-
1.
Association between COMT gene Val108/158Met and antidepressive treatment response: A meta-analysis.
Tang, Z, Zhang, S, Guo, D, Wang, H
Gene. 2020;:144333
Abstract
Multiple antidepressive treatment methods are widely used in the clinic, but different patients showed considerable differences in response to the same treatment. The catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) rs4680 polymorphism is involved in the antidepressive treatment reaction; however, the results in different studies are inconsistent. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis to explore the association of the COMT rs4680 polymorphism with the treatment response in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients. An online search was performed through PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library up to December 2018. The odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and heterogeneity were calculated in four genetic models. Subgroup analysis and Galbraith plot were carried out to detect the potential source of heterogeneity. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were performed to identify the reliability of the results. A total of 11 studies involving 2845 individuals were included in this meta-analysis. The results of the subgroup analysis indicated that patients who carried the G allele had remission or a better response to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in four genetic models. Excluding the studies that might lead to heterogeneity, overall ORs were recalculated, and no obvious association between rs4680 polymorphism and therapeutic reaction was detected in the allelic, recessive and additive models. In the dominant model, COMT rs4680 variants showed significant associations with antidepressive treatment, but the result was highly dependent on the individual study. In addition, the patients with the GG or AG + GG genotype in comparison to AA were associated with a better response to ECT treatment. However, due to the small number of studies using ECT treatment, we suggest that more research should be performed to verify this result.
-
2.
Value of peripheral neurotrophin levels for the diagnosis of depression and response to treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Shi, Y, Luan, D, Song, R, Zhang, Z
European neuropsychopharmacology : the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020;:40-51
Abstract
The neurotrophin hypothesis indicates that neurotrophic factors are important for the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD), with alterations in peripheral neurotrophin levels having potential clinical application for MDD. The present meta-analysis aimed to investigate the diagnostic value for MDD of peripheral neurotrophin levels in cross-sectional studies and the association between peripheral neurotrophin levels and the response to antidepressant treatment in longitudinal studies. Published studies in the PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to February 2020. The search terms included depressive disorder, neurotrophic factor, serum/plasma and their synonyms. Human studies reporting on BDNF, GDNF, IGF-2, VEGF, NGF, FGF-2, and S100B levels in MDD patients were included. Data comparing MDD patients and healthy controls, and/or between responders and non-responders before and after antidepressant treatment were extracted. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean differences. A total of 177 original studies were identified, including 139 cross-sectional and 38 longitudinal studies. Significantly reduced BDNF and NGF levels and significantly elevated IGF-1, VEGF, and S100B levels were reported in MDD patients compared with healthy controls, while GDNF and FGF-2 levels were not significantly different. Furthermore, compared with non-responders, S100B levels at baseline and BDNF levels following treatment were significantly elevated in responders. In addition, there was a significantly elevated level of VEGF after treatment in responders only. In conclusions, alterations in peripheral neurotrophins levels were strongly associated with the biology and the treatment response of MDD. Further investigations are required to examine potential sources of heterogeneity.
-
3.
International Society for Nutritional Psychiatry Research Practice Guidelines for Omega-3 Fatty Acids in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder.
Guu, TW, Mischoulon, D, Sarris, J, Hibbeln, J, McNamara, RK, Hamazaki, K, Freeman, MP, Maes, M, Matsuoka, YJ, Belmaker, RH, et al
Psychotherapy and psychosomatics. 2019;(5):263-273
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a complex mental illness with unmet therapeutic needs. The antidepressant effects of ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs) have been widely reported. The subcommittee of the International Society for Nutritional Psychiatry Research organized an expert panel and conducted a literature review and a Delphi process to develop a consensus-based practice guideline for clinical use of n-3 PUFAs in MDD. The guideline focuses on 5 thematic areas: general concepts, acute treatment strategy, depression recurrence monitoring and prevention, use in special populations, and potential safety issues. The key practice guidelines contend that: (1) clinicians and other practitioners are advised to conduct a clinical interview to validate clinical diagnoses, physical conditions, and measurement-based psychopathological assessments in the therapeutic settings when recommending n-3 PUFAs in depression treatment; (2) with respect to formulation and dosage, both pure eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) or an EPA/docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) combination of a ratio higher than 2 (EPA/DHA >2) are considered effective, and the recommended dosages should be 1-2 g of net EPA daily, from either pure EPA or an EPA/DHA (>2:1) formula; (3) the quality of n-3 PUFAs may affect therapeutic activity; and (4) potential adverse effects, such as gastrointestinal and dermatological conditions, should be monitored, as well as obtaining comprehensive metabolic panels. The expert consensus panel has agreed on using n-3 PUFAs in MDD treatment for pregnant women, children, and the elderly, and prevention in high-risk populations. Personalizing the clinical application of n-3 PUFAs in subgroups of MDD with a low Omega-3 Index or high levels of inflammatory markers might be regarded as areas that deserve future research.
