PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Maurizio Fava

Publications and source records attributed to Maurizio Fava.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2006

The combination of duloxetine and bupropion for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder.

Our objective was to assess the effectiveness and safety of the combination of duloxetine and bupropion for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (TRD). A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who had not experienced full remission of symptoms following an adequate trial of either duloxetine (n = 3) or bupropion (n = 7), and who then received the combination of these two antidepressants for TRD. Ten patients [37.2 +/- 11.3 years of age, five women, baseline Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale score 4.4 +/- 1.1], seven of whom had not remitted following treatment with bupropion (330 +/- 67 mg, 20.5 +/- 12.2 weeks), and three of whom had not remitted following treatment with duloxetine (90 +/- 30 mg, 18 +/- 2 weeks) received at least 4 weeks of combination treatment. The CGI was administered when the combination was first prescribed, and following 8.8 +/- 4.0 (range, 4-16) weeks of treatment. There was a significant decrease in CGI-S (Severity) scores (4.4 +/- 1.1 to 2.1+/-0.9, P <.0001) following combination treatment. Three (30%) patients were remitters at follow-up, and six (60%) were responders who did not achieve full symptom remission. The mean maximum adjunctive duloxetine and bupropion doses were 60.0 +/- 17.3 mg and 175.0 +/- 114.5 mg, respectively. Side effects reported during combination treatment were nausea (n = 2), dry mouth (n = 2), jitteriness/agitation (n = 2), fatigue/drowsiness (n = 2), increased blood pressure (n = 1), increased sweating (n = 1), insomnia (n = 1), pruritus (n = 1), headache (n = 1), sexual dysfunction (n = 1), and weight gain (n = 1). Although preliminary, these results suggest a possible role for the combination of duloxetine and bupropion for TRD.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Problem-solving ability and comorbid personality disorders in depressed outpatients.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with poor problem-solving abilities. In addition, certain personality disorders (PDs) that are common among patients with MDD are also associated with limited problem-solving skills. Attempts to understand the relationship between PDs and problem solving can be complicated by the presence of acute MDD. Our objective in this study was to investigate the relationships between PDs, problem-solving skills, and response to treatment among outpatients with MDD. We enrolled 312 outpatients with MDD in an open, fixed-dose, 8-week fluoxetine trial. PD diagnoses were ascertained via structured clinical interview before and after fluoxetine treatment. Subjects completed the Problem-Solving Inventory (PSI) at both time points. We used analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs) to assess relationships between PD diagnoses and PSI scores prior to treatment. Subjects were divided into three groups: those with PD diagnoses that remained stable after fluoxetine treatment (N=91), those who no longer met PD criteria after fluoxetine treatment (N=119), and those who did not meet criteria for a PD at any time point in the study (N=95). We used multiple chi(2) analyses to compare rates of MDD response and remission between the three PD groups. ANCOVA was also used to compare posttreatment PSI scores between PD groups. Prior to fluoxetine treatment, patients with avoidant, dependent, narcissistic, and borderline PDs reported significantly worse problem-solving ability than did patients without any PDs. Only subjects with dependent PD remained associated with poorer baseline problem-solving reports after the effects of baseline depression severity were controlled. Patients with stable PD diagnoses had significantly lower rates of MDD remission. Across PD groups, problem solving improved as MDD improved. No significant differences in posttreatment problem-solving were found between PD groups after controlling for baseline depression severity, baseline PSI score, and response to treatment. Treatment with fluoxetine is less likely to lead to remission of MDD in patients with stable PDs. More study is needed to investigate causal links between PDs, problem solving, and MDD treatment response.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Recognizing and engaging depressed Chinese Americans in treatment in a primary care setting.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of depression screening and the Engagement Interview Protocol (EIP) in identifying and engaging in treatment depressed Chinese Americans in a primary care setting. METHODS: Chinese American patients who attended a primary care clinic between 15 September, 2004 and 14 September, 2005 were screened for depression using the Chinese Bilingual version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (CB-PHQ-9). Patients who screened positive (CB-PHQ-9>or=15) were evaluated using the EIP to establish psychiatric diagnosis and to engage patients in treatment. RESULTS: Three thousand eight hundred and twelve patients completed the CB-PHQ-9, of which 113 (3.2%) screened positive for MDD. Among those screening positive, six (5.3%) had been receiving psychiatric treatment for depression, 57 (50%) declined to receive a psychiatric interview or were unable to be contacted, and 50 (44%) agreed to be interviewed with the EIP. Out of the 50 patients interviewed, 44 (88%) had their MDD diagnosis confirmed; among them, 41 (93%) agreed to receive treatment for depression and three (7%) declined intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Under-recognition and under-treatment of depressed Chinese Americans in primary care settings continue to be prevalent. Recognition of depression can be enhanced by using the brief CB-PHQ-9 to screen for depression. Half of the Chinese Americans who screened positive for MDD declined evaluation by a mental health professional. Most of the depressed Chinese Americans who were evaluated agreed to receive treatment. Enhanced cultural sensitivity with the use of the EIP in psychiatric assessment may have contributed to the success in engaging depressed Chinese Americans in treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Differences in cognitive factors between "true drug" versus "placebo pattern" response to fluoxetine as defined by pattern analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Pattern analysis has identified two types of response patterns to antidepressants: "true drug" response (TDR) and "placebo pattern" response (PPR). This study examines the relationship between cognitive factors and TDR and PPR to fluoxetine. METHODS: We assessed 310 outpatients meeting DSM-III-R criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD) who were enrolled in an 8-week open trial of fluoxetine 20 mg/day. Response patterns were determined using the clinical global impressions-improvement (CGI-I). We administered the following self-rated scales to all patients at the baseline visit and at endpoint: perceived stress scale (PSS), cognitions questionnaire (CQ), Beck hopelessness scale (BHS) and dysfunctional attitudes scale (DAS). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-four patients had TDR, 66 patients had PPR, and 110 patients were non-responders (NR). Demographic variables and severity of depression at baseline (HAMD-17) were not significantly different between the two response pattern groups. We compared cognitive factors before and after treatment across patients with TDR and PPR, and there were no significant differences at baseline in CQ, PSS, BHS, and DAS scores. At endpoint, outpatients with PPR had significantly lower scores on the PSS (p < 0.001) compared to the patients with TDR, even after adjusting for multiple comparisons and severity of depression at endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in cognitive/psychological factors, specifically lower post-treatment perceived stress, accompany "placebo" pattern of response to antidepressant treatment and differentiate it from "true drug" response pattern, as defined by pattern analysis.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Modafinil augmentation of SSRI therapy in patients with major depressive disorder and excessive sleepiness and fatigue: a 12-week, open-label, extension study.

