Literature DB >> 18172020

Difference in treatment outcome in outpatients with anxious versus nonanxious depression: a STAR*D report.

Maurizio Fava1, A John Rush, Jonathan E Alpert, G K Balasubramani, Stephen R Wisniewski, Cheryl N Carmin, Melanie M Biggs, Sidney Zisook, Andrew Leuchter, Robert Howland, Diane Warden, Madhukar H Trivedi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: About half of outpatients with major depressive disorder also have clinically meaningful levels of anxiety. The authors conducted a secondary data analysis to compare antidepressant treatment outcomes for patients with anxious and nonanxious major depression in Levels 1 and 2 of the STAR*D study.
METHOD: A total of 2,876 adult outpatients with major depressive disorder, enrolled from 18 primary and 23 psychiatric care sites, received citalopram in Level 1 of STAR*D. In Level 2, a total of 1,292 patients who did not remit with or tolerate citalopram were randomly assigned either to switch to sustained-release bupropion (N=239), sertraline (N=238), or extended-release venlafaxine (N=250) or to continue taking citalopram and receive augmentation with sustained-release bupropion (N=279) or buspirone (N=286). Treatment could last up to 14 weeks in each level. Patients were designated as having anxious depression if their anxiety/somatization factor score from the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) was 7 or higher at baseline. Rates of remission and response as well as times to remission and response were compared between patients with anxious depression and those with nonanxious depression.
RESULTS: In Level 1 of STAR*D, 53.2% of patients had anxious depression. Remission was significantly less likely and took longer to occur in these patients than in those with nonanxious depression. Ratings of side effect frequency, intensity, and burden, as well as the number of serious adverse events, were significantly greater in the anxious depression group. Similarly, in Level 2, patients with anxious depression fared significantly worse in both the switching and augmentation options.
CONCLUSIONS: Anxious depression is associated with poorer acute outcomes than nonanxious depression following antidepressant treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18172020     DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.06111868

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0002-953X            Impact factor:   18.112


  238 in total

Review 1.  An overview of mood disorders in the DSM-5.

Authors:  Jan Fawcett
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 5.285

2.  What are the clinical implications of new onset or worsening anxiety during the first two weeks of SSRI treatment for depression?

Authors:  Jackie K Gollan; Maurizio Fava; Benji Kurian; Stephen R Wisniewski; A John Rush; Ella Daly; Sachiko Miyahara; Madhukar H Trivedi
Journal:  Depress Anxiety       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 6.505

3.  Trajectories of depression severity in clinical trials of duloxetine: insights into antidepressant and placebo responses.

Authors:  Ralitza Gueorguieva; Craig Mallinckrodt; John H Krystal
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  2011-12

4.  Do early changes in the HAM-D-17 anxiety/somatization factor items affect the treatment outcome among depressed outpatients? Comparison of two controlled trials of St John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) versus a SSRI.

Authors:  Stella Bitran; Amy H Farabaugh; Victoria E Ameral; Rachel A LaRocca; Alisabet J Clain; Maurizio Fava; David Mischoulon
Journal:  Int Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 1.659

5.  Assessing anxious features in depressed outpatients.

Authors:  Shawn M McClintock; Mustafa M Husain; Ira H Bernstein; Stephen R Wisniewski; Madhukar H Trivedi; David Morris; Jonathan Alpert; Diane Warden; James F Luther; Susan G Kornstein; Melanie M Biggs; Maurizio Fava; A John Rush
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2011-11-04       Impact factor: 4.035

6.  Sensitivity to changes during antidepressant treatment: a comparison of unidimensional subscales of the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) in patients with mild major, minor or subsyndromal depression.

Authors:  Isabella Helmreich; Stefanie Wagner; Roland Mergl; Antje-Kathrin Allgaier; Martin Hautzinger; Verena Henkel; Ulrich Hegerl; André Tadić
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 5.270

Review 7.  Targeting opioid dysregulation in depression for the development of novel therapeutics.

Authors:  Caroline A Browne; Irwin Lucki
Journal:  Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 12.310

8.  Treating co-occurring depression and anxiety: modeling the dynamics of psychopathology and psychotherapy using the time-varying effect model.

Authors:  Aidan G C Wright; Michael N Hallquist; Holly A Swartz; Ellen Frank; Jill M Cyranowski
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2013-09-16

9.  Pioneering first steps and cautious conclusions.

Authors:  Francis J McMahon
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 13.382

10.  Clinical predictors of depression treatment outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease.

Authors:  Robert M Carney; Kenneth E Freedland; Brian C Steinmeyer; Eugene H Rubin; Michael W Rich
Journal:  J Psychosom Res       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 3.006

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.