Biomedical subjects

Kathy Shores-Wilson

Publications and source records attributed to Kathy Shores-Wilson.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Family history of mood disorder and characteristics of major depressive disorder: a STAR*D (sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression) study.

INTRODUCTION: Clinicians routinely ask patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) about their family history. It is unknown, however, if patients who report a positive family history differ from those who do not. This study compared the demographic and clinical features of a large cohort of treatment-seeking outpatients with non-psychotic MDD who reported that they did or did not have at least one first-degree relative who had either MDD or bipolar disorder. METHODS: Subjects were recruited for the STAR( *)D multicenter trial. Differences in demographic and clinical features for patients with and without a family history of mood disorders were assessed after correcting for age, sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: Patients with a family history of mood disorder (n=2265; 56.5%) were more frequently women and had an earlier age of onset of depression, as compared to those without such a history (n=1740; 43.5%). No meaningful differences were found in depressive symptoms, severity, recurrence, depressive subtype, or daily function. CONCLUSIONS: Women were twice as likely as men to report a positive family history of mood disorder, and a positive family history was associated with younger age of onset of MDD in the proband. Consistent with prior research, early age of onset appears to define a familial and, by extension, genetic subtype of major depressive disorder.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

Bupropion-SR, sertraline, or venlafaxine-XR after failure of SSRIs for depression.

BACKGROUND: After unsuccessful treatment for depression with a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), it is not known whether switching to one antidepressant is more effective than switching to another. METHODS: We randomly assigned 727 adult outpatients with a nonpsychotic major depressive disorder who had no remission of symptoms or could not tolerate the SSRI citalopram to receive one of the following drugs for up to 14 weeks: sustained-release bupropion (239 patients) at a maximal daily dose of 400 mg, sertraline (238 patients) at a maximal daily dose of 200 mg, or extended-release venlafaxine (250 patients) at a maximal daily dose of 375 mg. The study was conducted in 18 primary and 23 psychiatric care settings. The primary outcome was symptom remission, defined by a total score of 7 or less on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) at the end of the study. Scores on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self Report (QIDS-SR-16), obtained at treatment visits, determined secondary outcomes, including remission (a score of 5 or less at exit) and response (a reduction of 50 percent or more on baseline scores). RESULTS: Remission rates as assessed by the HRSD-17 and the QIDS-SR-16, respectively, were 21.3 percent and 25.5 percent for sustained-release bupropion, 17.6 percent and 26.6 percent for sertraline, and 24.8 percent and 25.0 percent for extended-release venlafaxine. QIDS-SR-16 response rates were 26.1 percent for sustained-release bupropion, 26.7 percent for sertraline, and 28.2 percent for extended-release venlafaxine. These treatments did not differ significantly with respect to outcomes, tolerability, or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: After unsuccessful treatment with an SSRI, approximately one in four patients had a remission of symptoms after switching to another antidepressant. Any one of the medications in the study provided a reasonable second-step choice for patients with depression. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00021528.).

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Medication augmentation after the failure of SSRIs for depression.

BACKGROUND: Although clinicians frequently add a second medication to an initial, ineffective antidepressant drug, no randomized controlled trial has compared the efficacy of this approach. METHODS: We randomly assigned 565 adult outpatients who had nonpsychotic major depressive disorder without remission despite a mean of 11.9 weeks of citalopram therapy (mean final dose, 55 mg per day) to receive sustained-release bupropion (at a dose of up to 400 mg per day) as augmentation and 286 to receive buspirone (at a dose of up to 60 mg per day) as augmentation. The primary outcome of remission of symptoms was defined as a score of 7 or less on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) at the end of this study; scores were obtained over the telephone by raters blinded to treatment assignment. The 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Report (QIDS-SR-16) was used to determine the secondary outcomes of remission (defined as a score of less than 6 at the end of this study) and response (a reduction in baseline scores of 50 percent or more). RESULTS: The sustained-release bupropion group and the buspirone group had similar rates of HRSD-17 remission (29.7 percent and 30.1 percent, respectively), QIDS-SR-16 remission (39.0 percent and 32.9 percent), and QIDS-SR-16 response (31.8 percent and 26.9 percent). Sustained-release bupropion, however, was associated with a greater reduction (from baseline to the end of this study) in QIDS-SR-16 scores than was buspirone (25.3 percent vs. 17.1 percent, P<0.04), a lower QIDS-SR-16 score at the end of this study (8.0 vs. 9.1, P<0.02), and a lower dropout rate due to intolerance (12.5 percent vs. 20.6 percent, P<0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Augmentation of citalopram with either sustained-release bupropion or buspirone appears to be useful in actual clinical settings. Augmentation with sustained-release bupropion does have certain advantages, including a greater reduction in the number and severity of symptoms and fewer side effects and adverse events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00021528.).

