-
The Lancet. Psychiatry Mar 2024There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network meta-analysis to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to Nov 23, 2023 for randomised controlled trials published in any language that assessed pharmacological treatments for individuals of any age with a diagnosis of a major depressive episode with psychotic features, in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder in any setting. We excluded continuation or maintenance trials. We screened the study titles and abstracts identified, and we extracted data from relevant studies after full-text review. If full data were not available, we requested data from study authors twice. We analysed treatments for individual drugs (or drug combinations) and by grouping them on the basis of mechanisms of action. The primary outcomes were response rate (ie, the proportion of participants who responded to treatment) and acceptability (ie, the proportion who discontinued treatment for any reason). We calculated risk ratios and did separate frequentist network meta-analyses by using random-effects models. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the confidence in the evidence with the Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023392926.
FINDINGS
Of 6313 reports identified, 16 randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and 14 were included in the network meta-analyses. The 16 trials included 1161 people with psychotic depression (mean age 50·5 years [SD 11·4]). 516 (44·4%) participants were female and 422 (36·3%) were male; sex data were not available for the other 223 (19·2%). 489 (42·1%) participants were White, 47 (4·0%) were African American, and 12 (1·0%) were Asian; race or ethnicity data were not available for the other 613 (52·8%). Only the combination of fluoxetine plus olanzapine was associated with a higher proportion of participants with a treatment response compared with placebo (risk ratio 1·91 [95% CI 1·27-2·85]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes compared with placebo. When treatments were grouped by mechanism of action, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with a second-generation antipsychotic was associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses than was placebo (1·89 [1·17-3·04]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes. In head-to-head comparisons of active treatments, a significantly higher proportion of participants had a response to amitriptyline plus perphenazine (3·61 [1·23-10·56]) and amoxapine (3·14 [1·01-9·80]) than to perphenazine, and to fluoxetine plus olanzapine compared with olanzapine alone (1·60 [1·09-2·34]). Venlafaxine, venlafaxine plus quetiapine (2·25 [1·09-4·63]), and imipramine (1·95 [1·01-3·79]) were also associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses overall. In head-to-head comparisons grouped by mechanism of action, antipsychotic plus antidepressant combinations consistently outperformed monotherapies from either drug class in terms of the proportion of participants with treatment responses. Heterogeneity was low. No high-risk instances were identified in the bias assessment for our primary outcomes.
INTERPRETATION
According to the available evidence, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a second-generation antipsychotic-and particularly of fluoxetine and olanzapine-could be the optimal treatment choice for psychotic depression. These findings should be taken into account in the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, these conclusions should be interpreted cautiously in view of the low number of included studies and the limitations of these studies.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Depressive Disorder, Major; Fluoxetine; Perphenazine; Network Meta-Analysis; Bipolar Disorder; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Depression; Antipsychotic Agents; Olanzapine
PubMed: 38360024
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00006-3 -
Journal of Clinical PsychopharmacologyThis systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical manifestations and characteristics of venlafaxine-associated rhabdomyolysis.
PURPOSE
This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical manifestations and characteristics of venlafaxine-associated rhabdomyolysis.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Elsevier, Science Direct, Embase, Springer Link, Wiley Online Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases from the date of database inception to January 2023. Previously reported cases of venlafaxine-associated rhabdomyolysis were identified, and relevant data from these cases were collected for descriptive statistical analysis. Cases that met the inclusion criteria were evaluated to determine the correlation between adverse reactions and venlafaxine.
RESULTS
A total of 12 patients with venlafaxine-associated rhabdomyolysis were included. None of these patients had a history of muscle pain or discomfort. Of the 12 patients, 5 patients received venlafaxine at doses of ≤225 mg/d, whereas the remaining 7 patients received doses exceeding 225 mg/d. The main clinical symptoms included myalgia, muscle weakness, and renal injury. All 12 patients discontinued venlafaxine and received symptomatic care.
CONCLUSIONS
Venlafaxine, used either as a monotherapy or in combination with other drugs, may be associated with rhabdomyolysis. Creatine kinase levels may normalize or significantly decrease after discontinuation of venlafaxine and symptomatic treatment.
