Combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing improves outcomes for older adults with depression

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the clinical utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing for informing medication selection among older adults who have experienced antidepressant medication failure for major depressive disorder (MDD). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of data from a blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing two active treatment arms. SETTING: Psychiatry specialty and primary care clinics across 60 U.S. community and academic sites. PARTICIPANTS: Adults age 65 years or older at baseline (n = 206), diagnosed with MDD and inadequate response to at least one medication on the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test report during the current depressive episode. INTERVENTION: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing to inform medication selection (guided-care), compared with treatment as usual (TAU). OUTCOMES: Mean percent symptom improvement, response rate, and remission rateat week 8, measured using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; medication switching; and comorbidity moderator analysis. RESULTS: At week 8, symptom improvement was not significantly different for guided-care than for TAU (∆ = 8.1%, t = 1.64, df = 187; p = 0.102); however, guided-care showed significantly improved response (∆ = 13.6%, t = 2.16, df = 187; p = 0.032) and remission (∆ = 12.7%, t = 2.49, df = 189; p = 0.014) relative to TAU. By week 8, more than twice as many patients in guided-care than in TAU were on medications predicted to have no gene-drug interactions (χ CONCLUSIONS: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic test-informed medication selection improved outcomes over TAU among older adults with depression

A Review of the Pharmacological and Clinical Profile of Newer Atypical Antipsychotics as Treatments for Bipolar Disorder: Considerations for Use in Older Patients.

Bipolar disorder prevalence rates vary in the older adult population (defined as age ≥ 65 years), ranging from 1% in community dwellers to as high as 8-10% in hospital inpatients. Although older agents, including lithium and valproic acid, offer significant antimanic efficacy, as supported by a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT), there is growing interest in using atypical antipsychotics to treat bipolar disorder in older adults. Newer atypical antipsychotics are of interest based on their tolerability and efficacy in the general adult bipolar population. The aim of this review was to systematically examine efficacy and tolerability of newer atypical antipsychotics for older adult bipolar disorder (OABD). We conducted a systematic search utilizing the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library electronic databases, with the aim of identifying all RCTs comparing newer atypical antipsychotics approved by the US FDA since 2002 (including brexpiprazole, cariprazine, lurasidone, iloperidone, asenapine, paliperidone, and aripiprazole) with placebo or another comparator, in the treatment of any phase of bipolar disorder (including mania, depression or mixed episodes while used as an acute or maintenance treatment) in older adults (\u3e 65 years). We found no RCT data on any of the examined agents. Hence, we changed our search criteria to include studies with a lower age cut-off (≥ 55 years), as well as the inclusion of post hoc studies. Two post hoc studies on lurasidone suggest its reasonable safety and efficacy profile in the acute and maintenance treatment of OABD; however, there are no pharmacoeconomic data on the use of lurasidone in the treatment of OABD. Research data from open-label studies on oral asenapine and aripiprazole as add-on therapy suggest that these two agents are adequately tolerated and improved symptoms of depression and mania in OABD; hence, there is an urgent need to conduct RCTs on these two agents. Lastly, we found no studies for the treatment of OABD with brexpiprazole, cariprazine, iloperidone, or paliperidone

Comparing sensitivity to change using the 6-item versus the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale in the GUIDED randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests that the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) is less sensitive in detecting differences between active treatment and placebo for major depressive disorder (MDD) than is the HAM-D6 scale, which focuses on six core depression symptoms. Whether HAM-D6 shows greater sensitivity when comparing two active MDD treatment arms is unknown. METHODS: This post hoc analysis used data from the intent-to-treat (ITT) cohort (N = 1541) of the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) trial, a rater- and patient-blinded randomized controlled trial. GUIDED compared combinatorial pharmacogenomics-guided care with treatment as usual (TAU) in patients with MDD. Percent of symptom improvement, response rate and remission rate from baseline to week 8 were evaluated using both scales. Analyses were performed for the full cohort and for the subset of patients who at baseline were taking medications predicted by the test to have moderate or significant gene-drug interactions. A Mokken scale analysis was conducted to compare the homogeneity of HAM-D17 with that of HAM-D6. RESULTS: At week 8, the guided-care arm demonstrated statistically significant benefit over TAU when the HAM-D6 (∆ = 4.4%, p = 0.023) was used as the continuous measure of symptom improvement, but not when using the HAM-D17 (∆ = 3.2%, p = 0.069). Response rates increased significantly for guided-care compared with TAU when evaluated using both HAM-D6 (∆ = 7.0%, p = 0.004) and HAM-D17 (∆ = 6.3%, p = 0.007). Remission rates also were significantly greater for guided-care versus TAU using both measures (HAM-D6 ∆ = 4.6%, p = 0.031; HAM-D17 ∆ = 5.5%, p = 0.005). Patients in the guided-care arm who at baseline were taking medications predicted to have gene-drug interactions showed further increased benefit over TAU at week 8 for symptom improvement (∆ = 7.3%, p = 0.004) response (∆ = 10.0%, p = 0.001) and remission (∆ = 7.9%, p = 0.005) using HAM-D6. All outcomes showed continued improvement through week 24. Mokken scale analysis demonstrated the homogeneity and unidimensionality of HAM-D6, but not of HAM-D17, across treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: The HAM-D6 scale identified a statistically significant difference in symptom improvement between combinatorial pharmacogenomics-guided care and TAU, whereas the HAM-D17 did not. The demonstrated utility of pharmacogenomics-guided treatment over TAU as detected by the HAM-D6 highlights its value for future biomarker-guided trials comparing active treatment arms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02109939. Registered 10 April 2014

