Inflammatory markers and risk factors of RA patients with depression and application of different scales in judging depression.

To evaluate the association of inflammatory markers and depression in RA patients and the risk factors in RA with depression, a cross-sectional study was conducted in a cohort of RA patients from southern China.Two hundred-fifteen RA patients were enrolled. The demographic and disease-related characteristics were recorded and inflammatory markers in sera were measured. RA patients were guided to fill out PHQ-9 scale by themselves, the psychological state was evaluated by psychiatry experts and graded according to the HAMD-17 scale. The consistency of the two scales in judging depression was evaluated. RA with depression group had HAMD-17 scores greater than 7. The levels of CRP, ESR, fibrinogen, SAA, IL-2, IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IL-4, and IL-10 were measured and compared. Logistic regression analysis was performed to find the risk factors of RA with different depression levels. One hundred-five (48.84%) RA patients had HAMD-17 scores greater than 7. High consistency was found between HAMD-17 and PHQ-9 in predicting depression. RA patients with depression were more likely to have tender joints, lower income, no employment, higher disease activity, joint deformities and glucocorticoid treatment. The depressed RA patients had higher serum levels of IL-6, CRP, fibrinogen, and SAA. IL-6, CRP, fibrinogen, and SAA were positive correlated with depression in RA patients. PHQ-9 can replace HAMD-17 in clinical application to judge depression.

Effectiveness of mirtazapine as add-on to paroxetine v. paroxetine or mirtazapine monotherapy in patients with major depressive disorder with early non-response to paroxetine: a two-phase, multicentre, randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to examine the efficacy of combining paroxetine and mirtazapine v. switching to mirtazapine, for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who have had an insufficient response to SSRI monotherapy (paroxetine) after the first 2 weeks of treatment. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, three-arm study recruited participants from five hospitals in China. Eligible participants were aged 18-60 years with MDD of at least moderate severity. Participants received paroxetine during a 2-week open-label phase and patients who had not achieved early improvement were randomized to paroxetine, mirtazapine or paroxetine combined with mirtazapine for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was improvement on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item (HAMD-17) scores 6 weeks after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 204 patients who showed early non-response to paroxetine monotherapy were randomly assigned to receive either mirtazapine and placebo (n = 68), paroxetine and placebo (n = 68) or mirtazapine and paroxetine (n = 68), with 164 patients completing the outcome assessment. At week 8, the least squares (LS) mean change of HAMD-17 scores did not significantly differ among the three groups, (12.98 points) in the mirtazapine group, (12.50 points) in the paroxetine group and (13.27 points) in the mirtazapine plus paroxetine combination group. Participants in the paroxetine monotherapy group were least likely to experience adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: After 8 weeks follow-up, paroxetine monotherapy, mirtazapine monotherapy and paroxetine/mirtazapine combination therapy were equally effective in non-improvers at 2 weeks. The results of this trial do not support a recommendation to routinely offer additional treatment or a switch in treatment strategies for MDD patients who do not show early improvement after 2 weeks of antidepressant treatment.