A cross-validation of the provisional diagnostic instrument (PDI-4).

BACKGROUND: The Provisional Diagnostic Instrument (PDI-4) is a brief, adult self-report instrument for 4 common psychiatric diagnoses in primary care patients: major depressive episode (MDE), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and bipolar I disorder based on past or present mania. Our objective was to assess validity of the PDI-4 in a population independent of the study population originally used to develop the scale. METHODS: An online version of the 17-item PDI-4 was administered to 1,047 adults in the US; respondents also completed the PHQ-9, HADS-A, CAARS-S, and MDQ within the online survey. Respondents self-reported diagnosis by a healthcare professional with the terms depression (n=221), anxiety (n=218), attention deficit disorder (n=206), bipolar or manic depressive disorder (n=195), or none of these (n=207). Statistical analyses examined convergent and discriminant validity, and operating characteristics of the PDI-4 relative to the individual, validated, self-rated scales PHQ-9, HADS-A, CAARS-S, and MDQ, for each PDI-4 diagnosis. RESULTS: Convergent validity of the PDI-4 was supported by strong correlations with the corresponding individual scales (range of 0.63 [PDI-4 and MDQ] to 0.87 [PDI-4 and PHQ-9]). Operating characteristics of the PDI-4 were similar to results in the previous site-based study. The scale exhibited moderate sensitivities (0.52 [mania] to 0.70 [ADHD]) and strong specificities (0.86 [mania] to 0.92 [GAD]) using the individual scales as the gold standards. ANOVAs demonstrated that PDI-4 discriminated between subsets of patients defined by pre-specified severity level cutoff scores of the individual scales. However, overlapping symptoms and co-morbidities made differentiation between mental diagnoses much weaker than differentiation from the control group with none of the diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The PDI-4 appears to be a suitable, brief, self-rated tool for provisional diagnoses of common mental disorders. However, the high level of symptom overlap between these diagnoses emphasizes that such brief scales are not a replacement for thorough diagnostic evaluation by trained medical providers.

Pharmacogenomic associations with weight gain in olanzapine treatment of patients without schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacogenomic analyses of weight gain during treatment with second-generation antipsychotics have resulted in a number of associations with variants in ankyrin repeat and kinase domain containing 1 (ANKK1)/dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2) and serotonin 2C receptor (HTR2C) genes. These studies primarily assessed subjects with schizophrenia who had prior antipsychotic exposure that may have influenced the amount of weight gained from subsequent therapies. We assessed the relationships between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in these genes with weight gain during treatment with olanzapine in a predominantly antipsychotic-naive population. METHOD: The association between 5 ANKK1, 54 DRD2, and 11 HTR2C SNPs and weight change during 8 weeks of olanzapine treatment was assessed in 4 pooled studies of 205 white patients with diagnoses other than schizophrenia who were generally likely to have had limited previous antipsychotic exposure. RESULTS: The A allele of DRD2 rs2440390(A/G) was associated with greater weight gain in the entire study sample (P = .0473). Three HTR2C SNPs in strong linkage disequilibrium, rs6318, rs2497538, and rs1414334, were associated with greater weight gain in women but not in men (P = .0032, .0012, and .0031, respectively). A significant association with weight gain for 2 HTR2C SNPs previously reported associated with weight gain, -759C/T (rs3813929) and -697G/C (rs518147), was not found. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between weight gain and HTR2C and DRD2 variants in whites newly exposed to olanzapine may present opportunities for the individualization of medication selection and development based on differences in adverse events observed across genotype groups.

Evaluation of genetic models for response in a randomized clinical trial of duloxetine in major depressive disorder.

In self-identified white patients with major depressive disorder (N=126) treated with open-label duloxetine (60-120 mg/d), a significant association of (P=0.020) of a composite risk score (based on SLC6A2 rs5569 [G1287A] AA, HTR1A rs6295 [C(-1019)G] GG, and COMT rs174697 AA/AG) with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score change from baseline to 12 weeks was observed.

