-
Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience Apr 2020: This paper sought to identify the instruments used to measure depression in heart failure (HF) and elucidate the impact of treatment interventions on depression in HF.... (Review)
Review
: This paper sought to identify the instruments used to measure depression in heart failure (HF) and elucidate the impact of treatment interventions on depression in HF. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed. Studies published from 1988 to 2018 covering depression and HF were identified through the review of the PubMed and PsycINFO databases using the keywords: "depres*" AND "heart failure." Two authors independently conducted a focused analysis, identifying 27 studies that met the specific selection criteria and passed the study quality checks. Patient-reported questionnaires were more commonly adopted than clinician-rated questionnaires, including the Beck Depression Inventory, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Six common interventions were observed: antidepressant medications, collaborative care, psychotherapy, exercise, education, and other nonpharmacological interventions. Except for paroxetine, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors failed to show a significant difference from placebo. However, the collaborative care model including the use of antidepressants showed a significant decrease in PHQ-9 score after one year. All of the psychotherapy studies included a variation of cognitive behavioral therapy and patients showed significant improvements. The evidence was mixed for exercise, education, and other nonpharmacological interventions. This study suggests which types of interventions are more effective in addressing depression in heart failure patients.
PubMed: 32802590
DOI: No ID Found -
Drugs in Context 2020The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on the impact of antidepressants on depressive symptom severity, quality of life (QoL), morbidity, and mortality in...
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on the impact of antidepressants on depressive symptom severity, quality of life (QoL), morbidity, and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF).
METHODS
Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, studies published from December 1969 to December 2019 that pertain to depression and HF were identified through the use of the PubMed and PsycINFO databases, using the keywords: 'antidepressant*' and 'heart failure.' Two authors independently conducted a focused analysis and reached a final consensus on 17 studies that met the specific selection criteria and passed the study quality checks.
RESULTS
Studies varied in types of antidepressants used as well as in study designs. Ten studies were analyzed for the impact of antidepressant medications on depressive symptom severity. Five of these were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), out of which sertraline and paroxetine showed a significant reduction in depressive symptoms despite the small samples utilized. Four of the 17 studies addressed QoL as part of their outcomes showing no difference for escitalopram (RCT), significantly greater improvements for paroxetine controlled release (RCT), statistical significance for sertraline compared to control (pilot study), and showing significant improvement before and after treatment (open-label trial) for nefazodone. Thirteen of the 17 studies included measures of morbidity and mortality. Although early analyses have pointed to an association of antidepressant use and mortality particularly with fluoxetine, the reviewed studies showed no increase in mortality for antidepressants, and secondary analyses showed improved mortality in patients who achieved remission of depressive symptoms.
CONCLUSION
Out of the various antidepressants studied, which included sertraline, paroxetine, escitalopram, citalopram, bupropion, nefazodone, and nortriptyline, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors seem to be a safe treatment option for patients with depression and HF. However, due to the variety of study designs as well as the mixed results for each antidepressant, more information for reducing depression severity, morbidity, and mortality and improving quality of life in patients with HF should be examined using robust large sample RCTs.
PubMed: 32788920
DOI: 10.7573/dic.2020-5-4 -
International Journal of Psychiatry in... Nov 2020Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common mental problem and one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. SSRIs are the most commonly prescribed types of...
BACKGROUND
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common mental problem and one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. SSRIs are the most commonly prescribed types of antidepressants which are called Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors and used as a primary therapeutic intervention in MDD. This umbrella review aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of selected SSRIs.
METHODS
A systematic review on systematic reviews based on meta-analysis was conducted for head-to-head comparisons on 6 antidepressants (fluoxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, sertraline, paroxetine, and fluvoxamine) as monotherapy in the acute-phase treatment for adults with MDD. The primary outcomes included response rate and remission rate. The secondary outcome was the withdrawal rate due to any cause. All articles published on 6 electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ProQuest, until 28 August 2018, were searched and analysed.
RESULTS
Fifteen meta-analysis based systematic reviews finally met all the inclusion criteria and pre-defined outcomes were extracted. Regarding the remission rate and withdrawal rate, statistically, significant comparisons showed that escitalopram was the better choice.
CONCLUSION
The descriptive analysis of the included articles showed that generally, escitalopram was more effective than other defined SSRIs in terms of response rate, remission rate, and withdrawal rate. Keypoints This work compiles evidence from multiple meta-analyses based on systematic reviews and provides a clearer picture for assessing the efficacy of SSRIs, clarify current gaps and direction of future research in this category of antidepressants. A minority of included articles attained the high-quality rank according to AMSTAR-2. The descriptive analysis of the included articles showed that generally, escitalopram was more effective than other defined SSRIs in terms of response rate, remission rate, and withdrawal rate.