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Enrolling research subjects from clinical practice: ethical and procedural issues in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial.

The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial is a multi-site effectiveness study funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) with the aim of identifying successful, acceptable and cost-effective treatment strategies for outpatients with unremitted depression. With enrollment of 4,041 adults with major depressive disorder (MDD), it is the largest controlled psychiatric treatment study ever undertaken. In the course of developing procedures to ensure that ambitious enrollment goals were met, a number of ethical and practical issues became apparent that underscore the conflicts between effectiveness research and human subject protections. These are delineated as they relate to study design; eligibility criteria; incentives to subjects; investigators and clinical sites; the complementary roles of clinical research coordinators (CRCs) and study clinicians; and recruitment and consent procedures. The STAR*D trial exemplifies the interplay and tension between those strategies that integrate research and clinical aims and roles in the service of enhancing external validity, site participation, and recruitment and retention versus those strategies that differentiate research and clinical treatment in the service of research integrity and human subject protections. We hope that a discussion of these key challenges and dilemmas and how they have been addressed will help inform future discussions concerning design and conduct of ethical effectiveness trials designed to optimize care in real world clinical settings.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

A comparison of lithium and T(3) augmentation following two failed medication treatments for depression: a STAR*D report.

OBJECTIVE: More than 40% of patients with major depressive disorder do not achieve remission even after two optimally delivered trials of antidepressant medications. This study compared the effectiveness of lithium versus triiodothyronine (T(3)) augmentation as a third-step treatment for patients with major depressive disorder. METHOD: A total of 142 adult outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder who had not achieved remission or who were intolerant to an initial prospective treatment with citalopram and a second switch or augmentation trial were randomly assigned to augmentation with lithium (up to 900 mg/day; N=69) or with T(3) (up to 50 mug/day; N=73) for up to 14 weeks. The primary outcome measure was whether participants achieved remission, which was defined as a score < or =7 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. RESULTS: After a mean of 9.6 weeks (SD=5.2) of treatment, remission rates were 15.9% with lithium augmentation and 24.7% with T(3) augmentation, although the difference between treatments was not statistically significant. Lithium was more frequently associated with side effects (p=0.045), and more participants in the lithium group left treatment because of side effects (23.2% versus 9.6%; p=0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Remission rates with lithium and T(3) augmentation for participants who experienced unsatisfactory results with two prior medication treatments were modest and did not differ significantly. The lower side effect burden and ease of use of T(3) augmentation suggest that it has slight advantages over lithium augmentation for depressed patients who have experienced several failed medication trials.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