INTRODUCTION: Many patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have residual symptoms (eg, persistent fatigue, excessive sleepiness) despite an overall antidepressant response. Placebo-controlled studies indicate that modafinil, a wake-promoting agent, may relieve residual symptoms. METHODS: This 12-week, open-label, dose titration, extension study followed an 8-week placebo-controlled study of modafinil augmentation in patients with MDD. The dose was 100-400 mg/day. The median stable dose was 300 mg/day. Assessments were the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Brief Fatigue Inventory, Clinical Global Impression of Improvement scale, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. RESULTS: Of the 245 patients treated, 194 completed the study; 70% reported Clinical Global Impression of Improvement scale responses of "much improved" or "very much improved" between open-label baseline and final visit (previous randomized modafinil group: 74%; placebo group: 66%). When data were analyzed for four subsets of patients (former modafinil responders, placebo responders, modafinil nonresponders, and placebo nonresponders), improvements in scores on all outcome measures were at least twice as great among former modafinil and placebo nonresponders compared with responders. Most common adverse events were headache (18%), nausea (9%), and dizziness (7%); all were generally mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSION: Twelve weeks of modafinil augmentation relieved excessive sleepiness, reduced fatigue, and improved patients' overall clinical condition, including mood.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

A meta-analysis of early sustained response rates between antidepressants and placebo for the treatment of major depressive disorder.

CONTEXT: Pattern analysis suggests that "true" drug response is characterized by clinical improvement that is not subsequently followed by a worsening of symptoms (sustained clinical response). To date, several reports demonstrate that early response rates are equivalent between antidepressant-treated and placebo-treated groups of patients with major depressive disorder, suggesting that patients who demonstrate significant and sustained symptom improvement during the first 2 weeks of treatment are not responding to the antidepressant itself, but to nonspecific, placebo-like factors. OBJECTIVE: To compare early sustained response rates between antidepressant- and placebo-treated adults with major depressive disorder. DATA SOURCES: Medline/Pubmed were searched. No year of publication limits were used. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled antidepressant trials or pooled reports/meta-analyses of such trials reporting early sustained response rates for major depressive disorder. The decision to include studies in the meta-analysis was performed by 2 reviewers. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted with the use of a precoded form. DATA SYNTHESIS: Analyses were performed on the proportion of patients who achieved a sustained response the first 2 weeks of treatment, as well as the first week of treatment. A random-effects model with fixed drug effects was used to combine the studies and make comparisons of sustained early response rates between antidepressant- and placebo-treated groups. Data from 8 reports involving a total of 7121 major depressive disorder patients (4076 randomized to treatment with an antidepressant and 3045 randomized to placebo) were analyzed. Antidepressant-treated patients were more likely to demonstrate sustained clinical response by 2 weeks (odds ratio 2.06, 95% CI: 1.52-2.8) or 1 week of treatment (odds ratio 1.50, 95% CI: 1.08-2.08) than placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present analysis suggest that "true" drug response can occur the first 2 week as well as the first week of treatment of major depressive disorder with conventional antidepressants.