Topics: Citalopram; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 32667275
DOI: 10.1080/13651501.2020.1782433 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Jul 2020One problem areas of animal models and tests for neuropsychiatric disorders is unclear reproducibility, including both internal and external validity. One way to examine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Similarities and dissimilarities in the effects of benzodiazepines and specific serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the defensive marble burying test: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
One problem areas of animal models and tests for neuropsychiatric disorders is unclear reproducibility, including both internal and external validity. One way to examine external validity is with systematic reviews and meta-analyses, a standard practice in clinical research that is relatively neglected in preclinical research. Considering the need to evaluate the validity and reproducibility of frequently used animal models, this study presents a meta-analysis of the effects of prototypic benzodiazepines and specific serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the mouse defensive marble burying test (MBT). These drug groups were selected because although they differ in their biological targets as well as in their clinical use, they are both commonly used for the treatment of anxiety disorders. A PubMed literature search was performed to identify studies that examined the effects of benzodiazepines (diazepam, alprazolam, chlordiazepoxide, clonazepam) or SSRIs (fluoxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, paroxetine) in the MBT in mice. For benzodiazepines, 73 experiments were included. Benzodiazepines effect size was 2.04 and Q statistics was 1959 with a significant correlation between dose and effect size (r = 0.31, p = 0.007). For SSRIs we identified 47 experiments. Effect size of SSRIs was 2.24 and Q statistics was 493.38. No correlation was found between dose and effect size (r = 0.23, p = 0.12). The current results support the external validity of the defensive marble burying test as a screening test for anxiolytic effects. However, these results indicate that significant attention should be given to the administration schedules of benzodiazepines and SSRIs.
Topics: Animals; Anxiety; Benzodiazepines; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Administration Schedule; Mice; Motor Activity; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 32456852
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2020.04.007 -
World Psychiatry : Official Journal of... Jun 2020Mental disorders frequently begin in childhood or adolescence. Psychotropic medications have various indications for the treatment of mental dis-orders in this age...
Safety of 80 antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-attention-deficit/hyperactivity medications and mood stabilizers in children and adolescents with psychiatric disorders: a large scale systematic meta-review of 78 adverse effects.
Mental disorders frequently begin in childhood or adolescence. Psychotropic medications have various indications for the treatment of mental dis-orders in this age group and are used not infrequently off-label. However, the adverse effects of these medications require special attention during developmentally sensitive periods of life. For this meta-review, we systematically searched network meta-analyses and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), individual RCTs, and cohort studies reporting on 78 a priori selected adverse events across 19 categories of 80 psychotropic medications - including antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications and mood stabilizers - in children and adolescents with mental disorders. We included data from nine network meta-analyses, 39 meta-analyses, 90 individual RCTs, and eight cohort studies, including 337,686 children and adolescents. Data on ≥20% of the 78 adverse events were available for six antidepressants (sertraline, escitalopram, paroxetine, fluoxetine, venlafaxine and vilazodone), eight antipsychotics (risperidone, quetiapine, aripiprazole, lurasidone, paliperidone, ziprasidone, olanzapine and asenapine), three anti-ADHD medications (methylphenidate, atomoxetine and guanfacine), and two mood stabilizers (valproate and lithium). Among these medications with data on ≥20% of the 78 adverse events, a safer profile emerged for escitalopram and fluoxetine among antidepressants, lurasidone for antipsychotics, methylphenidate among anti-ADHD medications, and lithium among mood stabilizers. The available literature raised most concerns about the safety of venlafaxine, olanzapine, atomoxetine, guanfacine and valproate. Nausea/vomiting and discontinuation due to adverse event were most frequently associated with antidepressants; sedation, extrapyramidal side effects, and weight gain with antipsychotics; anorexia and insomnia with anti-ADHD medications; sedation and weight gain with mood stabilizers. The results of this comprehensive and updated quantitative systematic meta-review of top-tier evidence regarding the safety of antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-ADHD medications and mood stabilizers in children and adolescents can inform clinical practice, research and treatment guidelines.
PubMed: 32394557
DOI: 10.1002/wps.20765 -
Journal of Affective Disorders May 2020We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted by searching eight registries for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for the acute treatment of bipolar depression.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess data quality. Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes were efficacy (response and remission rate) and acceptability (completion of treatment and dropouts due to adverse events). Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.
RESULTS
Identified citations (4,404) included 50 trials comprising 11,448 participants. Escitalopram, phenelzine, moclobemide, carbamazepine, sertraline, lithium, paroxetine, aripiprazole, gabapentin and ziprasidone appear to be ineffective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression. Divalproex, olanzapine/fluoxetine, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, and lamotrigine, appear to be effective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression according to the network meta-analysis. Aripiprazole showed higher discontinuation rates versus placebo due to the appearance of any adverse event. Quetiapine was better than placebo at reducing treatment-emergent affective switches. For Bipolar I Disorder, cariprazine, fluoxetine, imipramine, lamotrigine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at response, while fluoxetine, imipramine, cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at remission.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These results could serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the relative benefits of the different antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizing agents for the treatment of bipolar depression.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42019122172).
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Humans; Lurasidone Hydrochloride; Network Meta-Analysis; Olanzapine
PubMed: 32339131
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.030 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2020To explore the short-term efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder in adults.
