Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder

A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded,prospective study

Changsu Han, Sheng Min Wang, Kyung Phil Kwak, Wang Yeon Won, Hwa Young Lee, Chia Ming Chang, Tze Chun Tang, Chi Un Pae

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n=52) or SW (n=49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of-8.7 (p<0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p=0.0086) and remitters (p=0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60% and 54%, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6% and 19.6%, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)84-94
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Psychiatric Research
Volume66-67
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Jul 1

Fingerprint

Major Depressive Disorder
Antidepressive Agents
Prospective Studies
Depression
Psychomotor Agitation
Controlled Clinical Trials
Therapeutics
Aripiprazole
Augmentation
Raters
Antidepressants
Fatigue
Outpatients
Rating Scales

Keywords

  • Antidepressant
  • Aripiprazole
  • Augmentation
  • Major depressive disorder
  • Switching

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry

Cite this

Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder : A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded,prospective study. / Han, Changsu; Wang, Sheng Min; Kwak, Kyung Phil; Won, Wang Yeon; Lee, Hwa Young; Chang, Chia Ming; Tang, Tze Chun; Pae, Chi Un.

In: Journal of Psychiatric Research, Vol. 66-67, 01.07.2015, p. 84-94.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Han, Changsu ; Wang, Sheng Min ; Kwak, Kyung Phil ; Won, Wang Yeon ; Lee, Hwa Young ; Chang, Chia Ming ; Tang, Tze Chun ; Pae, Chi Un. / Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder : A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded,prospective study. In: Journal of Psychiatric Research. 2015 ; Vol. 66-67. pp. 84-94.
@article{cd5295b3e9cb4f3fa6465399e80b725a,
title = "Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder: A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded,prospective study",
abstract = "No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-{\AA}sberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n=52) or SW (n=49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of-8.7 (p<0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p=0.0086) and remitters (p=0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60{\%} and 54{\%}, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6{\%} and 19.6{\%}, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.",
keywords = "Antidepressant, Aripiprazole, Augmentation, Major depressive disorder, Switching",
author = "Changsu Han and Wang, {Sheng Min} and Kwak, {Kyung Phil} and Won, {Wang Yeon} and Lee, {Hwa Young} and Chang, {Chia Ming} and Tang, {Tze Chun} and Pae, {Chi Un}",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.04.020",
language = "English",
volume = "66-67",
pages = "84--94",
journal = "Journal of Psychiatric Research",
issn = "0022-3956",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder

T2 - A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded,prospective study

AU - Han, Changsu

AU - Wang, Sheng Min

AU - Kwak, Kyung Phil

AU - Won, Wang Yeon

AU - Lee, Hwa Young

AU - Chang, Chia Ming

AU - Tang, Tze Chun

AU - Pae, Chi Un

PY - 2015/7/1

Y1 - 2015/7/1

N2 - No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n=52) or SW (n=49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of-8.7 (p<0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p=0.0086) and remitters (p=0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60% and 54%, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6% and 19.6%, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.

AB - No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n=52) or SW (n=49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of-8.7 (p<0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p=0.0086) and remitters (p=0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60% and 54%, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6% and 19.6%, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.

KW - Antidepressant

KW - Aripiprazole

KW - Augmentation

KW - Major depressive disorder

KW - Switching

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930542066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930542066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.04.020

DO - 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.04.020

M3 - Article

VL - 66-67

SP - 84

EP - 94

JO - Journal of Psychiatric Research

JF - Journal of Psychiatric Research

SN - 0022-3956

ER -