Antidepressive Agents↗
PubMed2006

Clinical characteristics of depressed patients with comorbid diabetes mellitus.

Both diabetes and depression are highly prevalent. Patients with diabetes experience higher rates of depression compared to the general population. When present, depression is associated with an increase in the morbidity and mortality of diabetes, suggesting the importance of treatment in this population. The objective of the present study was to characterize depressive characteristics in depressed patients with and without comorbid diabetes. Seventeen patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were drawn from outpatient clinical trials. Depressed patients without diabetes were identified from the same studies. Unpaired t-tests and multiple chi-square analyses were used to compare demographic and clinical characteristics between the samples. Diabetic patients in our sample were more depressed and reported lower levels of somatic well-being and contentment compared to non-diabetic patients. The samples did not differ significantly along other dimensions of depression, including course of illness, response to previous treatments and comorbid conditions. These findings suggest that depressed diabetic patients are more similar than not to non-diabetic depressed patients, although important differences exist.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Current status of augmentation and combination treatments for major depressive disorder: a literature review and a proposal for a novel approach to improve practice.

Most patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) do not reach symptom remission. These patients with residual symptoms have worse function and worse prognosis than those who remit. Several augmentation and combination treatments are used to either increase the chances of achieving remission or to eliminate/minimize residual depressive symptoms. Evidence for these pharmacological approaches rests primarily on open, uncontrolled studies, and there are clearly not enough controlled studies. Clinicians should carefully weigh these different treatment options to increase their patients' chances of achieving and sustaining remission from depression. This paper will review the pertinent studies and will propose a novel approach to improve practice involving the use of augmentation or combination strategies at the outset of initial treatment to primarily enhance the chances of remission through synergy and/or a broader spectrum of action. This novel approach could potentially enhance retention and/or increase remission rates since the lack of response with antidepressant monotherapy may lead many depressed patients with little or no benefit to drop out of treatment, precluding the subsequent use of augmentation or combination strategies altogether. In addition, the emergence of certain side-effects (e.g., agitation, insomnia) or the persistence of some initial baseline symptoms (e.g., anxiety, insomnia) may lead to premature discontinuation from monotherapy in the absence of concomitant use of augmenting pharmacological options targeting these symptoms.

Combined Modality Therapy↗
PubMed2006

Acute and longer-term outcomes in depressed outpatients requiring one or several treatment steps: a STAR*D report.

OBJECTIVE: This report describes the participants and compares the acute and longer-term treatment outcomes associated with each of four successive steps in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial. METHOD: A broadly representative adult outpatient sample with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder received one (N=3,671) to four (N=123) successive acute treatment steps. Those not achieving remission with or unable to tolerate a treatment step were encouraged to move to the next step. Those with an acceptable benefit, preferably symptom remission, from any particular step could enter a 12-month naturalistic follow-up phase. A score of or=11 (HRSD(17)>or=14) defined relapse. RESULTS: The QIDS-SR(16) remission rates were 36.8%, 30.6%, 13.7%, and 13.0% for the first, second, third, and fourth acute treatment steps, respectively. The overall cumulative remission rate was 67%. Overall, those who required more treatment steps had higher relapse rates during the naturalistic follow-up phase. In addition, lower relapse rates were found among participants who were in remission at follow-up entry than for those who were not after the first three treatment steps. CONCLUSIONS: When more treatment steps are required, lower acute remission rates (especially in the third and fourth treatment steps) and higher relapse rates during the follow-up phase are to be expected. Studies to identify the best multistep treatment sequences for individual patients and the development of more broadly effective treatments are needed.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

A comparison of mirtazapine and nortriptyline following two consecutive failed medication treatments for depressed outpatients: a STAR*D report.

