evidence) and as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants; very low certainty evidence). No trials reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, showing no difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants; very low certainty evidence). No clear evidence of a beneficial effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from our analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low certainty evidence). In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants as a class compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38, seven RCTs, 479 participants; very low certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty (quality) of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low certainty evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results, clear implications for practice cannot be deduced. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. To better inform clinical practice, there is an urgent need for large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer who have depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder.
Topics: Adjustment Disorders; Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Humans; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 29683474
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2015Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in this population group are few and often report conflicting results.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April week 3, 2014), EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2014 week 17) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to April week 4, 2014). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs allocating adults (18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis) comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into RevMan 5 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
We retrieved a total of nine studies (861 participants), with seven studies contributing to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants and one-three armed study compared two antidepressants and a placebo arm. For the acute phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class on symptoms of depression compared with placebo when measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants) or as a proportion of people who had depression (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants). No trials reported data on the follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, providing very low quality evidence for the difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants). No clear evidence of an effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from the analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low quality evidence). We found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class in terms of dropouts due to any cause compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.53, six RCTs, 455 participants), as well as between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low quality evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results clear implications for practice cannot be made. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent should be prescribed may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer with depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder, are urgently needed to better inform clinical practice.
Topics: Adjustment Disorders; Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Humans; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 26029972
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006.pub2 -
BMC Psychiatry Nov 2022Common mental disorders are general term for mental disorders with high disability rates and significant social burden. The purpose of this study was to determine the...
BACKGROUND
Common mental disorders are general term for mental disorders with high disability rates and significant social burden. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of long-term disability associated with common mental disorders and to interpret the relationship between common mental disorders and long-term disability.
METHODS
Participants in the 2013 China Mental Health Survey were followed up by telephone between April and June 2018. This study evaluated long-term disability over a five-year period using the World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Poisson regression was used to analyze the relationship between common mental disorders and long-term disability.
RESULTS
A total of 6269 patients were followed up by telephone. In patients with common mental disorders, the prevalence of disability ranged from 7.62% to 43.94%. The long-term disabilities were significantly associated with dysthymic disorder (DD, RR:2.40; 95% CI:1.87-3.03), major depressive disorder (MDD, RR:1.63; 95% CI:1.34-1.98), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD, RR:1.95; 95% CI:1.15-3.09), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD, RR:1.68; 95% CI:1.24-2.22) and alcohol use disorder (AUD, RR: 1.42; 95% CI:0.99-1.96).
CONCLUSIONS
In China, common mental disorders raise the risk of long-term disability, and there is a critical need for monitoring patients with DD, MDD, GAD, OCD, and AUD. For improved quality of life and reduced disability levels, more resources need to be dedicated to mental health in the future.
Topics: Humans; Follow-Up Studies; Depressive Disorder, Major; Quality of Life; Mental Disorders; China
PubMed: 36419029
DOI: 10.1186/s12888-022-04382-4 -
Scientific Reports Mar 2024Observational studies have previously reported an association between depression and certain female reproductive disorders. However, the causal relationships between...
Observational studies have previously reported an association between depression and certain female reproductive disorders. However, the causal relationships between depression and different types of female reproductive disorders remain unclear in terms of direction and magnitude. We conducted a comprehensive investigation using a two-sample bi-directional Mendelian randomization analysis, incorporating publicly available GWAS summary statistics. Our aim was to establish a causal relationship between genetically predicted depression and the risk of various female reproductive pathological conditions, such as ovarian dysfunction, polycystic ovary syndrome(PCOS), ovarian cysts, abnormal uterine and vaginal bleeding(AUB), endometriosis, leiomyoma of the uterus, female infertility, spontaneous abortion, eclampsia, pregnancy hypertension, gestational diabetes, excessive vomiting in pregnancy, cervical cancer, and uterine/endometrial cancer. We analyzed a substantial sample size, ranging from 111,831 to 210,870 individuals, and employed robust statistical methods, including inverse variance weighted, MR-Egger, weighted median, and MR-PRESSO, to estimate causal effects. Sensitivity analyses, such as Cochran's Q test, MR-Egger intercept test, MR-PRESSO, leave-one-out analysis, and funnel plots, were also conducted to ensure the validity of our results. Furthermore, risk factor analyses were performed to investigate potential mediators associated with these observed relationships. Our results demonstrated that genetic predisposition to depression or dysthymia was associated with an increased risk of developing PCOS (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.28-1.59; P = 6.66 × 10), ovarian cysts (OR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.20-1.55; P = 1.57 × 10), AUB (OR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.20-1.66; P = 3.01 × 10), and endometriosis (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.27-1.70; P = 2.21 × 10) after Bonferroni correction, but no evidence for reverse causality. Our study did not find any evidence supporting a causal or reverse causal relationship between depression/dysthymia and other types of female reproductive disorders. In summary, our study provides evidence for a causal relationship between genetically predicted depression and specific types of female reproductive disorders. Our findings emphasize the importance of depression management in the prevention and treatment of female reproductive disorders, notably including PCOS, ovarian cysts, AUB, and endometriosis.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Depression; Dysthymic Disorder; Endometriosis; Mendelian Randomization Analysis; Ovarian Cysts; Genome-Wide Association Study
PubMed: 38472314
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-55993-8 -
International Journal of Preventive... 2022Obesity is a chronic medical illness with a higher risk of physical and mental cascade. People who seek obesity treatment were reported to have some psychiatric...