Association of common variations in the norepinephrine transporter gene with response to olanzapine-fluoxetine combination versus continued-fluoxetine treatment in patients with treatment-resistant depression: a candidate gene analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes are associated with response to olanzapine-fluoxetine combination. METHOD: A post hoc analysis of a priori-selected SNPs used data from a clinical trial (dates: April 2002-July 2005) of olanzapine-fluoxetine combination, fluoxetine, and olanzapine in patients with major depressive disorder (DSM-IV criteria) and with nonresponse to prestudy antidepressant treatment and nonresponse to fluoxetine treatment during the study. Patients received open-label treatment with fluoxetine for 8 weeks (2 weeks, 25 mg/d; then 6 weeks, 50 mg/d), at the end of which nonresponders (< 25% decline in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score) were randomized to receive double-blind, monotherapy treatment with olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (6/50-18/50 mg/d, n = 71), fluoxetine (50 mg/d, n = 78), or olanzapine (6-18 mg/d, n = 56) for 8 weeks. Statistical significance was assessed at P < .05. The primary efficacy measure for within-study treatment was improvement on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: Rs36024, an intronic SNP in the norepinephrine transporter (SLC6A2), as well as 3 SNPs in melanocortin 3 receptor (MC3R) and 2 SNPs in tryptophan hydroxylase 2 (TPH2), were associated with MADRS-defined response to treatment with olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (adjusted Li-Nyholt P < .05). Except for 1 SNP in TPH2, identified SNPs were not significantly associated with response to continued-fluoxetine or olanzapine treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings further support the hypothesis that the synergistic effect of olanzapine and fluoxetine on prefrontal cortical levels of norepinephrine and dopamine might be an underlying mechanism for the efficacy of olanzapine-fluoxetine combination in the treatment of treatment-resistant depression and, if replicated, may form a basis on which response to olanzapine-fluoxetine combination versus continued fluoxetine can be predicted based on variants in SLC6A2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Parent study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00035321.

Analysis of gene variants previously associated with iloperidone response in patients with schizophrenia who are treated with risperidone.

OBJECTIVE: We examined 6 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) previously reported to be associated with response to iloperidone therapy for association with response to risperidone therapy. METHOD: Patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV) were assessed during 2006 and 2007 for response/nonresponse (defined as ≥ 20%/<20% improvement in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] total score) after 2 weeks of risperidone treatment (2 to 6 mg/d). Responders continued risperidone treatment; nonresponders were randomly assigned to either risperidone or olanzapine treatment (10 to 20 mg/d) for an additional 10 weeks. Associations between change in PANSS total (primary outcome measure), positive, and negative scores and the 6 SNPs were examined in risperidone-treated patients (N = 145). Genotype frequencies and improvement in PANSS total scores were analyzed for those SNPs significantly associated with change in PANSS total score. RESULTS: The SNPs XKR4 rs9643483 and GRIA4 rs2513265 were significantly associated with change in PANSS total response (adjusted P < .05 for both), with the same direction of effect as reported for iloperidone. For patients with nonresponsive genotypes for these SNPs, mean improvement in PANSS total score for African Americans was two-thirds that seen for whites (XKR4: -13.9 versus -21.4; GRIA4: -12.5 versus -20.9). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective pharmacogenomic analysis, we found that 2 SNPs previously linked to iloperidone response were also associated with response to risperidone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00337662.

PDI-4A: an augmented provisional screening instrument assessing 5 additional common anxiety-related diagnoses in adult primary care patients.

Patients with nonpsychotic mental health and emotional problems are commonly seen by primary care physicians. The objective of this study was to expand the Provisional Diagnostic Instrument-4 (PDI-4) to include a short self-report screen for 5 common anxiety-related diagnoses: panic attack (PA), social phobia (SP), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), hypochondriasis, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Primary care patients (N = 343) were originally evaluated with a self-report screen comprised of 85 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition symptom-based candidate questions, then interviewed by a trained rater for Structured Clinical Interview Research Version (SCID)/Adult ADHD Clinician Diagnostic Scale version 1.2 (ACDS) assessment and diagnosis. Responses to screening questions were used to calculate sensitivity and specificity for an SCID diagnosis, and to select the optimal cutoffs in symptom frequency for 1 or 2 questions for each additional anxiety-related diagnosis. The PDI-4 Anxiety (PDI-4A) contains 6 items for provisional differential diagnosis of PA, SP, OCD, hypochondriasis, and PTSD in addition to items for the PDI-4. Sensitivities/specificities were: PA, 88%/68%; SP, 57%/70%; OCD, 88%/61%; hypochondriasis, 67%/85%; and PTSD, 71%/72%. Screening for multiple common anxiety diagnoses may be desirable, although limitations may include reduced sensitivity and specificity for selected diagnoses. The PDI-4A may additionally help primary care physicians identify patients with PA, SP, OCD, hypochondriasis, and PTSD.

Association of catechol-O-methyltransferase variants with duloxetine response in major depressive disorder.