Tranylcypromine versus venlafaxine plus mirtazapine following three failed antidepressant medication trials for depression: a STAR*D report.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness and tolerability of tranylcypromine and combination treatment with extended-release venlafaxine and mirtazapine in patients with treatment-resistant major depression whose current depressive episode had not responded adequately to treatment in three prior prospective medication trials. METHOD: Adult outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder who had not achieved remission or had withdrawn from treatment because of intolerance in three previous prospective medication trials were randomly assigned to receive open-label treatment with either tranylcypromine (N=58) or extended-release venlafaxine plus mirtazapine (N=51). The primary outcome measure was whether patients achieved remission, which was defined as a score < or =7 at exit on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D). The HAM-D was administered by telephone by raters to whom treatment was masked. RESULTS: Remission rates were not significantly different between the two treatment groups (6.9% for the tranylcypromine group and 13.7% for the venlafaxine plus mirtazapine group). The mean daily dose at exit for tranylcypromine was 36.9 mg (SD=18.5); for venlafaxine, 210.3 mg (SD=95.2); and for mirtazapine, 35.7 mg (SD=17.6). Tranylcypromine was associated with significantly less symptom reduction and greater attrition due to intolerance. CONCLUSIONS: Remission rates were modest for both the tranylcypromine group and the extended-release venlafaxine plus mirtazapine group, and the rates were not statistically different between groups. The lower side effect burden, lack of dietary restrictions, and ease of use of venlafaxine and mirtazapine suggest that this combination may be preferred over tranylcypromine for patients with highly treatment-resistant depression who have not benefited adequately from several prior treatments.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Evaluation of outcomes with citalopram for depression using measurement-based care in STAR*D: implications for clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are widely used to treat depression, but the rates, timing, and baseline predictors of remission in "real world" patients are not established. The authors' primary objectives in this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of citalopram, an SSRI, using measurement-based care in actual practice, and to identify predictors of symptom remission in outpatients with major depressive disorder. METHOD: This clinical study included outpatients with major depressive disorder who were treated in 23 psychiatric and 18 primary care "real world" settings. The patients received flexible doses of citalopram prescribed by clinicians for up to 14 weeks. The clinicians were assisted by a clinical research coordinator in the application of measurement-based care, which included the routine measurement of symptoms and side effects at each treatment visit and the use of a treatment manual that described when and how to modify medication doses based on these measures. Remission was defined as an exit score of or=50% in baseline QIDS-SR score. RESULTS: Nearly 80% of the 2,876 outpatients in the analyzed sample had chronic or recurrent major depression; most also had a number of comorbid general medical and psychiatric conditions. The mean exit citalopram dose was 41.8 mg/day. Remission rates were 28% (HAM-D) and 33% (QIDS-SR). The response rate was 47% (QIDS-SR). Patients in primary and psychiatric care settings did not differ in remission or response rates. A substantial portion of participants who achieved either response or remission at study exit did so at or after 8 weeks of treatment. Participants who were Caucasian, female, employed, or had higher levels of education or income had higher HAM-D remission rates; longer index episodes, more concurrent psychiatric disorders (especially anxiety disorders or drug abuse), more general medical disorders, and lower baseline function and quality of life were associated with lower HAM-D remission rates. CONCLUSIONS: The response and remission rates in this highly generalizable sample with substantial axis I and axis III comorbidity closely resemble those seen in 8-week efficacy trials. The systematic use of easily implemented measurement-based care procedures may have assisted in achieving these results.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

Comparison of self-report and clinician ratings on two inventories of depressive symptomatology.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the concordance between the self-report and the clinician-rated versions of the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-30) and between the two versions of the briefer 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-16). METHODS: Data were gathered for 544 adult outpatients with psychotic (N = 106) or nonpsychotic (N = 438) major depressive disorder at 14 public sector mental health clinics in the Texas Medication Algorithm Project. Data for the QIDS-16 were extracted from the IDS-30. Baseline scores and scores from the final study visit at or before month 12 were analyzed. The clinician-rated and the self-report versions of each scale were compared in their identification of response to treatment and remission. RESULTS: The average baseline IDS-SR-30 total score was 2.2 points higher (indicating greater severity) than the IDS-C-30 score; the average QIDS-SR-16 total score was only .3 points higher than the QIDS-C-16 score. The IDS-SR-30 and the IDS-C-30, as well as the QIDS-C-16 and QIDS-SR-16, agreed substantially in classifying response and remission for patients, regardless of whether the patients had psychotic features. None of a large number of clinical and demographic features accounted for differences between the QIDS-SR-16 and QIDS-C-16 total scores. CONCLUSIONS: Either the IDS-30 or the QIDS-16 self-report adequately assesses depressive symptom severity among public-sector outpatients with major depressive disorder. The briefer QIDS-16 may be preferred to save time and cost.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

What clinical and symptom features and comorbid disorders characterize outpatients with anxious major depressive disorder: a replication and extension.

