Aripiprazole augmentation, antidepressant combination or switching therapy in patients with major depressive disorder who are partial- or non-responsive to current antidepressants: A multi-center, naturalistic study

Changsu Han, Sheng Min Wang, Ho Jun Seo, Boung Chul Lee, Hong Jin Jeon, Won Kim, Kyung Phil Kwak, Chi Un Pae

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There has been no studies comparing the clinical benefits of aripiprazole augmentation (AT), antidepressant combination (AC), and switching to a different antidepressant (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) patients partially or not responding to an initial antidepressant. AT, AC, or SW was chosen by patients. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients showing an improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB) score at week 8. Secondary efficacy measures included changes in CGI-CB, CGI-Severity (S) and subjective satisfaction scores. Remission and responder analysis were also employed. A total of 295 patients were enrolled. The most preferred strategy was AT (n=156, 52.9%), followed by AC (n=93, 31.5%) and SW (n=46, 15.6%). The improver was significantly higher in AT (74.1%) compared with AC (48.1%; p<0.001) and similar to SW (73.5%, p=0.948), whereas no significant difference was found between AC and SW. Similar results were also found in the most secondary endpoint measures proving a superiority of AT over AC without differences between AT and SW. Tolerability profiles were similar across the three groups; however, the mean weight gain for SW (-0.1kg) was significantly less than that for AC (1.3kg, p<0.05). Patients preferred AT to AC or SW when an antidepressant was ineffective in treating their depression. Among the three treatment strategies, overall AT yielded greater clinical benefit than did AC and SW. Adequately powered, well-controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm our findings due to methodological shortcomings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)75-82
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Psychiatric Research
Volume49
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Feb 1

Fingerprint

Major Depressive Disorder
Antidepressive Agents
Therapeutics
Aripiprazole
Augmentation
Antidepressants
Therapy
Controlled Clinical Trials
Weight Gain
Depression

Keywords

  • Augmentation
  • Combination
  • Depression
  • Switching

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry

Cite this

Aripiprazole augmentation, antidepressant combination or switching therapy in patients with major depressive disorder who are partial- or non-responsive to current antidepressants : A multi-center, naturalistic study. / Han, Changsu; Wang, Sheng Min; Seo, Ho Jun; Lee, Boung Chul; Jeon, Hong Jin; Kim, Won; Kwak, Kyung Phil; Pae, Chi Un.

In: Journal of Psychiatric Research, Vol. 49, No. 1, 01.02.2014, p. 75-82.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f17601aea28c4c23b3f21b21259a95f9,
title = "Aripiprazole augmentation, antidepressant combination or switching therapy in patients with major depressive disorder who are partial- or non-responsive to current antidepressants: A multi-center, naturalistic study",
abstract = "There has been no studies comparing the clinical benefits of aripiprazole augmentation (AT), antidepressant combination (AC), and switching to a different antidepressant (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) patients partially or not responding to an initial antidepressant. AT, AC, or SW was chosen by patients. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients showing an improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB) score at week 8. Secondary efficacy measures included changes in CGI-CB, CGI-Severity (S) and subjective satisfaction scores. Remission and responder analysis were also employed. A total of 295 patients were enrolled. The most preferred strategy was AT (n=156, 52.9{\%}), followed by AC (n=93, 31.5{\%}) and SW (n=46, 15.6{\%}). The improver was significantly higher in AT (74.1{\%}) compared with AC (48.1{\%}; p<0.001) and similar to SW (73.5{\%}, p=0.948), whereas no significant difference was found between AC and SW. Similar results were also found in the most secondary endpoint measures proving a superiority of AT over AC without differences between AT and SW. Tolerability profiles were similar across the three groups; however, the mean weight gain for SW (-0.1kg) was significantly less than that for AC (1.3kg, p<0.05). Patients preferred AT to AC or SW when an antidepressant was ineffective in treating their depression. Among the three treatment strategies, overall AT yielded greater clinical benefit than did AC and SW. Adequately powered, well-controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm our findings due to methodological shortcomings.",
keywords = "Augmentation, Combination, Depression, Switching",
author = "Changsu Han and Wang, {Sheng Min} and Seo, {Ho Jun} and Lee, {Boung Chul} and Jeon, {Hong Jin} and Won Kim and Kwak, {Kyung Phil} and Pae, {Chi Un}",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.11.001",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "75--82",
journal = "Journal of Psychiatric Research",
issn = "0022-3956",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Aripiprazole augmentation, antidepressant combination or switching therapy in patients with major depressive disorder who are partial- or non-responsive to current antidepressants

