Long-term outcomes in patients with severe depression after in-hospital treatment - study protocol of the depression long-term Augsburg (DELTA) study.

INTRODUCTION: Depressive disorders are very common diseases entailing a great burden on affected people. However, comprehensive information on long-term disease course in patients with severe depression is lacking so far. The objectives of the DELTA study are to examine long-term outcomes and their predicting factors, to assess clinical response of antidepressant pharmacotherapy by applying therapeutic drug monitoring, to identify predictors of therapeutic non-response, to describe the long-term healthcare utilisation and to investigate the role of biomarkers in disease course. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cohort study including all adult hospitalised cases (age range 18 to 75 years) of severe major depression who are admitted to the Bezirkskrankenhaus Augsburg is established. It is planned to include 300 patients. During the hospital stay, information is gathered through personal interview, self-administered questionnaires, cognitive tests and chart review. Furthermore, biomaterials are collected. After hospital discharge, patients are repeatedly re-examined over time (3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months) to collect information about mortality, relapse, depression severity, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), perceived stigma, cognitive functions, diet, physical activity, treatment and healthcare utilisation. Follow-up blood samples are collected to determine therapeutic drug levels. The primary study aim is to investigate long-term therapeutic response, survival, relapse, HRQOL and cognitive functions. Survival time and time to relapse or re-hospitalisation will be analysed using Cox regression models. Changes of HRQOL, depressive symptoms and cognitive functions over time will be examined using generalised linear regression models for repeated measures or mixed models. Correlates of the disease course will be modelled using suitable generalised linear, mixed, estimating equation and growth curve models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (date of approval: 23 October 2017, reference number: 17-625). Study results will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Comparison of the combinations of fexofenadine-pseudoephedrine and loratadine-montelukast in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Antihistamine-decongestant combinations are used routinely for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Recently, the combination of an antihistamine and a leukotriene receptor antagonist has been shown to be efficacious. OBJECTIVE: To compare the 2 combinations in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel study in which patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis received either fexofenadine, 60 mg, and pseudoephedrine, 120 mg, twice daily, or loratadine, 10 mg, and montelukast, 10 mg, once daily, for 2 weeks. The Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) was completed at the beginning and end of the study. Patients recorded nasal symptoms and measured nasal peak inspiratory flow (NPIF) twice daily. Baseline measurements were obtained before initiation of treatment. RESULTS: Compared with baseline, both treatments resulted in statistically and clinically meaningful reductions of overall and individual RQLQ domain scores (P < .01) except for the sleep domain, for which only loratadine-montelukast led to significant improvement. There was a significant reduction in total symptoms (P < or = .05) compared with baseline on most treatment days in patients receiving both combinations. When the change from baseline was analyzed, there were no statistically significant differences in total symptoms between fexofenadine-pseudoephedrine and loratadine-montelukast (median, -28.5 vs -22.5; P = .33). There was a significant improvement in NPIF from baseline on all treatment days in both groups (P < .05), with no significant difference between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Fexofenadine-pseudoephedrine and loratadine-montelukast have comparable efficacy in improving symptoms, RQLQ scores, and nasal obstruction in seasonal allergic rhinitis. The lack of improvement in sleep in the fexofenadine-pseudoephedrine group is probably related to insomnia, a known adverse effect of pseudoephedrine.