Biomedical subjects

James M Russell

Publications and source records attributed to James M Russell.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Prospective, long-term, multicenter study of the naturalistic outcomes of patients with treatment-resistant depression.

BACKGROUND: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is a long-term, disabling illness. We report on the characteristics and outcomes of a large cohort of patients with a level of treatment resistance that is very substantial and who were treated for 2 years with standard care. METHOD: This 2-year prospective, multicenter, observational study (patients enrolled from January 2001 through July 2004) tracked the outcomes of 124 patients with treatment-resistant, nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (N = 109) or bipolar depressed phase disorder (N = 15) who received treatment as usual (TAU) (i.e., any therapeutic regimen agreed to by patients and psychiatrists, including medications, electroconvulsive therapy [ECT], and psychotherapy). Treatments could be adjusted, started, and stopped as necessary. The primary outcome, treatment response, was defined a priori as > or = 50% improvement from baseline as measured by the 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (IDS-SR-30). Remission was defined as an IDS-SR-30 score of < or = 14. The Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) was used to monitor quality-of-life changes. RESULTS: The 12- and 24-month IDS-SR-30 response rates were 11.6% (13/112) and 18.4% (19/103), respectively. Of the 13 responders at 12 months, only 5 were responders at 24 months. The 12- and 24-month IDS-SR-30 remission rates were 3.6% (4/112) and 7.8% (8/103), respectively. Only 1 of the 4 12-month remitters was also a remitter at 24 months. The SF-36 indicated globally poor quality of life in this sample. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the wide range of treatment options available for depression, the response rates, remission rates, and quality-of-life results in this study show that most patients with a substantial degree of treatment resistance continue to have significant symptomatology and functional disability when receiving TAU.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2005

The cost of treating anxiety: the medical and demographic correlates that impact total medical costs.

The purpose of this retrospective, multivariate analysis is to examine how medical conditions and demographic characteristics affect the costs of treating individuals diagnosed with anxiety. Data from MarketScan Databases [The MEDSTAT Group, 2000] were used to identify individuals with new episodes of anxiety. Multivariate analysis was used, with the dependent variable being the log of total medical costs. This analysis controlled for demographic characteristics, medical comorbidities, anxiety diagnosis, and prior resource utilization. A smearing estimate is used to calculate the total medical costs for patients with any anxiety disorder. The mean estimated total medical cost for individuals diagnosed with any anxiety disorder was $6,475. The multivariate model indicates that controlling for demographics and other disease states, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), panic disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are associated with a $2,138, $1,603, and $3,940 increase, respectively, in the total medical cost (P < .0001). The incremental impact of depression, other anxiety disorders, and prior mental health diagnoses on the total medical costs were $1,945, $1,900, and $1,515, respectively (P < .0001). Individuals with the highest costs, and therefore the greatest need for intervention, are anxious patients with depression, individuals diagnosed with PTSD or GAD, and individuals diagnosed with both anxiety and a comorbid medical condition such as an acute myocardial infarction or diabetes.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Is treatment-associated hypomania rare with duloxetine: secondary analysis of controlled trials in non-bipolar depression.

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) like duloxetine have the efficacy of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) with a more tolerable side-effect profile. Bipolar disorder is often undetected, with the most common misdiagnosis being unipolar depression. Studies have suggested that treatment of bipolar and unipolar depression with heterocyclic TCAs may increase the risk of switch rate to mania. Studies of antidepressants in unipolar major depression show a small risk of mania or hypomania, presumably because some bipolar depressives were mistakenly studied. This study investigated the rate of hypomania, mania, and hypomanic-like symptoms observed during treatment with duloxetine in patients with major depression. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of data from eight placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trials of duloxetine in patients with non-bipolar major depression. LIMITATIONS: The studies were of limited duration. Manic or hypomanic symptoms were not elicited using standardized mania rating scale instruments. RESULTS: One case of mania occurred in the placebo group (0.1%), and two cases of hypomania were observed in the duloxetine-treated group (0.2%). Among hypomanic-like symptoms, only insomnia was significantly higher in the duloxetine group than in the placebo group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine was associated with a low incidence of treatment-emergent hypomania, mania, or hypomanic-like symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The low incidence reported here may be due to greater diagnostic diligence on the part of the investigators. It is possible that the cases reported likely reflect inclusion of misdiagnosed bipolar II patients rather than true unipolar MDD cases. The effect of duloxetine in patients with bipolar depression is not known.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Self-reported depressive symptom measures: sensitivity to detecting change in a randomized, controlled trial of chronically depressed, nonpsychotic outpatients.

