Usefulness of mirtazapine and SSRIs in late-life depression: post hoc analysis of the GUNDAM study.

OBJECTIVE: Mirtazapine and SSRIs are widely prescribed as first-line agents for late-life depression. However, evidence for these drugs is mostly based on non-elderly patients. Therefore, we reanalyzed a randomized controlled trial of mirtazapine versus SSRIs for depression in a sub-population of late-life patients. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 141 patients, of whom 41 were elderly, and 100 were non-elderly. This study compared SSRIs and mirtazapine in late-life depression, examined late-onset and early adult-onset separately and compared elderly and non-elderly patients for each drug. Treatment effects and adverse events were assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser Side Effect Rating Scale, respectively. RESULTS: In late-life depression, mirtazapine showed faster HAM-D total score improvement (3.3 points difference, p = 0.021) and higher improvement in insomnia (1.7 points difference, p = 0.001) and appetite (1.2 points difference, p = 0.020). Similar findings were observed for late-onset depression with the HAM-D total score (4.3 points difference, p = 0.007) and appetite (0.9 points difference, p = 0.004), favoring mirtazapine. Depressive symptoms were generally less improved in late-life depression than in non-late-life depression. Regarding the effect of mirtazapine on appetite, late-life depression showed greater improvement (0.7 points difference, p = 0.008). Nausea and micturition disturbances were more common with SSRIs in late-life depression than in non-late-life depression. In contrast, somnolence was less common in late-life depression with mirtazapine. CONCLUSION: The potential usefulness of mirtazapine in elderly patients was demonstrated. The results also showed differences in the treatment response to SSRIs and mirtazapine between elderly and non-elderly patients.

Personality as a basis for antidepressant selection for patients with depression: A two-point outcome study at 4 and 8 weeks.

BACKGROUND: The treatment course for depression is multifactorial, and the gold standard method for antidepressant selection remains unclear. Therefore, we focused on patients' personality as a possible indicator of the treatment response to mirtazapine and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and whether it can contribute to antidepressant selection. METHODS: One hundred one patients with major depressive disorder were randomized at baseline to receive either mirtazapine or SSRI treatment. Their personality was measured using the NEO Five-Factor Inventory at baseline, and depressive symptoms were evaluated using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression at baseline and 4 and 8 weeks. Stepwise multivariable logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed to determine the association of personality traits with remission and better antidepressant selection. RESULTS: Neuroticism had the substantial influence on remission at 4 and 8 weeks among the entire sample. The cutoff T-score of neuroticism for predicting remission at 4 weeks was 62.5. The patients with moderate neuroticism (scores below the cutoff) were more likely to experience remission after 4-week mirtazapine treatment (remission rate: 73.7 %) than after SSRI treatment (40.0 %); those with high neuroticism (scores above the cutoff) were more likely to experience remission after 8-week SSRI treatment (74.1 %) than after mirtazapine treatment (35.7 %). LIMITATIONS: The small sample size increased the confidence intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment response of the patients with depression differed according to the type of antidepressants and degree of neuroticism. Measuring personality traits at treatment initiation may help in selecting better antidepressants and predicting the time to remission.

Non response at week 4 as clinically useful indicator for antidepressant combination in major depressive disorder. A sequential RCT.

We aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of mirtazapine versus SSRIs and to assess whether "non-response at week 4" may be a clinical indicator for combining mirtazapine and SSRIs for subsequent treatment. One-hundred fifty-four outpatients with MDD were randomized to receive mirtazapine or SSRIs in step I (4 weeks). Non-responders in step I were randomly assigned to either mirtazapine or SSRIs monotherapy or their combination in step IIa while responders in step I continued the same monotherapy in step IIb for 4 weeks. In step I, mirtazapine showed significantly faster improvement as shown by higher remission rate at week 2 with NNT = 8 compared to SSRIs. Somnolence rate was higher in mirtazapine and nausea rate was higher in SSRIs. In step IIa, combination therapy showed a more favorable time course than SSRIs monotherapy. For subjects taking SSRIs in step I, combination therapy showed significant better improvement in the Hamilton Depression Rating (HAM-D) score both at week 6 (p = 0.006) and 8 (p = 0.013) than SSRIs monotherapy. About 80% of responders at week 4 could reach remission at week 8 and 64% of non-responders could not reach remission at week 8 for patients who continued monotherapy. When mirtazapine was added on for SSRIs non-responders at week 4, the remission rate increased by 5% and HAM-D score improved by 4 points. While for mirtazapine non-responders, SSRIs add-on was not equally effective. Mirtazapine may provide a faster improvement and "non-response at week 4" may be indicator to mirtazapine add-on for patients receiving SSRIs.

[Successful completion of left total hip arthroplasty by inhibitor neutralization therapy in a hemophilia B patient with high responding inhibitor].

Major surgery in hemophilia patients has been facilitated by the development of coagulation concentrates. However, it is still difficult to manage bleeding during major surgery in patients with inhibitors to FVIII/IX. In addition, there have been few reports of major surgery in hemophilia B with high responding inhibitors. We report a 26-year-old hemophilia B patient with high responding factor IX inhibitor who demonstrated severe hemophiliac arthropathy in his left hip joint. Total hip arthroplasty was performed with a high dose of FIX followed by recombinant FVIIa. His inhibitor titer was decreased from 111 BU/ml to 1.0 BU/ml at surgery by avoiding the use of FIX concentrates. Thus, we could use high dose FIX for the management of surgical bleeding. Anamnestic response occurred on the 7th day after surgery and FIX concentrates were switched to recombinant FVIIa. The whole process was safely managed without any excess bleeding or adverse effects. The successful use of high dose FIX followed by recombinant FVIIa suggests that even major surgery could be safely performed in hemophilia B patients with a low titer of high responding inhibitors.