Single-nucleotide and diplotype associations with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD(17)) total score changes were examined, based on catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) rs165599 status in duloxetine-treated, self-identified white patients with major depressive disorder. COMT rs165737 and a diplotype containing COMT rs165599 and COMT rs165737 were associated with HAMD(17) total score changes.

A provisional screening instrument for four common mental disorders in adult primary care patients.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an adult self-report instrument for provisional diagnosis of four common mental disorders in primary care patients. METHODS: Primary care patients were evaluated during routine clinic visits with a self-report screening tool comprised of 85 DSM-IV symptom-based candidate questions. Patients with a physician-assessed provisional diagnosis for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), major depressive episode (MDE), past/present mania, and adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or none of these, completed additional self-report clinical questionnaires, and then were interviewed on the telephone by a trained rater for a SCID/ACDS diagnosis. Responses to the symptom-based candidate questions were used to calculate sensitivity and specificity for a SCID/ACDS diagnosis (GAD, N = 24; MDE, N = 89; Mania, N = 24; ADHD, N = 65) and to select the optimal four questions for each diagnosis to be included in the instrument. RESULTS: Analyses resulted in a 17-item instrument for provisional differential diagnosis of GAD, MDE, past/present mania, and ADHD. Comparison of limited symptom-based versus full DSM-IV criteria-based diagnosis showed minimal differences for relative diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivities and specificities, respectively, were 83% and 75% for GAD, 80% and 80% for MDE, 83% and 82% for mania, and 82%and 73% for ADHD. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this preliminary work, the Provisional Diagnostic Instrument-4 is a brief, easily scored, self-report instrument that may assist primary care physicians to identify potential cases of GAD, MDE, past/present mania, and ADHD.

Early symptom change and prediction of subsequent remission with olanzapine augmentation in divalproex-resistant bipolar mixed episodes.

Potential predictors of remission in mixed bipolar I disorder were identified using early Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) improvement criteria in divalproex-resistant patients randomized to olanzapine augmentation (olanzapine + divalproex; N = 101) in a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. In a post-hoc analysis, receiver operating characteristics of 1-point decreases in the CGI-S total score after 2, 4, 7, and 14 days were examined as predictors of endpoint (Week 6 or last observation) remission of depression and/or mania as defined by 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-21) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score ≤8. Based on a 1-point improvement in CGI-S as a predictor of remission, all odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were statistically significant for depression or mania remission criteria. ORs for mixed symptom remission with a decrease ≥1 in CGI-S scores at Day 2 for olanzapine augmentation were (6.727; CI: 2.382, 18.997; p < .001) with negative predictive value = 89.5% and positive predictive value = 44.2%. Changes in HDRS-21 and YMRS individual item scores after 2 days of augmentation as predictors of endpoint remission identified that decreases in HDRS-21 symptom item scores (early, middle, and/or late insomnia; paranoid; agitation; and somatic/gastrointestinal) predicted depressive symptom remission at endpoint, and decreases in YMRS item scores (language-thought disorder and irritability) were associated with manic symptom remission at endpoint. Because remission with augmentation therapy may occur in as few as one in ten individuals who lack very early symptom reduction, lack of early improvement may indicate a need to expediently reassess treatment strategy.

Symptoms predicting remission after divalproex augmentation with olanzapine in partially nonresponsive patients experiencing mixed bipolar I episode: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Rating scale items in a 6-week clinical trial of olanzapine versus placebo augmentation in patients with mixed bipolar disorder partially nonresponsive to ≥14 days of divalproex monotherapy were analyzed to characterize symptom patterns that could predict remission. At baseline, the two treatment groups were similar. FINDINGS: Factor analysis with Varimax rotation was performed post hoc on baseline items of the 21-Item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-21) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Backwards-elimination logistic regression ascertained factors predictive of protocol-defined endpoint remission (HDRS-21 score ≤ 8 and YMRS score ≤ 12) with subsequent determination of optimally predictive factor score cutoffs.Factors for Psychomotor activity (YMRS items for elevated mood, increased motor activity, and increased speech and HDRS-21 agitation item) and Guilt/Suicidality (HDRS-21 items for guilt and suicidality) significantly predicted endpoint remission in the divalproex+olanzapine group. No factor predicted remission in the divalproex+placebo group. Patients in the divalproex+olanzapine group with high pre-augmentation psychomotor activity (scores ≥10) were more likely to remit compared to those with lower psychomotor activity (odds ratio [OR] = 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22-7.79), and patients with marginally high Guilt/Suicidality (scores ≥2) were less likely to remit than those with lower scores (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.13-1.03). Remission rates for divalproex+placebo vs. divalproex+olanzapine patients with high psychomotor activity scores were 22% vs. 45% (p = 0.08) and 33% vs. 48% (p = 0.29) for patients with low Guilt/Suicidality scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were partially nonresponsive to divalproex treatment with remaining high vs. low psychomotor activity levels or minimal vs. greater guilt/suicidality symptoms were more likely to remit with olanzapine augmentation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00402324?term=NCT00402324&rank=1, Identifier: NCT00402324.