OBJECTIVE: We previously found that 46% of the first 1450 outpatients with depression participating in the multicentre Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) project qualified for the designation of anxious depression. This study was designed to replicate and extend our initial findings in a subsequent, larger cohort of outpatient STAR*D participants with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Baseline clinical and sociodemographic data were collected on 2337 consecutive STAR*D participants. A baseline 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Anxiety-Somatization factor score of 7 or higher was designated as anxious depression. We identified concurrent Axis I disorders with the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire (PDSQ), using a 90% specificity threshold. Depressive symptoms were assessed by clinical telephone interview with the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30). RESULTS: The prevalence of anxious depression in this population was 45.1%. Patients with anxious MDD were significantly more likely to be in primary care settings and to be women, nonsingle, unemployed, Hispanic, less educated, and suffering from severe depression, both before and after adjustment for overall depression severity. Patients with anxious depression were significantly more likely to meet PDSQ thresholds for generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, agoraphobia, hypochondriasis, and somatoform disorder, both before and after adjusting for baseline depression severity. Individuals with anxious depression were also significantly less likely to endorse IDS-C30 items concerning atypical features and were significantly more likely to endorse items concerning melancholic-endogenous depression features, both before and after adjusting for baseline depression severity. CONCLUSIONS: This study clearly replicates our previous STAR*D findings and supports the notion that anxious depression may be a valid diagnostic subtype of MDD, with distinct psychiatric comorbidities and clinical and sociodemographic features.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

Presenting characteristics of depressed outpatients as a function of recurrence: preliminary findings from the STAR*D clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Recurrent depression predicts risk for subsequent episodes, but it is unclear how it relates to demographic features, course of illness, and clinical presentation. METHODS: We report on the baseline data for the first 1500 patients enrolled in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study (www.star-d.org). Patients were required to have a DSM-IV diagnosis of nonpsychotic major depression and to score > or = 14 on the 17-item Hamilton rating scale for depression. Status with respect to recurrent depression and other aspects of illness course and demographic features were ascertained at intake, along with measures of depression and concurrent general medical illness. RESULTS: Patients with recurrent depression were older, had an earlier age of onset, and were more likely to have a positive family history of depression than first episode patients. However, recurrent patients were less likely to be chronic and reported shorter current episodes than first episode patients, something that was largely confined to females. Recurrent patients were more likely than first episode patients to report non-essential aspects of mood, cognition, and somatic symptoms, although largely as a consequence of greater overall depressive symptom severity. CONCLUSIONS: As compared to single episode depressions, recurrent depression was associated with greater symptom severity and illness characteristics suggestive of greater underlying risk, but not other demographic characteristics than age. Risk for recurrence appeared to be distinct from chronic depression. A subset of chronic first episode patients may lack the capacity to remit and may therefore be distinct from those with recurrent episodes.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

An evaluation of the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology and the hamilton rating scale for depression: a sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression trial report.

BACKGROUND: Nine DSM-IV-TR criterion symptom domains are evaluated to diagnose major depressive disorder (MDD). The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) provides an efficient assessment of these domains and is available as a clinician rating (QIDS-C16), a self-report (QIDS-SR16), and in an automated, interactive voice response (IVR) (QIDS-IVR16) telephone system. This report compares the performance of these three versions of the QIDS and the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17). METHODS: Data were acquired at baseline and exit from the first treatment step (citalopram) in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial. Outpatients with nonpsychotic MDD who completed all four ratings within +/-2 days were identified from the first 1500 STAR*D subjects. Both item response theory and classical test theory analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The three methods for obtaining QIDS data produced consistent findings regarding relationships between the nine symptom domains and overall depression, demonstrating interchangeability among the three methods. The HRSD17, while generally satisfactory, rarely utilized the full range of item scores, and evidence suggested multidimensional measurement properties. CONCLUSIONS: In nonpsychotic MDD outpatients without overt cognitive impairment, clinician assessment of depression severity using either the QIDS-C16 or HRSD17 may be successfully replaced by either the self-report or IVR version of the QIDS.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Brief psychiatric rating scale expanded version: How do new items affect factor structure?

