Efficacy and safety of two treatment algorithms in bipolar depression consisting of a combination of lithium, lamotrigine or placebo and paroxetine

Objective: In a previous paper, we reported about the efficacy of the addition of lamotrigine to lithium in patients with bipolar depression. In the second phase of this study paroxetine was added to ongoing treatment in non-responders. Method: Bipolar depressed patients (n = 124) treated with lithium were randomized to addition of lamotrigine or placebo. In non-responders after 8 weeks, paroxetine 20 mg was added for another 8 weeks to ongoing treatment. Results: After 8 weeks the improvement in patients treated with lamotrigine vs. patients treated with placebo was significant. After addition of paroxetine this difference disappeared as a result of greater further improvement in the non-responders to placebo. Conclusion: Addition of lamotrigine to lithium was found effective in bipolar depressed patients. Further addition of paroxetine in non-responders to lithium plus lamotrigine did not appear to provide additional benefit, while it appeared to do so in non-responders to lithium plus placebo.Stress-related psychiatric disorders across the life spa

Long-term response to successful acute pharmacological treatment of psychotic depression

Background: Data about follow-up after acute pharmacological treatment of psychotic depression are scarce. Methods: A 4 month open follow-up was done, preferentially with same medication as during acute treatment, of patients (n=59) with DSM-IV-TR major depressive disorder with psychotic features, aged 18 to 65 years, who had completed as responders an acute double-blind 7 week trial with imipramine, venlafaxine or venlafaxine plus quetiapine. Main outcome measures were Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and Clinical Global Impression Scale. Results: Six patients dropped out during the 4 month follow-up. Almost all patients (86.4%; 51/59) remained responder while remission rate increased from 59.3% (35/59) to 86.8% (46/53), independent of treatment. Relapse rate was low (3.8%; 2/53). Tolerability was good. Weight increased with all treatments. Limitations: Limitations were the limited sample size and consequent limited statistical power. The treatment during follow-up was not double-blind. Conclusions: Continuation treatment with the same medication that was effective in the acute treatment trial, remained effective during the 4 month follow-up in many patients leading to further improvement, and was well tolerated. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

Treatment of unipolar psychotic depression: a randomized, double-blind study comparing imipramine, venlafaxine, and venlafaxine plus quetiapine

Objective: It remains unclear whether unipolar psychotic depression should be treated with an antidepressant and an antipsychotic or with an antidepressant alone. Method: In a multi-center RCT, 122 patients (18-65 years) with DSM-IV-TR psychotic major depression and HAM-D-17 >= 18 were randomized to 7 weeks imipramine (plasma-levels 200-300 mu g/l), venlafaxine (375 mg/day) or venlafaxine-quetiapine (375 mg/day, 600 mg/day). Primary outcome was response on HAM-D-17. Secondary outcomes were response on CGI and remission (HAM-D-17). Results: Venlafaxine-quetiapine was more effective than venlafaxine with no significant differences between venlafaxine-quetiapine and imipramine, or between imipramine and venlafaxine. Secondary outcomes followed the same pattern. Conclusion: That unipolar psychotic depression should be treated with a combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic and not with an antidepressant alone, can be considered evidence based with regard to venlafaxine-quetiapine vs. venlafaxine monotherapy. Whether this is also the case for imipramine monotherapy is likely, but cannot be concluded from the data