BACKGROUND
Obesity is a chronic medical illness with a higher risk of physical and mental cascade. People who seek obesity treatment were reported to have some psychiatric disorders affecting their disease and selection of management.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
This study aims to estimate the prevalence of depressive and anxiety disorders in obese patients seeking obesity management and explore the relationship between common psychiatric disorders (depression and anxiety disorders) and selection of the type of obesity management (surgical or non-surgical).
METHODS
Patients were recruited from Alazhar Universityhospitals, Egypt, and the total number completing the study was 1115 patients. All subjects underwent psychiatric interview through Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (SCID-5 for DSM-5) for diagnosis of psychiatric disorders and completed two questionnaires, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HRSA).
RESULTS
The prevalences of depressive and anxiety disorders were 29.23% and 25.56%, respectively, in all subjects. The most prevalent diagnoses were dysthymic disorder (20.7%), general anxiety disorder (16.95%), major depressive disorder (13.04%), and social phobia (12.4%). Our sample was divided into two groups (surgical and non-surgical). Dysthymia was more common in the surgical group (21.4% versus 19.8% = 0.560), whereas major depressive disorder was more common in the non-surgical group (7.4% versus 5.4 = 0.593); also, the non-surgical group was more likely to have "anxiety disorders" (29.23% versus 22.4%, = 0.840), but severity of anxiety was higher in the surgical group according to HRSA score with a highly significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS
A high prevalence of depression and anxiety disorders was found among patients who sought obesity treatment. Severity of anxiety was higher in the surgical group according to HRSA score with a highly significant difference, which may affect selection of treatment, so psychiatric evaluation and management are needed before and after obesity management to improve the outcome.
PubMed: 36452465
DOI: 10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_102_21 -
Behaviour Research and Therapy Aug 2020This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a decision rule driven treatment for youth with comorbid conduct problems and depression.... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a decision rule driven treatment for youth with comorbid conduct problems and depression. A randomized, controlled, repeated measures design was used to compare two treatment approaches: Decision-Rule Based Treatment (DR) and Sequential Treatment (SEQ). Participants included 30 children (ages 8-14; 66% female; 80% Caucasian) who met criteria for a depressive disorder (major depressive disorder and/or dysthymia) and a conduct problem disorder (oppositional defiant disorder and/or conduct disorder). Assessments were conducted at baseline, post-treatment, and six-month follow-up. Treatment adherence, attendance, and session evaluations ratings indicate that the treatments were feasible to implement and acceptable to parents and youth in both conditions. Both treatments showed similar remission of internalizing and externalizing diagnoses. Participants in DR showed significantly greater improvements at six-month follow-up in child-reported depressive symptom severity compared to SEQ. Both DR and SEQ conditions showed significantly lower behavior problems at end of treatment and six-month follow-up. DR showed significant reductions in emotion dysregulation at 6-month follow-up, while SEQ did not. Findings suggest that a decision rule based intervention holds promise as a feasible and acceptable treatment with high rates of remittance.
Topics: Adolescent; Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders; Child; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Comorbidity; Conduct Disorder; Decision Support Systems, Clinical; Depressive Disorder; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Emotional Regulation; Feasibility Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Parents; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Pilot Projects; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32353635
DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2020.103625 -
BMC Public Health Nov 2023Depression is increasingly recognized as a worldwide serious, public health concern. A better understanding of depression is important for advancing its management and...
BACKGROUND
Depression is increasingly recognized as a worldwide serious, public health concern. A better understanding of depression is important for advancing its management and learning the difference between major depressive disorder (MDD) and dysthymia. Our aim is to conduct a concurrent analysis of the trends of both MDD and dysthymia in China.