Our goal was to suggest a factor structure for the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Expanded Version (BPRS-E) based upon a large and diverse sample and to determine which of the new items improved the factors derived from the 18-item version of the scale that have been used in clinical research for decades. We investigated the consistency of our proposed model over time and across demographic groups. As part of the Texas Medication Algorithm Project, the BPRS-E was administered to a total of 1440 psychiatric outpatients in three different diagnostic groups on multiple occasions. The sample was randomly split so that exploratory factor analysis could be done with the first half, and the model could be confirmed on the second half. A four-factor structure including factors assessing depression/anxiety, psychosis, negative symptoms, and activation was found. For each factor, we specify items in the expanded version that added to the breadth of the commonly used clinical factors while improving or maintaining goodness of fit and reliability. The final model proposed was consistent over time and across diagnosis, phase of illness, age, gender, ethnicity, and level of education. The BPRS-E has a stable four-factor structure, making it useful as a clinical outcome measure.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Comorbid psychiatric disorders in depressed outpatients: demographic and clinical features.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the clinical and sociodemographic features associated with various degrees of concurrent comorbidity in adult outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Outpatients enrolled in the STAR*D trial completed the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire (PDSQ). An a priori 90% specificity threshold was set for PDSQ responses to ascertain the presence of 11 different concurrent DSM-IV Axis I disorders. RESULTS: Of 1376 outpatients, 38.2% had no concurrent comorbidities, while 25.6% suffered one, 16.1% suffered two, and 20.2% suffered three or more comorbid conditions. Altogether, 29.3% met threshold for social anxiety disorder, 20.8% for generalized anxiety disorder, 18.8% for posttraumatic stress disorder, 12.4% for bulimia, 11.9% for alcohol abuse/dependence, 13.4% for obsessive-compulsive disorder, 11.1% for panic disorder, 9.4% for agoraphobia, 7.3% for drug abuse/dependence, 3.7% for hypochondriasis, and 2.2% for somatoform disorder. Those with more concurrent Axis I conditions had earlier ages at first onset of MDD, longer histories of MDD, greater depressive symptom severity, more general medical comorbidity (even though they were younger than those with fewer comorbid conditions), poorer physical and mental function, health perceptions, and life satisfaction; and were more likely to be seen in primary care settings. LIMITATIONS: Participants had to meet entry criteria for STAR*D. Ascertainment of comorbid conditions was not based on a structured interview. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent Axis I conditions (most often anxiety disorders) are very common with MDD. Greater numbers of concurrent comorbid conditions were associated with increased severity, morbidity, and chronicity of their MDD.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Clinical and demographic features of atypical depression in outpatients with major depressive disorder: preliminary findings from STAR*D.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and demographic and clinical characteristics of depression with atypical features in a broadly representative sample of outpatients. METHOD: Data derived from the first 1500 patients with DSM-IV major depressive disorder enrolled in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial at 41 primary care and nonresearch psychiatric outpatient clinics. An algorithm based on the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rating (IDS-C30) determined presence or absence of depression with atypical features. Odds ratios determined whether a variety of demographic and clinical parameters differed between patients meeting and not meeting atypical criteria. RESULTS: Over 18% of the sample met criteria for atypical features based on items from the IDS-C30. The atypical group was more likely to be female and have an earlier age at onset, greater comorbidity with anxiety symptoms, and greater symptom severity compared with the nonatypical group. CONCLUSION: Previously identified features of atypical depression were confirmed in this large and broadly representative, nonresearch clinical population.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

A brief cognitive assessment for use with schizophrenia patients in community clinics.

Cognitive impairment is a prominent feature of schizophrenia. The availability of very brief measures may increase the use of cognitive assessment in routine care settings. We examined the reliability and validity of the brief cognitive assessment (BCA), a battery that takes approximately 15 min to administer and score, and that was designed to be sensitive to changes in cognition with novel antipsychotics. The BCA was administered to 340 outpatients on two occasions, 3 months apart. A sub-sample of subjects received a full battery of cognitive tests (n=97) and additional measures of functional outcome. Results indicated that the BCA had very good test-retest reliability and inter-item consistency. Moreover, the BCA was strongly correlated with a comprehensive battery (r=0.72; p<0.0001) which took 8 to 10 times longer to administer. Finally, both cognitive batteries were correlated similarly with measures of community functioning. Changes over time for individual patients can be interpreted in the context of normative data available for each test in the BCA. The data provide preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of the BCA. Further studies examining the utility of the BCA for tracking changes in cognitive functioning with treatment are encouraged.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

One-year clinical outcomes of depressed public sector outpatients: a benchmark for subsequent studies.