Topics: Rhabdomyolysis; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Humans; Male; Adult; Female; Middle Aged; Creatine Kinase; Myalgia
PubMed: 38506608
DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000001838 -
Current Pain and Headache Reports Oct 2023Although the association between CGRP and migraine disease is well-known and studied, therapies can target other pathways to minimize migraine symptoms. It is important... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Although the association between CGRP and migraine disease is well-known and studied, therapies can target other pathways to minimize migraine symptoms. It is important to understand the role of these medications as options for migraine treatment and the varied mechanisms by which symptoms can be addressed. In the present investigation, the role of non-CGRP antagonist/non-triptan options for migraine disease therapy is reviewed, including NSAIDs, ß-blockers, calcium channel blockers, antidepressants, and antiepileptics. Pharmacologic therapies for both acute symptoms and prophylaxis are evaluated, and their adverse effects are compared.
RECENT FINDINGS
At present, the Food and Drug Association has approved the beta-blockers propranolol and timolol and the anti-epileptic drugs topiramate and divalproex sodium for migraine prevention. Clinicians have other options for evidence-based treatment of episodic migraine attacks. Treatment decisions should consider contraindications, the effectiveness of alternatives, and potential side effects. NSAIDs are effective for the acute treatment of migraine exacerbations with caution for adverse effects such as gastrointestinal upset and renal symptoms. Beta-blockers are effective for migraine attack prophylaxis but are associated with dizziness and fatigue and are contraindicated in patients with certain co-morbidities, including asthma, congestive heart failure, and abnormal cardiac rhythms. Calcium channel blockers do not show enough evidence to be recommended as migraine attack prophylactic therapy. The anti-epileptic drugs topiramate and divalproex sodium and antidepressants venlafaxine and amitriptyline are effective for migraine exacerbation prophylaxis but have associated side effects. The decision for pharmacologic management should ultimately be made following consideration of risk vs. benefit and discussion between patient and physician.
Topics: Humans; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Tryptamines; Migraine Disorders; Propranolol; Calcium Channel Blockers; Antidepressive Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Serotonin 5-HT1 Receptor Agonists; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37584847
DOI: 10.1007/s11916-023-01151-0 -
Nutrition Reviews Jan 2024Despite recent advances in antidepressants in treating major depression (MDD), their usage is marred by adverse effects and social stigmas. Probiotics may be an...
CONTEXT
Despite recent advances in antidepressants in treating major depression (MDD), their usage is marred by adverse effects and social stigmas. Probiotics may be an efficacious adjunct or standalone treatment, potentially circumventing the aforementioned issues with antidepressants. However, there is a lack of head-to-head clinical trials between these 2 interventions.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and acceptability of these 2 interventions in treating MDD.
DATA SOURCES
Six databases and registry platforms for the clinical trial were systematically searched to identify the eligible double-blinded, randomized controlled trials published between 2015 and 2022.
DATA EXACTION
Two authors selected independently the placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants and microbiota-targeted interventions (prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics) used for the treatment of MDD in adults (≥18 years old). Standardized mean differences (SMDs) of depressive symptom scores from individual trials were pooled for network meta-analysis (PROSPERO no. CRD42020222305).
RESULTS
Forty-two eligible trials covering 22 interventions were identified, of which 16 were found to be effective in MDD treatment and the certainty of evidence was moderate to very low. When all trials were considered, compared with placebo, SMDs of interventions ranged from -0.16 (95% credible interval: -0.30, -0.04) for venlafaxine to -0.81 (-1.06, -0.52) for escitalopram. Probiotics were superior to brexpiprazole (SMD [95% credible interval]: -0.42 [-0.68, -0.17]), cariprazine (-0.44 [-0.69, -0.24]), citalopram (-0.37 [-0.66, -0.07]), duloxetine (-0.26, [-0.51, -0.04]), desvenlafaxine (-0.38 [-0.63, -0.14]), ketamine (-0.32 [-0.66, -0.01]), venlafaxine (-0.47 [-0.73, -0.23]), vilazodone (-0.37 [-0.61, -0.12]), vortioxetine (-0.39 [-0.63, -0.15]), and placebo (-0.62 [-0.86, -0.42]), and were noninferior to other antidepressants. In addition, probiotics ranked the second highest in the treatment hierarchy after escitalopram. Long-term treatment (≥8 weeks) using probiotics showed the same tolerability as antidepressants.
