David L Dunner1, Kimberly K Laubmeier, George Manos, Robert A Forbes, Ross A Baker, Robert M Berman. 1. Center for Anxiety and Depression, Mercer Island, Washington (Dr Dunner); Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc, Princeton, New Jersey (Drs Baker and Forbes); and Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wallingford, Connecticut (Drs Berman, Laubmeier, and Manos). Dr Laubmeier is currently an employee of Otsuka, and Dr Forbes is currently employed by Genentech.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether switching within or between antidepressant therapy (ADT) classes prior to the use of adjunctive antipsychotic treatment is associated with different outcomes in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from 3 similar, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled registrational studies of aripiprazoleadjunctive to ADT conducted between September 2004 and April 2008. The trials comprised the following 3 phases: a 7- to 28-day screening phase, an 8-week single-blind prospective treatment phase, and a 6-week double-blind, randomized phase. Patients were aged 18-65 years and met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD. Patients with an inadequate response to ADT during the screening phase entered the prospective treatment phase, during which they were switched to another ADT medication of either the same or a different class. Those patients with an inadequate response were then randomized to double-blind adjunctive aripiprazole or adjunctive placebo and followed for 6 weeks. RESULTS:Mean improvement in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score was significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole versus adjunctive placebo for both between-class (-9.2 vs -6.2, P < .001) and within-class (-9.8 vs -6.6, P < .001) switch groups. Relative risks for response were 1.6 (95% CI = 1.3-2.1) for those who switched between classes and 1.7 (95% CI = 1.2-2.2) for those who switched within class. CONCLUSIONS: Augmentation with aripiprazole, after either a between-class or within-class switch following initial ADT failure, is an effective option for patients with nonresponsive MDD. In contrast to current strategies employed in clinical practice, these results suggest that adjunctive aripiprazole is a logical strategy in patients unresponsive to ADT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00105196, NCT00095758, NCT00095823.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether switching within or between antidepressant therapy (ADT) classes prior to the use of adjunctive antipsychotic treatment is associated with different outcomes in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from 3 similar, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled registrational studies of aripiprazole adjunctive to ADT conducted between September 2004 and April 2008. The trials comprised the following 3 phases: a 7- to 28-day screening phase, an 8-week single-blind prospective treatment phase, and a 6-week double-blind, randomized phase. Patients were aged 18-65 years and met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD. Patients with an inadequate response to ADT during the screening phase entered the prospective treatment phase, during which they were switched to another ADT medication of either the same or a different class. Those patients with an inadequate response were then randomized to double-blind adjunctive aripiprazole or adjunctive placebo and followed for 6 weeks. RESULTS: Mean improvement in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score was significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole versus adjunctive placebo for both between-class (-9.2 vs -6.2, P < .001) and within-class (-9.8 vs -6.6, P < .001) switch groups. Relative risks for response were 1.6 (95% CI = 1.3-2.1) for those who switched between classes and 1.7 (95% CI = 1.2-2.2) for those who switched within class. CONCLUSIONS: Augmentation with aripiprazole, after either a between-class or within-class switch following initial ADT failure, is an effective option for patients with nonresponsive MDD. In contrast to current strategies employed in clinical practice, these results suggest that adjunctive aripiprazole is a logical strategy in patients unresponsive to ADT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00105196, NCT00095758, NCT00095823.
Authors: Madhukar H Trivedi; A John Rush; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Diane Warden; Louise Ritz; Grayson Norquist; Robert H Howland; Barry Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Kathy Shores-Wilson; Melanie M Biggs; G K Balasubramani; Maurizio Fava Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Jonathan W Stewart; Diane Warden; George Niederehe; Michael E Thase; Philip W Lavori; Barry D Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Jerrold F Rosenbaum; Harold A Sackeim; David J Kupfer; James Luther; Maurizio Fava Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: David A Shapiro; Sean Renock; Elaine Arrington; Louis A Chiodo; Li-Xin Liu; David R Sibley; Bryan L Roth; Richard Mailman Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2003-05-21 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Robert M Berman; Maurizio Fava; Michael E Thase; Madhukar H Trivedi; René Swanink; Robert D McQuade; William H Carson; David Adson; Leslie Taylor; James Hazel; Ronald N Marcus Journal: CNS Spectr Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 3.790
Authors: Robert M Berman; Ronald N Marcus; René Swanink; Robert D McQuade; William H Carson; Patricia K Corey-Lisle; Arif Khan Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Ronald C Kessler; Patricia Berglund; Olga Demler; Robert Jin; Doreen Koretz; Kathleen R Merikangas; A John Rush; Ellen E Walters; Philip S Wang Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Raymond W Lam; Sidney H Kennedy; Sophie Grigoriadis; Roger S McIntyre; Roumen Milev; Rajamannar Ramasubbu; Sagar V Parikh; Scott B Patten; Arun V Ravindran Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2009-08-11 Impact factor: 4.839