-
4.
Efficacy and Safety of Xiaoyao Formula as an Adjuvant Treatment for Post-Stroke Depression: A Meta-Analysis.
Jin, X, Jiang, M, Gong, D, Chen, Y, Fan, Y
Explore (New York, N.Y.). 2018;(3):224-229
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Xiaoyao formula (XYF) as an adjuvant treatment of post-stroke depression (PSD) by conducting a meta-analysis. METHODS Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched up to May 2016. Randomized controlled trials investigating XYF plus antidepressants versus antidepressants alone for patients with PSD were considered. RESULTS A total of 607 PSD patients were identified from 7 trials. Adjuvant treatment with XYF had additional benefits in terms of improved total response rates (risk ratio [RR] 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.30), reduced Hamilton's depressive scale (weighted mean difference [WMD] -5.21; 95% CI: -7.48 to -2.95), and decreased Scandinavian Stroke Scale (WMD -6.35; 95% CI: -8.27 to -4.43). No serious adverse events were observed in any of the included trials. CONCLUSIONS Adjuvant treatment with XYF appears to have additional benefits in the treatment of PSD, without increasing serious adverse events.
-
5.
Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in Perinatal Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Lin, PY, Chang, CH, Chong, MF, Chen, H, Su, KP
Biological psychiatry. 2017;(8):560-569
Abstract
BACKGROUND Omega-3 (or n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are promising antidepressant treatments for perinatal depression (PND) because of supporting evidence from clinical trials, the advantage in safety, and their anti-inflammatory and neuroplastic effects. Although several observational studies have shown n-3 PUFA deficits in women with PND, the results of individual PUFAs from different studies were inconsistent. METHODS This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the levels of PUFA indices, including eicosapentaenoic acid, docosahexaenoic acid, arachidonic acid, total n-3, total n-6, and the n-6/n-3 ratio between women with PND and healthy control subjects. The meta-analysis included 12 eligible studies available as of December 2016. The effect sizes were synthesized by using a random effects model. In addition, we performed subgroup analysis for the PUFA levels in patients with prenatal and postnatal depression, both of which were compared with healthy control subjects. RESULTS There were significantly lower levels of total n-3 PUFAs and docosahexaenoic acid and significantly increased n-6/n-3 ratios in PND patients. In the subgroup analyses, there were significantly lower levels of n-3 PUFAs, eicosapentaenoic acid, and docosahexaenoic acid in women with prenatal depression. The n-6/n-3 ratio was significantly increased in both prenatal and postnatal depression subgroups. CONCLUSIONS Our meta-analysis consolidates the important role of n-3 PUFAs in PND. Nutritional medicine is an important strategy to improve the effectiveness of treatment for depression, and our findings provide the strong rationale to conduct clinical trials to test the therapeutic and prophylactic effects of n-3 PUFAs in PND.
-
6.
D-Cycloserine Augmentation of Exposure-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Anxiety, Obsessive-Compulsive, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data.