This study evaluated and compared the performance of three self-report measures: (1) 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (IDS-SR30); (2) 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16); and (3) Patient Global Impression-Improvement (PGI-I) in assessing clinical outcomes in depressed patients during a 12-week, acute phase, randomized, controlled trial comparing nefazodone, cognitive-behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP), and the combination in the treatment of chronic depression. The IDS-SR30, QIDS-SR16, PGI-I, and the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS24) ratings were collected at baseline and at weeks 1-4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. Response was defined a priori as a > or =50% reduction in baseline total score for the IDS-SR30 or for the QIDS-SR16 or as a PGI-I score of 1 or 2 at exit. Overall response rates (LOCF) to nefazodone were 41% (IDS-SR30), 45% (QIDS-SR16), 53% (PCI-I), and 47% (HDRS17). For CBASP, response rates were 41% (IDS-SR30), 45% (QIDS-SR16), 48% (PGI-I), and 46% (HDRS17). For the combination, response rates were 68% (IDS-SR30 and QIDS-SR16), 73% (PGI-I), and 76% (HDRS17). Similarly, remission rates were comparable for nefazodone (IDS-SR30=32%, QIDS-SR16=28%, PGI-I=22%, HDRS17=30%), for CBASP (IDS-SR30=32%, QIDS-SR16=30%, PGI-I=21%, HDRS17=32%), and for the combination (IDS-SR30=52%, QIDS-SR16=50%, PGI-I=25%, HDRS17=49%). Both the IDS-SR30 and QIDS-SR16 closely mirrored and confirmed findings based on the HDRS24. These findings raise the possibility that these two self-reports could provide cost- and time-efficient substitutes for clinician ratings in treatment trials of outpatients with nonpsychotic MDD without cognitive impairment. Global patient ratings such as the PGI-I, as opposed to specific item-based ratings, provide less valid findings.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

The cost consequences of treatment-resistant depression.

CONTEXT: Treatment-resistant depression is a significant public health problem with profound effects on general medical and mental health-related health care costs. OBJECTIVE: To describe health care costs of patients with treatment-resistant depression as their illness progresses, in terms of pharmaceutical and medical expenditures, and to identify factors associated with increasing degrees of treatment resistance. DATA SOURCES: The MEDSTAT MarketScan Private Pay Fee for Service (FFS) Database, a medical and prescription claims database covering over 3.5 million enrollees, from 1995-2000. DESIGN AND STUDY SUBJECTS: 7737 patients with depression (ICD-9) who had 2 or more unsuccessful trials of antidepressant medication at an adequate dose for at least 4 weeks from 1995-2000 were defined as treatment-resistant in this study. Demographic and clinical characteristics were assessed for these patients with treatment-resistant depression. The number of changes in depression medication treatment regimens was used as a proxy for increasing degrees of treatment resistance and its severity. MAJOR OUTCOME MEASURE: Differences in health care expenditures associated with increasing degrees of treatment-resistant depression. RESULTS: Total depression-related and general medical health care expenditures increased significantly as treatment-resistant depression increased in severity. Multivariate analyses of patient demographic characteristics were not associated with ongoing treatment resistance. Disease severity, type of antidepressant at index, comorbid mental health disorders, and membership in a managed health care plan were associated with increasing degrees of treatment resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Depression and general medical health care expenditures increase with the degree of treatment-resistant depression. Disease management interventions for treatment-resistant depression that result in sustained remission early in the course of illness are most likely to be cost effective.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

The effectiveness of St. John's Wort in major depressive disorder: a naturalistic phase 2 follow-up in which nonresponders were provided alternate medication.