Late-onset Alzheimer’s disease is associated with inherent changes in bioenergetics profiles

Body-wide changes in bioenergetics, i.e., energy metabolism, occur in normal aging and disturbed bioenergetics may be an important contributing mechanism underlying late-onset Alzheimer’s disease (LOAD). We investigated the bioenergetic profiles of fibroblasts from LOAD patients and healthy controls, as a function of age and disease. LOAD cells exhibited an impaired mitochondrial metabolic potential and an abnormal redox potential, associated with reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide metabolism and altered citric acid cycle activity, but not with disease-specific changes in mitochondrial mass, production of reactive oxygen species, transmembrane instability, or DNA deletions. LOAD fibroblasts demonstrated a shift in energy production to glycolysis, despite an inability to increase glucose uptake in response to IGF-1. The increase of glycolysis and the abnormal mitochondrial metabolic potential in LOAD appeared to be inherent, as they were disease- and not age-specific. Our findings support the hypothesis that impairment in multiple interacting components of bioenergetic metabolism may be a key mechanism contributing to the risk and pathophysiology of LOAD

Essential data dimensions for prospective international data collection in older age bipolar disorder (OABD):Recommendations from the GAGE-BD group

Background: By 2030, over 50% of individuals living with bipolar disorder (BD) are expected to be aged ≥50 years. However, older age bipolar disorder (OABD) remains understudied. There are limited large-scale prospectively collected data organized in key dimensions capable of addressing several fundamental questions about BD affecting this subgroup of patients.Methods: We developed initial recommendations for the essential dimensions for OABD data collection, based on (1) a systematic review of measures used in OABD studies, (2) a Delphi consensus of international OABD experts, (3) experience with harmonizing OABD data in the Global Aging &amp; Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder Database (GAGE-BD, n ≥ 4500 participants), and (4) critical feedback from 34 global experts in geriatric mental health.Results: We identified 15 key dimensions and variables within each that are relevant for the investigation of OABD: (1) demographics, (2) core symptoms of depression and (3) mania, (4) cognition screening and subjective cognitive function, (5) elements for BD diagnosis, (6) descriptors of course of illness, (7) treatment, (8) suicidality, (9) current medication, (10) psychiatric comorbidity, (11) psychotic symptoms, (12) general medical comorbidities, (13) functioning, (14) family history, and (15) other. We also recommend particular instruments for capturing some of the dimensions and variables.Conclusion: The essential data dimensions we present should be of use to guide future international data collection in OABD and clinical practice. In the longer term, we aim to establish a prospective consortium using this core set of dimensions and associated variables to answer research questions relevant to OABD.</p

Essential data dimensions for prospective international data collection in older age bipolar disorder (OABD):Recommendations from the GAGE-BD group

Background: By 2030, over 50% of individuals living with bipolar disorder (BD) are expected to be aged ≥50 years. However, older age bipolar disorder (OABD) remains understudied. There are limited large-scale prospectively collected data organized in key dimensions capable of addressing several fundamental questions about BD affecting this subgroup of patients.Methods: We developed initial recommendations for the essential dimensions for OABD data collection, based on (1) a systematic review of measures used in OABD studies, (2) a Delphi consensus of international OABD experts, (3) experience with harmonizing OABD data in the Global Aging &amp; Geriatric Experiments in Bipolar Disorder Database (GAGE-BD, n ≥ 4500 participants), and (4) critical feedback from 34 global experts in geriatric mental health.Results: We identified 15 key dimensions and variables within each that are relevant for the investigation of OABD: (1) demographics, (2) core symptoms of depression and (3) mania, (4) cognition screening and subjective cognitive function, (5) elements for BD diagnosis, (6) descriptors of course of illness, (7) treatment, (8) suicidality, (9) current medication, (10) psychiatric comorbidity, (11) psychotic symptoms, (12) general medical comorbidities, (13) functioning, (14) family history, and (15) other. We also recommend particular instruments for capturing some of the dimensions and variables.Conclusion: The essential data dimensions we present should be of use to guide future international data collection in OABD and clinical practice. In the longer term, we aim to establish a prospective consortium using this core set of dimensions and associated variables to answer research questions relevant to OABD.</p

Combinatorial Pharmacogenomic Testing Improves Outcomes for Older Adults With Depression

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the clinical utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing for informing medication selection among older adults who have experienced antidepressant medication failure for major depressive disorder (MDD). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of data from a blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing two active treatment arms. SETTING: Psychiatry specialty and primary care clinics across 60 U.S. community and academic sites. PARTICIPANTS: Adults age 65 years or older at baseline (n=206), diagnosed with MDD and inadequate response to at least one medication on the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test report during the current depressive episode. INTERVENTION: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing to inform medication selection (guided-care), compared with treatment as usual (TAU). OUTCOMES: Mean percent symptom improvement, response rate, and remission rat eat week 8, measured using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; medication switching; and comorbidity moderator analysis. RESULTS: At week 8, symptom improvement was not significantly different for guided-care than for TAU (=8.1%, t=1.64, df=187; p=0.102); however, guided-care showed significantly improved response (=13.6%, t=2.16, df=187; p=0.032) and remission (=12.7%, t=2.49, df=189; p=0.014) relative to TAU. By week 8, more than twice as many patients in guided-care than in TAU were on medications predicted to have no gene-drug interactions (chi(2)=19.3, df=2; p \u3c 0.001). Outcomes in the guided-care arm showed consistent improvement through the end of the open-design 24-week trial, indicating durability of the effect. Differences in outcomes between arms were not significantly impacted by comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic test-informed medication selection improved outcomes over TAU among older adults with depression