CONCLUSION
Probiotics, compared with antidepressants and placebo, may be efficacious as an adjunct or standalone therapy for treating MDD.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020222305.
PubMed: 38219239
DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuad171 -
Drugs & Aging Apr 2024Detailed data on post-stroke depression (PSD) in older adults are limited in spite of the high vulnerability of this population to stroke. In fact, PSD prevalence in... (Review)
Review
Detailed data on post-stroke depression (PSD) in older adults are limited in spite of the high vulnerability of this population to stroke. In fact, PSD prevalence in older adults ranges from 16.0 to 43.9%; however, timing and instruments of evaluation often differ significantly across all available studies. The etiology, genetic and inflammatory factors, as well as structural brain alterations, are claimed as part of a multifaceted mechanism of action in PSD onset. Thus, the aim of this narrative review was to further elaborate on the prevalence, etiology, diagnosis, consequences and treatment of PSD in older adults. The consequences of PSD in older adults may be devastating, including a poor functional outcome after rehabilitation and lower medication adherence. In addition, lower quality of life and reduced social participation, higher risk of new stroke, rehospitalization, and mortality have been reported. In this scenario, treating PSD represents a crucial step to prevent these complications. Both pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies are currently available. The pharmacological treatment utilizes antidepressant drugs, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TAs) and new multimodal antidepressants (NMAs). Non-pharmacological therapies include psychological interventions and non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, while excluding drug administration. In the general population experiencing PSD, SSRIs (sertraline in particular) are the most prescribed, whereas the combination of antidepressants and psychotherapy is underused. Furthermore, about one-third of patients do not receive treatment for PSD. In regard to older adults with PSD, the possibility of more adverse effects or contraindications to antidepressant prescription due to comorbidities may limit the therapeutic window. Although drugs such as citalopram, escitalopram, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine are usually well tolerated by older patients with PSD, the few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) specifically considering older adults with PSD have been conducted with fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, citalopram and nortriptyline, often with very small patient samples. Furthermore, data regarding the results of non-pharmacological therapies are scarce. High-quality RCTs recruiting large samples of older adults are needed in order to better manage PSD in this population. In addition, adequate screening and diagnosis instruments, with reliable timing of evaluation, should be applied.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Citalopram; Depression; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Sertraline; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38396311
DOI: 10.1007/s40266-024-01104-1 -
Drugs Aug 2023Despite being an essential part of whole-person care, patients with cancer often experience complex and under-treated pain. Managing cancer-related pain in patients who... (Review)
Review
Despite being an essential part of whole-person care, patients with cancer often experience complex and under-treated pain. Managing cancer-related pain in patients who are also pregnant compounds the challenge for adequate pain management, as studies have largely excluded this population. Therapy for pain management should be guided by the cause and mechanism of pain. The objective of this review is to provide clinicians with an understanding of pain experienced by pregnant patients with cancer and medications that may be used to help manage cancer-related pain. Nociceptive pain results from damage to somatic or visceral tissues that may be directly caused by cancer. This type of pain can be managed in pregnant patients using acetaminophen and/or nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs as first-line agents. In nociceptive pain not managed by non-opioid analgesics, buprenorphine is recommended for those requiring chronic opioids to help manage their pain. Neuropathic pain that results from damage to the peripheral or central nervous system may also be directly caused by cancer, particularly chemotherapy. In pregnant patients, duloxetine and gabapentin should be considered first. Venlafaxine, pregabalin, tricyclic antidepressants, and sodium channel blockers should be avoided, if possible. Nociplastic pain is not directly caused by cancer but may be caused by ongoing peripheral nociceptive input or a condition that predates the cancer diagnosis. Duloxetine and gabapentin are reasonable agents to consider for treatment of nociceptive pain in pregnant patients. Cyclobenzaprine may also be helpful for nociplastic pain.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Gabapentin; Analgesics; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Cancer Pain; Neuralgia; Analgesics, Opioid; Nociceptive Pain; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37347386
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-023-01906-4 -
The Journal of Mental Health Policy and... Mar 2024Consensus-guidelines for prescribing antidepressants recommend that clinicians should be vigilant to match antidepressants to patient's medical history but provide no... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
BACKGROUND
Consensus-guidelines for prescribing antidepressants recommend that clinicians should be vigilant to match antidepressants to patient's medical history but provide no specific advice on which antidepressant is best for a given medical history.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
For patients with major depression who are in psychotherapy, this study provides an empirically derived guideline for prescribing antidepressant medications that fit patients' medical history.
