METHODS: Elderly outpatients aged at least 65 years with a primary diagnosis of moderate to severe episode of recurrent MDD were recruited by psychiatrists in 44 clinical centers in 10 countries from October 2013 to January 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tianeptine (n = 105), placebo (n = 107), or escitalopram (n = 99) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS₁₇) total score.
RESULTS: Tianeptine improved depressive symptoms, as evaluated by the HDRS₁₇ total score in terms of absolute change from baseline (week 0) to week 8 (placebo-tianeptine difference [SE] of 3.84 [0.85] points, P < .001, using a last-observation-carried-forward approach) and response to treatment (tianeptine: 46.7%; placebo: 34.0%, estimate [SE] = 12.70% [6.70], P = .06). A sensitivity analysis using a mixed model for repeated measures confirmed the main results on HDRS total score. The placebo-tianeptine difference (SE) was 0.66 (0.15) for Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.96; P < .001) and 0.57 (0.14) for Clinical Global Impressions- Improvement (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.83; P < .001). Positive results were also obtained with the active control escitalopram (HDRS₁₇ total score placebo-escitalopram difference of 4.09 ± 0.86 points, P < .001), therefore validating the sensitivity of the studied population. Tianeptine was well tolerated, with only minimal differences in tolerability from placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides robust evidence that an 8-week treatment period with tianeptine 25-50 mg is efficacious and well tolerated in depressed patients aged 65 years or older.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT identifier: 2012-005612-26.
METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment for 6 weeks with lurasidone, 20-60 mg/day (n = 184) or 80-120 mg/day (n = 169), or placebo (n = 172). The primary end-point was change from baseline to Week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
RESULTS: Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores from baseline to Week 6 for the 20-60-mg/day group (-13.6; adjusted P = 0.007; effect size = 0.33), but not for the 80-120-mg/day group (-12.6; adjusted P = 0.057; effect size = 0.22) compared with placebo (-10.6). Treatment with lurasidone 20-60 mg/day also improved MADRS response rates, functional impairment, and anxiety symptoms. The most common adverse events associated with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Lurasidone treatments were associated with minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control.
CONCLUSION: Monotherapy with once daily doses of lurasidone 20-60 mg, but not 80-120 mg, significantly reduced depressive symptoms and improved functioning in patients with bipolar I depression. Results overall were consistent with previous studies, suggesting that lurasidone 20-60 mg/day is effective and safe in diverse ethnic populations, including Japanese.
METHODS: Semi-structured and individual in-depth interviews were conducted among patients with MDD who were taking antidepressants, in the psychiatric clinic of a government-run hospital in Malaysia. Participants were purposively sampled from different genders and ethnicities. Interviews were conducted using a validated topic guide, and responses were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, checked, and analyzed using the grounded theory approach.
RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were interviewed. Forty different themes and sub-themes were identified which were conceptually divided into two distinct categories related to barriers and facilitators to adherence. The barriers were: patient-specific, medication-specific, healthcare provision and system, social-cultural, and logistics. The facilitators were: having insight, perceived health benefits, regular activities, patient-provider relationship, reminders, and social support networks.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient-specific barriers and medication side effects were the major challenges for adhering to treatment. Perceived health benefits and having insight on the need for treatment were the most frequently cited facilitators. Targeted interventions should be developed to address the key barriers, and promote measures to facilitate adherence in this group of patients.