The association of single nucleotide polymorphisms in the catechol-O-methyltransferase gene and pain scores in female patients with major depressive disorder.

UNLABELLED: We tested the hypothesis that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene are associated with baseline pain levels in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Pain levels were quantified using a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Data from 159 female and 93 male self-reported white patients with MDD were analyzed. The associations between a haplotype previously associated with pain sensitivity created using COMT SNPs rs6269, rs4633, rs4818, and rs4680, and the proportion of female patients with "Pain While Awake" and "Overall Pain" at baseline were statistically significant (P < .05). In male patients, no statistically significant associations between COMT haplotypes and baseline pain scores were seen. The rs165599 SNP, which has previously been associated with response of depressive symptoms to treatment in patients with MDD, did not impact baseline pain in either gender. In conclusion, baseline pain levels appear to be associated with the COMT pain sensitivity haplotype in female patients with MDD. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents associations of the COMT pain sensitivity haplotype and baseline pain levels in female patients with MDD. This finding could potentially help clinicians who seek to assess how genetic polymorphisms may contribute to a patient's pain experience.

Characteristics and mortality among hospitalized patients treated with intramuscular antipsychotics: analysis of a United States hospital database.

Mortality rates across matched cohorts of hospitalized patients treated with IM olanzapine, haloperidol, and/or ziprasidone in a hospital database were compared. Using propensity score matching, matched cohorts of IM olanzapine- (N=2,984) and IM haloperidol-treated patients (N=2,984) and IM olanzapine- (N=2,876) and IM ziprasidone-treated patients (N=2,876) were obtained. The study outcome was in-hospital death within 2 days of administering IM antipsychotic. Incidence of death was not statistically different between olanzapine-ziprasidone cohorts (OR=1.21, 95% CI 0.92-1.59). The olanzapine cohort demonstrated a significantly lower death incidence than the haloperidol cohort (OR=0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.93; p=.011). The results suggest that patients treated with IM olanzapine do not have a significantly greater risk of death than patients treated with IM haloperidol or IM ziprasidone.

Failure to replicate genetic associations with antidepressant treatment response in duloxetine-treated patients.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have identified associations of polymorphisms in several target genes with antidepressant treatment response of serotonin reuptake inhibitors and a tricyclic antidepressant. We sought to replicate these associations in a study of a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. METHODS: In 250 outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder, response to treatment with once-daily duloxetine (60 mg/day) over 6 weeks was examined for associations with polymorphisms in eight candidate genes previously associated with antidepressant response using mixed-effect model repeated-measures analysis. Treatment response was quantified on the basis of changes from baseline using 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total scores. RESULTS: Polymorphisms in PDE1A, PDE1C, PDE6A, PDE11A, ABCB1, GRIK4, SLC6A4, and OPRM1 genes showed no statistically significant associations (uncorrected, two-tailed p > .05) with duloxetine treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: Previously, described associations between polymorphisms in candidate genes and antidepressant treatment response were not replicated in this study. This result may suggest that previous associations are specific to serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

Genetic associations of prolactin increase in olanzapine/fluoxetine combination-treated patients.

In patients from two clinical trials, we investigated the associations of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes with prolactin level changes during treatment with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination. In both cohorts, three dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) SNPs were associated with prolactin changes. DRD2 may influence susceptibility to hyperprolactinemia associated with antipsychotic treatment.