METHODS
This retrospective, observational, cohort study analyzed a large insurance database of 3,678,082 patients. Data was obtained from healthcare providers in the U.S. between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2018. These patients had 10,221,145 episodes of antidepressant treatments. This study reports the remission rates for the 14 most commonly prescribed single antidepressants (amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, doxepin, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, mirtazapine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, sertraline, trazodone, and venlafaxine) and a category named "Other" (other antidepressants/combination of antidepressants). The study used robust LASSO regressions to identify factors that affected remission rate and clinicians' selection of antidepressants. The selection bias in observational data was removed through stratification. We organized the data into 16,770 subgroups, of at least 100 cases, using the combination of the largest factors that affected remission and selection bias. This paper reports on 2,467 subgroups of patients who had received psychotherapy.
RESULTS
We found large, and statistically significant, differences in remission rates within subgroups of patients. Remission rates for sertraline ranged from 4.5% to 77.86%, for fluoxetine from 2.86% to 77.78%, for venlafaxine from 5.07% to 76.44%, for bupropion from 0.5% to 64.63%, for desvenlafaxine from 1.59% to 75%, for duloxetine from 3.77% to 75%, for paroxetine from 6.48% to 68.79%, for escitalopram from 1.85% to 65%, and for citalopram from 4.67% to 76.23%. Clearly these medications are ideal for patients in some subgroups but not others. If patients are matched to the subgroups, clinicians can prescribe the medication that works best in the subgroup. Some medications (amitriptyline, doxepin, nortriptyline, and trazodone) always had remission rates below 11% and therefore were not suitable as single antidepressant therapy for any of the subgroups.
DISCUSSIONS
This study provides an opportunity for clinicians to identify an optimal antidepressant for their patients, before they engage in repeated trials of antidepressants.
IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE
To facilitate the matching of patients to the most effective antidepressants, this study provides access to a free, non-commercial, decision aid at http://MeAgainMeds.com.
IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES
Policymakers should evaluate how study findings can be made available through fragmented electronic health records at point-of-care. Alternatively, policymakers can put in place an AI system that recommends antidepressants to patients online, at home, and encourages them to bring the recommendation to their clinicians at their next visit.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Future research could investigate (i) the effectiveness of our recommendations in changing clinical practice, (ii) increasing remission of depression symptoms, and (iii) reducing cost of care. These studies need to be prospective but pragmatic. It is unlikely random clinical trials can address the large number of factors that affect remission.
Topics: Humans; Citalopram; Fluoxetine; Paroxetine; Sertraline; Bupropion; Nortriptyline; Amitriptyline; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Escitalopram; Trazodone; Doxepin; Prospective Studies; Cohort Studies; Retrospective Studies; Antidepressive Agents; Psychotherapy
PubMed: 38634393
DOI: No ID Found -
The Journal of Maternal-fetal &... Dec 2023Antidepressant medications are used by increasing numbers of pregnant women. The evidence on the relationship between antidepressant use during pregnancy and the risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Antidepressant medications are used by increasing numbers of pregnant women. The evidence on the relationship between antidepressant use during pregnancy and the risk for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is inconsistent. We perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the GDM risk associated with antidepressant exposure during pregnancy.
METHODS
We systematically searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases until December 2021. We sought observational studies assessing the association between gestational antidepressant use and GDM.
RESULTS
Five observational studies were included in the analysis. Mothers exposed to antidepressants during pregnancy were at a significantly increased risk for GDM (relative risk [RR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.30; < .001). However, after considering confounding by indication, we observed no significant effect of antidepressant use during pregnancy on the risk of GDM (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1-1.28; = .054; = 0%). Independent of clinical indication, subgroup analysis based on individual antidepressants suggested that the risk was increased by venlafaxine or amitriptyline use, but not by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.
CONCLUSIONS
The significant association between antidepressant exposure during pregnancy and GDM may be overestimated due to confounding by indication. However, the evidence remains insufficient, particularly for specific drug classes.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Diabetes, Gestational; Antidepressive Agents; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Amitriptyline
PubMed: 36599445
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2022.2162817 -
World Psychiatry : Official Journal of... Jun 2024Psychotic depression (PD) is a severe mental disorder leading to functional disability and high risk of suicide, but very little is known about the comparative...