Mataix-Cols, D, Fernández de la Cruz, L, Monzani, B, Rosenfield, D, Andersson, E, Pérez-Vigil, A, Frumento, P, de Kleine, RA, Difede, J, Dunlop, BW, et al
JAMA psychiatry. 2017;(5):501-510
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Whether and under which conditions D-cycloserine (DCS) augments the effects of exposure-based cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and posttraumatic stress disorders is unclear. OBJECTIVE To clarify whether DCS is superior to placebo in augmenting the effects of cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and posttraumatic stress disorders and to evaluate whether antidepressants interact with DCS and the effect of potential moderating variables. DATA SOURCES PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to February 10, 2016. Reference lists of previous reviews and meta-analyses and reports of randomized clinical trials were also checked. STUDY SELECTION Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were (1) double-blind randomized clinical trials of DCS as an augmentation strategy for exposure-based cognitive behavior therapy and (2) conducted in humans diagnosed as having specific phobia, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or posttraumatic stress disorder. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Raw data were obtained from the authors and quality controlled. Data were ranked to ensure a consistent metric across studies (score range, 0-100). We used a 3-level multilevel model nesting repeated measures of outcomes within participants, who were nested within studies. RESULTS Individual participant data were obtained for 21 of 22 eligible trials, representing 1047 of 1073 eligible participants. When controlling for antidepressant use, participants receiving DCS showed greater improvement from pretreatment to posttreatment (mean difference, -3.62; 95% CI, -0.81 to -6.43; P = .01; d = -0.25) but not from pretreatment to midtreatment (mean difference, -1.66; 95% CI, -4.92 to 1.60; P = .32; d = -0.14) or from pretreatment to follow-up (mean difference, -2.98, 95% CI, -5.99 to 0.03; P = .05; d = -0.19). Additional analyses showed that participants assigned to DCS were associated with lower symptom severity than those assigned to placebo at posttreatment and at follow-up. Antidepressants did not moderate the effects of DCS. None of the prespecified patient-level or study-level moderators was associated with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE D-cycloserine is associated with a small augmentation effect on exposure-based therapy. This effect is not moderated by the concurrent use of antidepressants. Further research is needed to identify patient and/or therapy characteristics associated with DCS response.
-
7.
Statins for the treatment of depression: A meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.
Salagre, E, Fernandes, BS, Dodd, S, Brownstein, DJ, Berk, M
Journal of affective disorders. 2016;:235-42
Abstract
BACKGROUND In epidemiological studies, statins appear to benefit mood, and there are now some randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy of statins. However, the role of statins in depression remains uncertain. Thus the aim of this paper was to assess the effect of statins on depressive symptoms by performing a meta-analysis of all double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled clinical trials (RCT) conducted in subjects with depression. METHODS A systematic search was executed using PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov in November 30th, 2015 for all double-blind, RCT of statins versus placebo in persons with depressive symptoms. Sixty-seven potential articles were identified through search of electronic databases, of those three met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The outcome measure was change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) scores associated with statin use. A meta-analysis was conducted and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. GRADE was used to assess study quality. RESULTS The three articles included provided data on 165 participants with moderate to severe depression. Of these, 82 were randomized to statins as an adjuvant therapy to antidepressant treatment (i.e., citalopram or fluoxetine) and 83 to the placebo arm. All studies were double-blind RCTs, with a follow-up of 6-12 weeks. The statin agents evaluated were lovastatin, atorvastatin, and simvastatin. When compared to placebo, statins, as add-on to treatment as usual, largely improved depressive symptoms as assessed by the HDRS (SMD=-0.73, 95% IC -1.04 to -0.42, p<0.001, 3 between-group comparisons, n=165). No serious adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that adjunctive treatment with statins could be useful for the treatment of depressive symptoms. Additional double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials are necessary to settle the matter.
-
8.
Lamotrigine compared to placebo and other agents with antidepressant activity in patients with unipolar and bipolar depression: a comprehensive meta-analysis of efficacy and safety outcomes in short-term trials.