OBJECTIVE: Few controlled studies have addressed the issue of which antidepressant medications should be recommended for outpatients who have not responded to multiple treatment trials. This study compared the efficacy of switching to mirtazapine to that of switching to a tricyclic antidepressant (nortriptyline) following two prospective, consecutive, unsuccessful medication treatments for nonpsychotic major depressive disorder. METHOD: Following lack of remission or an inability to tolerate an initial trial of citalopram for up to 12 weeks (first step) and a second trial with either monotherapy involving another antidepressant or augmentation of citalopram with bupropion or buspirone (second step), adult outpatients (N=235) with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to 14 weeks of treatment with mirtazapine (up to 60 mg/day) (N=114) or nortriptyline (up to 200 mg/day) (N=121). The primary outcome, symptom remission, was defined a priori as a total exit score of </=7 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR(16)), obtained at treatment visits, provided secondary outcomes of remission (score </=5 at exit) and response (>/=50% reduction in score from baseline). RESULTS: For mirtazapine, remission rates were 12.3% and 8.0% per the Hamilton and QIDS-SR(16) scores, respectively. For nortriptyline, remission rates were 19.8% and 12.4%, respectively. QIDS-SR(16) response rates were 13.4% for mirtazapine and 16.5% for nortriptyline. Neither response nor remission rates statistically differed by treatment, nor did these two treatments differ in tolerability or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to a third antidepressant monotherapy regimen after two consecutive unsuccessful antidepressant trials resulted in low remission rates (<20%) among patients with major depressive disorder.

Adult↗
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

Predictors of relapse in a prospective study of fluoxetine treatment of major depression.

OBJECTIVE: Loss of response to a previously effective antidepressant is a common clinical problem. Retrospective analyses have shown that the pattern of response during antidepressant treatment (late onset and persistent versus other patterns) can be used to predict relapse during continuation and maintenance treatment and possibly to identify placebo responses to treatment. This study was designed to test the predictive value of response pattern prospectively and to examine the data for other predictors of relapse. METHOD: Five hundred seventy persons with major depressive disorder were treated with fluoxetine for 12 weeks and their pattern of response was determined. Those who responded (N=292) underwent random assignment, under double-blind conditions, to continue taking fluoxetine or to switch to placebo for 52 weeks or until relapse. Survival analysis was used to examine the effect of covariates on relapse. RESULTS: Although fluoxetine was significantly more effective than placebo during maintenance treatment, this chronically ill group had a high rate of relapse. Contrary to previous findings, a pattern of acute response was not predictive of relapse. Chronicity, symptom severity, a neurovegetative symptom pattern, and female gender were all associated with a significantly greater risk of relapse, with no difference observed between fluoxetine and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The pattern of response to acute treatment appears to be inconsistently predictive of relapse. There is a high rate of relapse with both active medication and placebo in patients with chronic depression. Illness characteristics predict loss of response both to fluoxetine and to placebo. No variable examined was predictive of differential relapse rates between fluoxetine and placebo.

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

A metaanalysis of clinical trials comparing moclobemide with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To compare response rates among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with either moclobemide, an antidepressant thought to simultaneously enhance both noradrenergic and serotonergic neurotransmission, or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). METHODS: Using a random-effects model, we combined 12 trials involving 1207 outpatients with MDD. RESULTS: Patients treated with moclobemide were as likely to experience clinical response as those treated with SSRIs (risk ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 1.26; P = 0.314). Simply pooling response rates for the 2 agents resulted in a 62.1% response rate for moclobemide and a 57.5% response rate for the SSRIs. A metaregression did not reveal a statistically significant relation between the mean moclobemide dosage for each study and the risk ratio for response rates. Further, we found no difference between the 2 treatments in overall discontinuation rates, discontinuation rates due to adverse events, or discontinuation rates due to lack of efficacy. Also, rates of fatigue or somnolence and of insomnia were similar between the 2 treatment groups. However, SSRI treatment was associated with higher rates of nausea, headaches, and treatment-emergent anxiety than was treatment with moclobemide. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that moclobemide and the SSRIs do differ with respect to their side effect profiles but not in their overall efficacy in the treatment of MDD.

Major Depressive Disorder↗
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↗
PubMed2006

Pharmacological approaches to the treatment of residual symptoms.

Despite the efficacy of currently available antidepressant treatment, residual symptoms are common among individuals treated for major depressive disorder and are associated with an increased risk of relapse and poor psychosocial functioning. However, distinguishing treatment-emergent side effects from residual symptoms can be challenging for clinicians. Anxiety, sleep disturbance, somnolence/fatigue, apathy and cognitive dysfunction are among the more frequent residual symptoms. Approaches to the management of residual symptoms include addressing treatment-emergent side effects and co-morbid conditions, optimizing antidepressant dosing and using augmentation therapy. Clinicians are often guided in their decisions by anecdotal impressions. Studies assessing the evaluation and treatment of residual symptoms and side effects will contribute importantly to the optimal acute and long-term management of depression.

Anti-Anxiety Agents↗