OBJECTIVE
To explore the short-term efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder in adults.
METHODS
Multiple electronic databases were searched to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on paroxetine and panic disorder. The primary efficacy outcomes were: the mean change compared to the baseline in the total number of full panic attacks, Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score, and the proportion of participants with zero full panic attacks and with a 50% or greater reduction in the number of full panic attacks. The tolerability outcomes included withdrawal rate and the incidence of adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS
13RCTs were included. The pooled analyses showed patients who received paroxetine experienced greater improvements in the number of full panic attacks (total: MD=-1.96, 95%CI -3.45 to -0.47, P=0.010; ≥50% reduction: OR=1.66, 95%CI 1.08 to 2.55, P=0.02; zero full panic attacks: OR=1.70, 95%CI 1.42 to 2.03, P < 0.00001) and CGI-S (MD=-0.37, 95%CI -0.74 to -0.01, P=0.05) than placebo. There was no evident difference in the total withdrawal rate (OR=0.91, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.08, P=0.26) and withdrawal rate due to AEs (OR=1.29, 95%CI 0.97 to 1.72, P=0.07) between the two groups. Withdrawal rate due to lack of efficacy or relapse (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.63, P < 0.00001) and the incidence of serious AEs (OR=0.42, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.79, P=0.007) in the paroxetine group was lower than the placebo group. Meanwhile, the incidence of any treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (OR=1.32, 95%CI 1.05 to 1.64, P=0.02) in the paroxetine group was higher in comparison with the placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
Paroxetine is an effective and well-tolerated short-term treatment for adults with panic disorder.
PubMed: 32296330
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00275 -
Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism &... May 2020: Pregnancy-related physiological changes exert a crucial impact on the pharmacokinetics of antidepressants; however, the current evidence presents inconsistencies. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
: Pregnancy-related physiological changes exert a crucial impact on the pharmacokinetics of antidepressants; however, the current evidence presents inconsistencies. A clearer understanding of pregnancy-related effects on antidepressant disposition may facilitate the development of guidelines for appropriate dose adjustments during the course of pregnancy based on therapeutic drug monitoring.: We systematically reviewed studies comparing antidepressant levels in the same individuals during pregnant and non-pregnant states. Using dose-adjusted plasma concentration measurements, we estimated alteration ratios between the 3rd trimester and baseline (before or after pregnancy). Additionally, we performed a meta-analysis for changes in dose-adjusted concentrations to estimate mean differences.: Data for several antidepressants display clear alteration patterns during pregnancy. On the basis of the alteration ratios trimipramine, fluvoxamine, and nortriptyline show a prominent decrease in dose-adjusted levels, especially in the 3rd trimester. Clomipramine, imipramine, citalopram, and paroxetine show smaller decreases in dose-adjusted concentrations in the third trimester. For escitalopram, venlafaxine and fluoxetine, changes are considered negligible. For sertraline, there was a tendency toward increased dose-adjusted concentrations in pregnancy. Available evidence suffers from major limitations and factors affecting pharmacokinetics have been insufficiently addressed. Further research is required to promote knowledge on pregnancy effects on antidepressant pharmacokinetics.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, Third
PubMed: 32238008
DOI: 10.1080/17425255.2020.1750598 -
Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology :... Mar 2020Clinical guidance on the symptomatic treatment of behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is limited.
BACKGROUND
Clinical guidance on the symptomatic treatment of behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is limited.
OBJECTIVE
To provide a systematic review of pharmacological interventions for symptomatic treatment of bvFTD, based on the International bvFTD Criteria Consortium clinical diagnostic criteria: apathy, disinhibition, lack of empathy or sympathy, hyperorality, stereotypical behavior, and executive dysfunction.
METHODS
We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO databases for reports on pharmacological interventions for individuals with bvFTD, published between 1970 and 2018, using key indicators and relevant terms. Studies were included if the efficacy of the intervention in alleviating bvFTD symptoms was provided as an outcome. Due to the high prevalence of depressive symptoms in individuals with bvFTD, we also evaluated the effect of the interventions on depression.
RESULTS
We included 23 studies-11 randomized controlled trials, eight open-label studies, one proof-of-concept study, and three case series-reporting on a total of 573 individuals. Of the 23 studies, 16 used pharmacological interventions that improved bvFTD symptoms. Based on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, trazodone had the greatest significant reductive effect on the symptoms of bvFTD. Overall, citalopram, rivastigmine, paroxetine, and trazodone all reduced multiple symptoms, including disinhibition, hyperorality, and depression.
CONCLUSIONS
This review provides an overview of the pharmacological interventions that can be used to treat the main bvFTD symptoms as well as a guideline for managing bvFTD. More research is needed to investigate the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for bvFTD through use of a validated outcome and a focus on the specific behavioral problems associated with bvFTD.
Topics: Female; Frontotemporal Dementia; Humans; Male; Neuropsychological Tests; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32132398
DOI: 10.1097/WNN.0000000000000217