Genetic association study of treatment response with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination or lamotrigine in bipolar I depression.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate common genetic variations for association with symptomatic improvement in bipolar I depression following treatment with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) or lamotrigine. METHOD: Symptom improvement was assessed in 88 OFC-treated and 85 lamotrigine-treated white patients with bipolar I depression in the 7-week acute period of a randomized, double-blind study comparing OFC (6/25, 6/50, 12/25, or 12/50 mg/d [olanzapine/fluoxetine]) with lamotrigine (titrated to 200 mg/d). The original study was conducted from November 2003 to August 2004. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in a set of 19 candidate genes corresponding to known sites of activity for olanzapine and fluoxetine or previously associated with antidepressant or antipsychotic response. Primary outcome was the reduction in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score as assessed by the difference by genotype from baseline to week 7 from a mixed-effects repeated measures analysis with terms for visit, genotype, genotype-by-visit interaction, and baseline MADRS score as a covariate. RESULTS: SNPs within the dopamine D(3) receptor and histamine H(1) receptor (HRH1) genes were significantly associated with response to OFC. SNPs within the dopamine D(2) receptor, HRH1, dopamine beta-hydroxylase, glucocorticoid receptor, and melanocortin 2 receptor genes were significantly associated with response to lamotrigine. CONCLUSIONS: SNPs in specific candidate genes were associated with symptomatic improvement in a treatment-specific fashion. These results suggest the importance of dopaminergic effects in the treatment of patients with bipolar I depression and the potential utility of genotyping in selection of pharmacologic treatments for bipolar depression.

Defining "good" and "poor" outcomes in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a multidimensional data-driven approach.

The study's goal was to characterize the typology of patient outcomes based on social and occupational functioning and psychiatric symptoms following antipsychotic drug treatment, and to explore predictors of group membership representing the best/worst outcomes. A hierarchical cluster analysis was used to define groups of patients (n=1449) based on endpoint values for psychiatric symptoms, social functioning, and useful work measured up to 30 weeks of treatment. Stepwise logistic regression was used to construct predictive models of cluster membership for baseline predictors, and with 2/4/8 weeks of treatment. Five distinct clusters of patients were identified at endpoint (Clusters A-E). Patients in Cluster A (25.6%, best outcome) had minimal psychiatric symptoms and mild functional impairment, while patients in Cluster D (14.3%) and E (14.8%) (worst outcome) had moderate-to-severe symptoms and severe functional impairment. Occupational functioning, disorganized thinking, and positive symptoms were sufficient to describe the clusters. Membership in the best/worst clusters was predicted by baseline scores for functioning and symptom severity, and by early changes in symptoms with treatment. Psychiatric symptoms and functioning provided complementary information to describe treatment outcomes. Early symptom response significantly improved the prediction of outcome, suggesting that early monitoring of treatment response may be useful in clinical practice.

Olanzapine-divalproex combination versus divalproex monotherapy in the treatment of bipolar mixed episodes: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: This 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial used simultaneous depression and mania criteria to compare a single mood stabilizer, divalproex, with and without adjunctive olanzapine in patients with bipolar I disorder experiencing acute mixed episodes. METHOD: Two hundred two adults, aged 18 to 60 years, who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar disorder with a current mixed episode and had been taking divalproex for >or=14 days at levels of 75 to 125 microg/mL with inadequate efficacy (21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS-21] and Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] scores >or=16) were randomly assigned to olanzapine 5 to 20 mg/d versus placebo augmentation. HDRS-21, YMRS, Clinical Global Impressions for Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP), hospitalizations, concomitant medications, and adverse events were assessed. Comparisons included changes in both HDRS-21 and YMRS (primary outcome measure), time to partial response and time to response, CGI-BP improvement, hospitalizations, and safety (secondary outcome measures). The study was conducted from December 2006 to February 2008. RESULTS: Mean (SD) baseline HDRS-21 and YMRS scores were 22.2 (4.5) and 20.9 (4.4), respectively, with 59% female and 51% white subjects. Mean +/- SE score changes from baseline across the 6-week treatment period for adjunctive olanzapine (n = 100) versus adjunctive placebo (n = 101) arms, respectively, were -9.37 +/- 0.55 versus -7.69 +/- 0.54, P = .022, on the HDRS-21 and -10.15 +/- 0.44 versus -7.68 +/- 0.44 P < .001, on the YMRS. Mean +/- SE score changes from baseline to last observation carried forward for CGI-BP measures were -1.34 +/- 0.11 for adjunctive olanzapine versus -1.06 +/- 0.11 for adjunctive placebo, P = .056. Time to partial response (>or=25% HDRS-21 and YMRS decreases, median 7 versus 14 days) and time to response (>or=50% HDRS-21 and YMRS decreases, median 25 versus 49 days) were significantly shorter with adjunctive olanzapine. Increases in weight (total and >or=7%) and fasting blood glucose were significantly greater with adjunctive olanzapine. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive olanzapine yielded greater and earlier reduction of manic and depressive symptoms in mixed-episode patients with inadequate response to at least 2 weeks of divalproex. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00402324.