BACKGROUND: The symptomatic outcomes of a cohort of public mental health sector depressed outpatients treated for 1 year are described to provide a benchmark for future long-term trials. Baseline moderators of outcome were evaluated. METHODS: Outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (n = 118) scoring >/=30 on the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rating (IDS-C(30)) were treated with a medication algorithm and patient/family education package. Response and remission rates were assessed every 3 months with the IDS-C(30). Logistic regression analyses evaluated several baseline features in relation to outcome. RESULTS: While response and remission rates increased from 3 to 12 months, the 1-year last observation carried forward (LOCF) response (26.3%) and remission (11.0%) rates were not impressive (sustained response = 14.4%; sustained remission = 5.1%). Younger patients and those with full-time employment (at baseline) were more likely to respond. A shorter length of illness tended to be associated with higher response and remission rates (p <.10). Results are generalizable to public sector patients with substantial socioeconomic, general medical, and educational disadvantages who were sufficiently depressed to recommend a change in antidepressant medication. CONCLUSIONS: Response and remission rates were modest when compared with outcomes in shorter duration efficacy trials in depressed outpatients with less chronicity, fewer concurrent general medical conditions, and less treatment resistance. Results support the need for more powerful treatments and/or the better delivery of available treatments.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Clinical results for patients with major depressive disorder in the Texas Medication Algorithm Project.

CONTEXT: The Texas Medication Algorithm Project is an evaluation of an algorithm-based disease management program for the treatment of the self-declared persistently and seriously mentally ill in the public mental health sector. OBJECTIVE: To present clinical outcomes for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) during 12-month algorithm-guided treatment (ALGO) compared with treatment as usual (TAU). DESIGN: Effectiveness, intent-to-treat, prospective trial comparing patient outcomes in clinics offering ALGO with matched clinics offering TAU. SETTING: Four ALGO clinics, 6 TAU clinics, and 4 clinics that offer TAU to patients with MDD but provide ALGO for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Patients Male and female outpatients with a clinical diagnosis of MDD (psychotic or nonpsychotic) were divided into ALGO and TAU groups. The ALGO group included patients who required an antidepressant medication change or were starting antidepressant therapy. The TAU group initially met the same criteria, but because medication changes were made less frequently in the TAU group, patients were also recruited if their Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total score was higher than the median for that clinic's routine quarterly evaluation of each patient. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included (1) symptoms measured by the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated scale (IDS-C(30)) and (2) function measured by the Mental Health Summary score of the Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) obtained every 3 months. A secondary outcome was the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report scale (IDS-SR(30)). RESULTS: All patients improved during the study (P<.001), but ALGO patients had significantly greater symptom reduction on both the IDS-C(30) and IDS-SR(30) compared with TAU. ALGO was also associated with significantly greater improvement in the SF-12 mental health score (P =.046) than TAU. CONCLUSION: The ALGO intervention package during 1 year was superior to TAU for patients with MDD based on clinician-rated and self-reported symptoms and overall mental functioning.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR*D): rationale and design.

STAR*D is a multisite, prospective, randomized, multistep clinical trial of outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder. The study compares various treatment options for those who do not attain a satisfactory response with citalopram, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant. The study enrolls 4000 adults (ages 18-75) from both primary and specialty care practices who have not had either a prior inadequate response or clear-cut intolerance to a robust trial of protocol treatments during the current major depressive episode. After receiving citalopram (level 1), participants without sufficient symptomatic benefit are eligible for randomization to level 2 treatments, which entail four switch options (sertraline, bupropion, venlafaxine, cognitive therapy) and three citalopram augment options (bupropion, buspirone, cognitive therapy). Those who receive cognitive therapy (switch or augment options) at level 2 without sufficient improvement are eligible for randomization to one of two level 2A switch options (venlafaxine or bupropion). Level 2 and 2A participants are eligible for random assignment to two switch options (mirtazapine or nortriptyline) and to two augment options (lithium or thyroid hormone) added to the primary antidepressant (citalopram, bupropion, sertraline, or venlafaxine) (level 3). Those without sufficient improvement at level 3 are eligible for level 4 random assignment to one of two switch options (tranylcypromine or the combination of mirtazapine and venlafaxine). The primary outcome is the clinician-rated, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, administered at entry and exit from each treatment level through telephone interviews by assessors masked to treatment assignments. Secondary outcomes include self-reported depressive symptoms, physical and mental function, side-effect burden, client satisfaction, and health care utilization and cost. Participants with an adequate symptomatic response may enter the 12-month naturalistic follow-up phase with brief monthly and more complete quarterly assessments.

Adolescent↗