Solmi, M, Veronese, N, Zaninotto, L, van der Loos, ML, Gao, K, Schaffer, A, Reis, C, Normann, C, Anghelescu, IG, Correll, CU
CNS spectrums. 2016;(5):403-418
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To meta-analytically summarize lamotrigine's effectiveness and safety in unipolar and bipolar depression. METHODS We conducted systematic PubMed and SCOPUS reviews (last search =10/01/2015) of randomized controlled trials comparing lamotrigine to placebo or other agents with antidepressant activity in unipolar or bipolar depression. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of depression ratings, response, remission, and adverse effects calculating standardized mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) ±95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS Eighteen studies (n=2152, duration=9.83 weeks) in patients with unipolar depression (studies=4, n=187; monotherapy vs lithium=1, augmentation of antidepressants vs placebo=3) or bipolar depression (studies=14, n=1965; monotherapy vs placebo=5, monotherapy vs lithium or olanzapine+fluoxetine=2, augmentation of antidepressants vs placebo=1, augmentation of mood stabilizers vs placebo=3, augmentation of mood stabilizers vs trancylpromine, citalopram, or inositol=3) were meta-analyzed. Lamotrigine's efficacy for depressive symptoms did not differ significantly in monotherapy vs augmentation studies (vs. placebo: p=0.98, I2=0%; vs active agents: p=0.48, I2=0%) or in unipolar vs bipolar patients (vs placebo: p=0.60, I2=0%), allowing pooling of each placebo-controlled and active-controlled trials. Lamotrigine outperformed placebo regarding depressive symptoms (studies=11, n=713 vs n=696; SMD=-0.15, 95% CI=-0.27, -0.02, p=0.02, heterogeneity: p=0.24) and response (after removing one extreme outlier; RR=1.42, 95% CI=1.13-1.78; p=0.003, heterogeneity: p=0.08). Conversely, lamotrigine did not differ regarding efficacy on depressive symptoms, response, or remission from lithium, olanzapine+fluoxetine, citalopram, or inositol (studies=6, n=306 vs n=318, p-values=0.85-0.92). Adverse effects and all-cause/specific-cause discontinuation were similar across all comparisons. CONCLUSIONS Lamotrigine was superior to placebo in improving unipolar and bipolar depressive symptoms, without causing more frequent adverse effects/discontinuations. Lamotrigine did not differ from lithium, olanzapine+fluoxetine, citalopram, or inositol.
-
9.
S-adenosyl methionine (SAMe) for depression in adults.
Galizia, I, Oldani, L, Macritchie, K, Amari, E, Dougall, D, Jones, TN, Lam, RW, Massei, GJ, Yatham, LN, Young, AH
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2016;(10):CD011286
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Depression is a recurrent illness with high rates of chronicity, treatment-resistance and significant economic impact. There is evidence in the literature that S-adenosyl methionine (SAMe), a naturally occurring compound in the human body, has antidepressant efficacy. This product may be an important addition to the armamentarium of antidepressant agents. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of SAMe in comparison with placebo or antidepressants for the treatment of depression in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group's Specialised Register (CCMDCTR Studies and Reference Register), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, international trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization trials portal (ICTRP). We checked reference lists, performed handsearching and contacted experts in the field. The CCMDCTR literature search was last updated on 5 February 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials comparing SAMe with placebo or antidepressants in adults with a diagnosis of major depression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently performed extraction of data and assessment of risk of bias. We contacted trialists of included studies for additional information. MAIN RESULTS This systematic review included eight trials comparing SAMe with either placebo, imipramine, desipramine or escitalopram. We accepted trials that used SAMe as monotherapy or as add-on therapy to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and we accepted both oral and parenteral administration. The review involved 934 adults, of both sexes, from inpatient and outpatient settings.The trials were at low risk of reporting bias. We judged the risk of selection, performance, detection and attrition bias as unclear or low, and one study was at high risk of attrition bias.There was no strong evidence of a difference in terms of change in depressive symptoms from baseline to end of treatment between SAMe and placebo as monotherapy (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.54 to 0.46; P = 0.29; 142 participants; 2 studies; very low quality evidence). There was also no strong evidence of a difference in terms of drop-out rates due to any reason between SAMe and placebo, when used as monotherapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.29; P = 0.52; 142 participants; 2 studies; low quality evidence).Low quality evidence