BACKGROUND: A continuation study of an extract of St. John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) for depression was performed in follow-up to an acute study that found no significant difference between St. John's wort extract and placebo. METHOD: Seventeen subjects with DSM-IV-defined major depressive disorder who responded to St. John's wort extract in the acute-phase study (phase 1) were continued on double-blind treatment with the same preparation for 24 weeks. Ninety-five subjects who did not respond to either St. John's wort or placebo were treated with an antidepressant for 24 weeks. RESULTS: During antidepressant treatment, mean scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression for phase 1 nonresponders decreased significantly (p <.0001), with no significant difference between St. John's wort nonresponders and placebo nonresponders. Of the 17 subjects continued on treatment with St. John's wort extract, 5 (29.4%) relapsed. CONCLUSIONS: The subjects who did not respond to St. John's wort extract or placebo in phase 1 were, by and large, not resistant to antidepressant treatment. This suggests that the lack of efficacy found by Shelton et al. in the acute-phase study was unlikely to be the result of a high proportion of treatment-resistant subjects.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of nefazodone maintenance treatment in preventing recurrence in chronic depression.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance treatment to prevent recurrences is recommended for chronic forms of major depressive disorder (MDD), but few studies have examined maintenance efficacy of antidepressants with chronic MDD. This randomized, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of nefazodone in preventing recurrence was conducted for patients with chronic MDD. METHODS: A total of 165 outpatients with chronic, nonpsychotic MDD, MDD plus dysthymic disorder ("double-depression"), or recurrent MDD with incomplete inter-episode recovery, who achieved and maintained a clinical response during acute and continuation treatment with either nefazodone alone or nefazodone combined with psychotherapy, were randomized to 52 weeks of double-blind nefazodone (maximum dose 600 mg/day) or placebo. The occurrence of major depressive episodes during maintenance treatment was assessed with the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, a DSM-IV MDD checklist, and a blinded review of symptom exacerbations by a consensus committee of research clinicians. RESULTS: Application of a competing-risk model that estimated the conditional probability of recurrence among those patients remaining on active therapy revealed a significant (p =.043) difference between nefazodone (n = 76) and placebo (n = 74) when the latter part of the 1-year maintenance period was emphasized. At the end of 1 year, the conditional probability of recurrence was 30.3% for nefazodone-treated patients, compared with 47.5% for placebo-treated patients. Prior concomitant psychotherapy during acute/continuation treatment, although enhancing the initial response, was not associated with lower recurrence rates. Discontinuations due to adverse events were relatively low for both nefazodone (5.3%) and placebo (4.8%). Somnolence was significantly greater among the patients taking active medication (15.4%), compared with placebo (4.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Nefazodone is well-tolerated and is an effective maintenance therapy for chronic forms of MDD.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2003

Chronic depression and comorbid personality disorders: response to sertraline versus imipramine.

BACKGROUND: Chronic subtypes of depression appear to be associated with high rates of Axis II personality disorder comorbidity. Few studies, though, have systematically examined the clinical correlates of Axis II personality disorder comorbidity or its effect on treatment response or time to response. METHOD: 635 patients diagnosed with DSM-III-R chronic major depression or "double depression" (dysthymia with concurrent major depression) were randomized to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with either sertraline or imipramine between February 1993 and December 1994. Axis II diagnoses were made using the personality disorders version of the DSM-III-R Structured Clinical Interview. The effect of study treatment was measured utilizing the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and the Clinical Global Impressions scale. RESULTS: Forty-six percent of patients met criteria for at least 1 comorbid Axis II personality disorder, with cluster C diagnoses being the most frequent at 39%; 21% met criteria for at least 2 Axis II personality disorders. A cluster C diagnosis was associated with significantly higher rates of early-onset depression (before age 21; 47% vs. 32% for no cluster C; p =.005) and comorbid anxiety disorder (34% vs. 18% for no cluster C; p <.001). Overall, the presence of Axis II personality disorder comorbidity had minimal-to-no effect on the ability to achieve either an antidepressant response or remission and had inconsistent effects on time to response. The presence of Axis II personality disorder comorbidity did not appear to reduce functional and quality-of-life improvements among patients responding to acute treatment with sertraline or imipramine. CONCLUSION: In this treatment sample, rates of Axis II personality disorder comorbidity were substantial in patients suffering from chronic forms of depression. Axis II personality disorder comorbidity did not appear to diminish symptomatic response to acute treatment or associated improvement in functioning and quality of life.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Double-blind switch study of imipramine or sertraline treatment of antidepressant-resistant chronic depression.