METHODS
The data on depression from 1990 to 2019 were collected from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (GBD 2019). To determine the average annual percent changes (AAPC) and relative risks (RRs), joinpoint regression and the age-period-cohort models were employed, respectively.
RESULTS
The incidence number of MDD and dysthymia continuously increased in China from 1990 to 2019, however, the age-standardized rates (ASR) had a decreasing trend in both men and women. The results from joinpoint regression showed that a declining trend was presented in young people (< 50 years) but an increased trend in the elderly (≥ 50 years) both in men and women, during 1990-2019. Age is the most influential factor for MDD and dysthymia. Age RRs for MDD incidence had an overall increasing trend with age. Period RR in MDD presented a U-shaped pattern, while Cohort RRs presented an inverted U-shaped pattern. On the other hand, RRs in dysthymia for period and cohort effects had no statistical significance, only the age effect presented an inverted U-shaped pattern.
CONCLUSIONS
The disparities in trends observed between MDD and dysthymia during the period of 1990-2019 indicated the significance of distinguishing between these two disorders. The age, period and cohort effects all had a greater impact on MDD than on dysthymia, and age effects presented different influential patterns in these two. To alleviate the burden of depressive disorders in China, proactive measures need to be implemented, with particular attention to the elderly population.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Aged; Adolescent; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Incidence; China; Cohort Effect
PubMed: 37926849
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-17025-4 -
Journal of Personality Assessment 2015The context-free diagnoses outlined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders might not provide enough information to represent the heterogeneity... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
The context-free diagnoses outlined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders might not provide enough information to represent the heterogeneity observed in depressed patients. Interpersonal factors have been linked to depression in a mutually influencing pathoplastic relationship where certain problems, like submissiveness, are related to symptom chronicity. This study evaluated interpersonal pathoplasticity in a range of depressive presentations. We examined archival data collected from 407 participants who met criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD), dysthymic disorder (DD), or subthreshold depression (sD). Latent profile analysis (LPA) identified 5 interpersonal subtypes (vindictive, intrusive, socially avoidant, exploitable, and cold). Apart from gender, the subtypes did not differ significantly on demographic characteristics, psychiatric comorbidity, or self-report depression severity. Socially avoidant participants were more likely to meet criteria for a clinical depression diagnosis (MDD or DD), whereas vindictive participants were more likely to have sD. Our results indicate that interpersonal problems could account for heterogeneity observed in depression.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Comorbidity; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Female; Humans; Interpersonal Relations; Male; Middle Aged; New York City; Psychiatric Status Rating Scales; Psychometrics; Psychotherapy; Sex Distribution; Social Behavior; Young Adult
PubMed: 25803309
DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2015.1011330 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2015This review has been withdrawn due to non‐compliance with Cochrane's Commercial Sponsorship Policy. The editorial group responsible for this previously published... (Review)
Review
This review has been withdrawn due to non‐compliance with Cochrane's Commercial Sponsorship Policy. The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Dysthymic Disorder; Humans; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26087170
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001130.pub2 -
Depression and Anxiety Jan 2018Although depression is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), it is unknown whether this risk varies across depressive disorder subtypes. Thus, we investigated...
BACKGROUND
Although depression is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), it is unknown whether this risk varies across depressive disorder subtypes. Thus, we investigated atypical major depressive disorder (MDD) and double depression as predictors of new-onset CVD in a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults.
METHODS
Prospective data from 28,726 adults initially free of CVD who participated in Wave 1 (2001-2002) and Wave 2 (2004-2005) of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) were examined. Lifetime depressive disorder subtypes (Wave 1) and incident CVD (Wave 2) were determined by structured interviews.
RESULTS
We identified 1,116 incident CVD cases. In demographics adjusted models, the atypical MDD group had a higher odds of incident CVD than the no depression history (OR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.71-2.81, P < .001), dysthymic disorder only (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.08-2.39, P = .019), and nonatypical MDD (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.11-1.91, P = .006) groups. Likewise, the double depression group had a higher odds of incident CVD than the no depression history (OR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.92-2.45, P < .001), dysthymic disorder only (OR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.16-2.19, P = .004), and MDD only (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.20-1.77, P < .001) groups. Relationships were similar but attenuated after adjustment for CVD risk factors and anxiety disorders.
CONCLUSIONS
Adults with atypical MDD or double depression may be subgroups of the depressed population at particularly high risk of new-onset CVD. Thus, these subgroups may (a) be driving the overall depression-CVD relationship and (b) be in need of earlier and/or more intense CVD primary prevention efforts to reduce their excess CVD burden.
Topics: Adult; Cardiovascular Diseases; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dysthymic Disorder; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; United States
PubMed: 28640965
DOI: 10.1002/da.22666