Real-world effectiveness of antidepressants, antipsychotics and their combinations in the maintenance treatment of psychotic depression. Evidence from within-subject analyses of two nationwide cohorts.
Psychotic depression (PD) is a severe mental disorder leading to functional disability and high risk of suicide, but very little is known about the comparative effectiveness of medications used in its maintenance treatment. The objective of this study was to investigate the comparative effectiveness of specific antipsychotics and antidepressants, and their combinations, on the risk of psychiatric hospitalization among persons with PD in routine care. Persons aged 16-65 years with a first-time diagnosis of PD were identified from Finnish (years 2000-2018) and Swedish (years 2006-2021) nationwide registers of inpatient care, specialized outpatient care, sickness absence, and disability pension. The main exposures were specific antipsychotics and antidepressants, and the main outcome measure was psychiatric hospitalization as a marker of severe relapse. The risk of hospitalization associated with periods of use vs. non-use of medications (expressed as adjusted hazard ratio, aHR) was assessed by a within-individual design, using each individual as his/her own control, and analyzed with stratified Cox models. The two national cohorts were first analyzed separately, and then combined using a fixed-effect meta-analysis. The Finnish cohort included 19,330 persons (mean age: 39.8±14.7 years; 57.9% women) and the Swedish cohort 13,684 persons (mean age: 41.3±14.0 years; 53.5% women). Individual antidepressants associated with a decreased risk of relapse vs. non-use of antidepressants were bupropion (aHR=0.73, 95% CI: 0.63-0.85), vortioxetine (aHR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.96) and venlafaxine (aHR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.86-0.98). Any long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) (aHR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.45-0.80) and clozapine (aHR=0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.91) were associated with a decreased risk of relapse vs. non-use of antipsychotics. Among monotherapies, only vortioxetine (aHR=0.67, 95% CI: 0.47-0.95) and bupropion (aHR=0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.89) were associated with a significantly decreased risk of relapse vs. non-use of both antidepressants and antipsychotics. In an exploratory analysis of antidepressant-antipsychotic combinations, a decreased relapse risk was found for amitriptyline-olanzapine (aHR=0.45, 95% CI: 0.28-0.71), sertraline-quetiapine (aHR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.67-0.93) and venlafaxine-quetiapine (aHR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.73-0.91) vs. non-use of antidepressants and antipsychotics. Benzodiazepines and related drugs (aHR=1.29, 95% CI: 1.24-1.34) and mirtazapine (aHR=1.17, 95% CI: 1.07-1.29) were associated with an increased risk of relapse. These data indicate that, in the maintenance treatment of PD, bupropion, vortioxetine, venlafaxine, any LAI, clozapine, and only few specific antidepressant-antipsychotic combinations are associated with a decreased risk of relapse. These findings challenge the current recommendation by treatment guidelines to combine an antipsychotic with an antidepressant (without further specification) as standard treatment in PD.
PubMed: 38727044
DOI: 10.1002/wps.21205 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Dec 2023Bruxism is a movement disorder of uncertain aetiology. Beside local peripheral and central psychological factors, drugs were suspected. Using the World Health...
Bruxism is a movement disorder of uncertain aetiology. Beside local peripheral and central psychological factors, drugs were suspected. Using the World Health Organization (WHO) global pharmacovigilance database, Vigibase®, we investigated through disproportionality analyses potential associations between exposure to drugs and bruxism reports. All reports of bruxism in adults between 01/01/2000 and 31/12/2022 were included. Results are expressed as reporting odds ratio (ROR). Among the 564 reports of bruxism, an association was found with eight antidepressants (first sertraline followed by escitalopram, venlafaxine, vortioxetine, citalopram, paroxetine, fluoxetine, duloxetine) and four antipsychotics (first ziprasidone followed by aripiprazole, olanzapine, risperidone). A signal was also described for oxybate sodium and metoclopramide. For antidepressants, a negative association was found between ROR values and NET (norepinephrine transporter) but not SERT (serotonin transporter) pKi values, suggesting this ADR is more closely linked to norepinephrine than serotonin reuptake inhibition.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Pharmacovigilance; Bruxism; Antidepressive Agents; World Health Organization
PubMed: 37574820
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15884