showed that the change in depressive symptoms from baseline to end of treatment was similar between SAMe and imipramine, both as monotherapy (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.27; P = 0.82; 619 participants; 4 studies). There was also no strong evidence of a difference between SAMe and a tricyclic antidepressant in terms of drop-outs due to any reason (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.31; P = 0.2; 78 participants; 3 studies; very low quality evidence).There was little evidence of a difference in terms of change in depressive symptoms from baseline to end of treatment between SAMe and escitalopram, both as monotherapy (MD 0.12, 95% CI -2.75 to 2.99; P = 0.93; 129 participants; 1 study; low quality evidence). There was no strong evidence of a difference between SAMe and escitalopram in terms of drop-outs due to any reason (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.16; P = 0.26; 129 participants; 1 study; low quality evidence).There was low quality evidence that SAMe is superior to placebo as add-on to SSRIs in terms of change in depressive symptoms from baseline to end of treatment (MD -3.90, 95% CI -6.93 to -0.87; P = 0.01; 73 participants; 1 study). There was no strong evidence of a difference between SAMe and placebo as adjunctive therapy to an SSRI in terms of drop-outs due to any reason (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.56; P = 0.38; 73 participants; 1 study; very low quality evidence).For all comparisons, secondary outcome measures of response and remission rates were consistent with these primary outcome measures.With regard to all extractable measures of the acceptability of SAMe, the quality of the evidence was low to very low. SAMe was not different from placebo and established antidepressants. The exception was that compared to imipramine, fewer participants experienced troublesome adverse effects when treated with parenteral SAMe.The specific adverse effects were not detailed in most of the included studies. There were two reports of mania/hypomania recorded for 441 participants in the SAMe arm. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Given the absence of high quality evidence and the inability to draw firm conclusions based on that evidence, the use of SAMe for the treatment of depression in adults should be investigated further. Future trials should be in the form of large randomised controlled clinical trials of high methodological quality, with particular attention given to randomisation, allocation concealment, blinding and the handling of missing data. Comparator antidepressants from all classes should be used. Adverse events should be detailed for each participant, bearing in mind that induction of mania is of particular interest.
-
10.
Meta-analysis and meta-regression of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation for major depressive disorder.
Mocking, RJ, Harmsen, I, Assies, J, Koeter, MW, Ruhé, HG, Schene, AH
Translational psychiatry. 2016;(3):e756
Abstract
Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation has been proposed as (adjuvant) treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). In the present meta-analysis, we pooled randomized placebo-controlled trials assessing the effects of omega-3 PUFA supplementation on depressive symptoms in MDD. Moreover, we performed meta-regression to test whether supplementation effects depended on eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) or docosahexaenoic acid dose, their ratio, study duration, participants' age, percentage antidepressant users, baseline MDD symptom severity, publication year and study quality. To limit heterogeneity, we only included studies in adult patients with MDD assessed using standardized clinical interviews, and excluded studies that specifically studied perinatal/perimenopausal or comorbid MDD. Our PubMED/EMBASE search resulted in 1955 articles, from which we included 13 studies providing 1233 participants. After taking potential publication bias into account, meta-analysis showed an overall beneficial effect of omega-3 PUFAs on depressive symptoms in MDD (standardized mean difference=0.398 (0.114-0.682), P=0.006, random-effects model). As an explanation for significant heterogeneity (I(2)=73.36, P<0.001), meta-regression showed that higher EPA dose (β=0.00037 (0.00009-0.00065), P=0.009), higher percentage antidepressant users (β=0.0058 (0.00017-0.01144), P=0.044) and earlier publication year (β=-0.0735 (-0.143 to 0.004), P=0.04) were significantly associated with better outcome for PUFA supplementation. Additional sensitivity analyses were performed. In conclusion, present meta-analysis suggested a beneficial overall effect of omega-3 PUFA supplementation in MDD patients, especially for higher doses of EPA and in participants taking antidepressants. Future precision medicine trials should establish whether possible interactions between EPA and antidepressants could provide targets to improve antidepressant response and its prediction. Furthermore, potential long-term biochemical side effects of high-dosed add-on EPA supplementation should be carefully monitored.