Early symptom change prediction of remission in depression treatment.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated hypothesized early symptom changes as differential predictors of long-term remission for duloxetine and escitalopram. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This was a post-hoc analysis from a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind study of patients with major depressive disorder treated for 8 weeks with duloxetine 60 mg/day (N = 273) or escitalopram 10 mg/day (N = 274), and for another 6 months with duloxetine up to 120 mg/day or escitalopram up to 20 mg/day. Odds ratios (ORs) for successful treatment (sustained remission), defined as a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) score 2.0. In a follow-up analysis, specific subscale items for psychological anxiety, motor retardation, and suicidality significantly predicted remission for duloxetine, and psychological and somatic anxiety for escitalopram. Notably, high NPVs on the Maier subscale indicated that a lack of 20% improvement on the "core" depression factor by Week 2 was highly predictive of unsuccessful treatment outcome over 8 months. CONCLUSIONS: In accord with hypotheses, early symptom changes were specific to treatment, with early response in the core depression factor (Maier subscale), anxiety, and motor activity for duloxetine, and core factor and anxiety for escitalopram. Lack of early response in depression symptom subscales was highly predictive of lack of sustained remission.

Variation in catechol-O-methyltransferase is associated with duloxetine response in a clinical trial for major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: The study objective was to evaluate variations in genes implicated in antidepressant mechanism of action for association with response to duloxetine treatment in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: We assessed response over 6 weeks in 250 duloxetine-treated Caucasian patients in a randomized, double-blind study of patients with MDD. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in 19 candidate genes selected based on evidence for involvement in antidepressant mechanism of action. Primary analysis examined baseline to end point reduction in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD17) total score, using a set-based test for association for each gene. Follow-up analyses examined individual SNPs within any significant gene for association with reduction in HAMD17 and 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C-30). RESULTS: After correction for multiple comparisons, only COMT was associated with change in HAMD17 (experiment wide p = .018). Peak association was detected with rs165599 (p = .006), which accounted for approximately 3% of variance in HAMD17 change and >4% of variance in IDS-C-30 change (p = .001). The least-squared mean change (SE) in HAMD17 score by rs165599 genotype was -10.8 (1.2), -8.7 (.6), and -6.5 (.7) for patients with GG, GA, and AA genotypes, respectively. For SNPs in serotonin 2A receptor (HTR2A) previously associated with citalopram response, including rs7997012, no significant evidence of association with duloxetine response was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Single nucleotide polymorphisms in COMT were associated with symptom change in duloxetine-treated patients with MDD. If replicated, the magnitude of the COMT genotype effect is of clinical relevance.

Olanzapine/fluoxetine combination vs. lamotrigine in the 6-month treatment of bipolar I depression.

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) compared with lamotrigine (Lam) for long-term treatment of bipolar I depression, this 25-wk, randomized, double-blind study compared OFC (6/25, 6/50, 12/25, or 12/50 mg/d, n=205) with Lam titrated to 200 mg/d (n=205) in patients with bipolar I disorder, depressed. A protocol-specified analysis of 7-wk outcomes was previously reported. Outcome measures included Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) (primary), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores. OFC-treated patients had significantly greater improvement than Lam-treated patients over 25 wk on CGI-S (p=0.008), MADRS (p=0.005), and YMRS (p<0.001) scores, and from baseline across visits from week 5 (titration complete) to the end of the study on CGI-S (p=0.043), MADRS (p=0.017), and YMRS (p=0.001) scores. Of patients in remission after the 7-wk acute phase, there was no significant difference between treatment groups in the incidence of relapse (MADRS >15, p=0.528). Rate of treatment-emergent mania was not significantly different by treatment (p=0.401). OFC-treated patients had more frequent (p<0.05) somnolence, increased appetite, dry mouth, sedation, weight gain, and tremor; Lam-treated patients had more frequent insomnia. There was a significant difference in incidence of treatment-emergent cholesterol > or = 240 (p<0.001) and in weight gain of > or = 7% (p<0.001) in favour of the Lam group. Patients with bipolar I depression had significantly greater symptom improvement over 25 wk on OFC compared with Lam. There was no treatment difference in incidence of relapse. OFC-treated patients had more treatment-emergent adverse events and greater incidence of weight gain and hypercholesterolaemia.