T2 - A multi-center, naturalistic study

AU - Han, Changsu

AU - Wang, Sheng Min

AU - Seo, Ho Jun

AU - Lee, Boung Chul

AU - Jeon, Hong Jin

AU - Kim, Won

AU - Kwak, Kyung Phil

AU - Pae, Chi Un

PY - 2014/2/1

Y1 - 2014/2/1

N2 - There has been no studies comparing the clinical benefits of aripiprazole augmentation (AT), antidepressant combination (AC), and switching to a different antidepressant (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) patients partially or not responding to an initial antidepressant. AT, AC, or SW was chosen by patients. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients showing an improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB) score at week 8. Secondary efficacy measures included changes in CGI-CB, CGI-Severity (S) and subjective satisfaction scores. Remission and responder analysis were also employed. A total of 295 patients were enrolled. The most preferred strategy was AT (n=156, 52.9%), followed by AC (n=93, 31.5%) and SW (n=46, 15.6%). The improver was significantly higher in AT (74.1%) compared with AC (48.1%; p<0.001) and similar to SW (73.5%, p=0.948), whereas no significant difference was found between AC and SW. Similar results were also found in the most secondary endpoint measures proving a superiority of AT over AC without differences between AT and SW. Tolerability profiles were similar across the three groups; however, the mean weight gain for SW (-0.1kg) was significantly less than that for AC (1.3kg, p<0.05). Patients preferred AT to AC or SW when an antidepressant was ineffective in treating their depression. Among the three treatment strategies, overall AT yielded greater clinical benefit than did AC and SW. Adequately powered, well-controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm our findings due to methodological shortcomings.

AB - There has been no studies comparing the clinical benefits of aripiprazole augmentation (AT), antidepressant combination (AC), and switching to a different antidepressant (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) patients partially or not responding to an initial antidepressant. AT, AC, or SW was chosen by patients. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients showing an improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB) score at week 8. Secondary efficacy measures included changes in CGI-CB, CGI-Severity (S) and subjective satisfaction scores. Remission and responder analysis were also employed. A total of 295 patients were enrolled. The most preferred strategy was AT (n=156, 52.9%), followed by AC (n=93, 31.5%) and SW (n=46, 15.6%). The improver was significantly higher in AT (74.1%) compared with AC (48.1%; p<0.001) and similar to SW (73.5%, p=0.948), whereas no significant difference was found between AC and SW. Similar results were also found in the most secondary endpoint measures proving a superiority of AT over AC without differences between AT and SW. Tolerability profiles were similar across the three groups; however, the mean weight gain for SW (-0.1kg) was significantly less than that for AC (1.3kg, p<0.05). Patients preferred AT to AC or SW when an antidepressant was ineffective in treating their depression. Among the three treatment strategies, overall AT yielded greater clinical benefit than did AC and SW. Adequately powered, well-controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm our findings due to methodological shortcomings.

KW - Augmentation

KW - Combination

KW - Depression

KW - Switching

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891154322&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84891154322&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.11.001

DO - 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.11.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 24268719

AN - SCOPUS:84891154322

VL - 49

SP - 75

EP - 82

JO - Journal of Psychiatric Research

JF - Journal of Psychiatric Research

SN - 0022-3956

IS - 1

ER -