BACKGROUND: Although various strategies have been proposed to treat antidepressant nonresponders, little controlled research has been published that examines prospectively the use of switching to an alternate antidepressant. METHODS: This was a multisite study in which outpatients with chronic major depression (with or without concurrent dysthymia), who failed to respond to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with either sertraline hydrochloride (n = 117) or imipramine hydrochloride (n = 51), were crossed over or switched to 12 additional weeks of double-blind treatment with the alternate medication. Outcome measures included the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and the Clinical Global Impressions--Severity and Improvement scales. RESULTS: The switch from sertraline to imipramine (mean dosage, 221 mg/d) and from imipramine to sertraline (mean dosage, 163 mg/d) resulted in clinically and statistically significant improvements. The switch to sertraline treatment was associated with fewer adverse effect complaints and significantly less attrition owing to adverse effects. Although sertraline treatment also resulted in significantly higher response rates in the intent-to-treat samples (60% in the sertraline group and 44% in the imipramine group), neither the intent-to-treat remission rates nor the response and remission rates among study completers differed significantly. Moreover, after considering the effect of attrition, there were no significant treatment effects on the more comprehensive generalized estimating equation analyses of the continuous dependent measures. CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% of chronically depressed antidepressant nonresponders benefited from a switch from imipramine to sertraline, or vice versa, despite a high degree of chronicity. As in the initial trial, sertraline was generally better tolerated than imipramine. Switching to a standard antidepressant of a different class is a useful treatment strategy for antidepressant nonresponders and could be considered a standard of comparison for future studies of novel alternate strategies.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

The impact of treatment-resistant depression on health care utilization and costs.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder will experience a recurrent or chronic course of illness for which long-term treatment is recommended. Moreover, at least 20% of patients diagnosed with depression do not respond satisfactorily to several traditional antidepressant medication treatment trials. Very little is known about the health care costs of patients with treatment-resistant depression. METHOD: Based on medical claims data (MarketScan Research Database, The MEDSTAT Group, Cambridge, Mass.) from January 1, 1995, to June 30, 2000, a naturalistic, retrospective analysis was conducted to study the characteristics and health care utilization of patients with treatment-resistant depression. All patients having an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9), diagnosis code for unipolar or bipolar depression with specified antidepressant dosing and treatment durations were initially selected. Patients were then classified as "treatment resistant" if either they switched from or augmented initial antidepressant medication with other antidepressants at least twice (outpatient treatment-resistant group) or they switched from or augmented their initial antidepressant medication and also had a claim for either a depression-related hospitalization or suicide attempt (hospitalized treatment-resistant group). Those meeting the initial medication and diagnosis selection criteria but not meeting the treatment-resistance criteria constituted the comparison group. Members of the comparison group had comparatively stable antidepressant medication use patterns, consistent with an acceptable response to treatment. Patients were followed for a minimum of 9 months. Resource utilization was calculated from index date to last available claims data point and then annualized. RESULTS: Treatment-resistant patients were more likely to be diagnosed with bipolar disorder or concurrent substance abuse or anxiety disorders than the comparison group (p <.001). Treatment-resistant patients were at least twice as likely to be hospitalized (general medical and depression related) and had at least 12% more outpatient visits (p <.02). Treatment resistance was also associated with use of 1.4 to 3 times more psychotropic medications (including antidepressants) (p <.001). Patients in the hospitalized treatment-resistant group had over 6 times the mean total medical costs of non-treatment-resistant depressed patients ($42,344 vs. $6512) (p <.001) and their total depression-related costs were 19 times greater than those of patients in the comparison group ($28,001 vs. $1455) (p <.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment-resistant depression is costly and associated with extensive use of depression-related and general medical services. These findings underscore the need for early identification and effective long-term maintenance treatment for treatment-resistant depression.

Adult↗