Cristina Cusin

We compared treatment response (≥50 decrease in Nine-Item Patient Health Questionnaire total score) among 24 Latinos with major depressive disorder, presenting with and without specific psychosislike symptoms: A, hearing noises or house sounds, B, hearing voices calling one's name, C, seeing fleeting visions such as shadows, and D, symptoms more likely to be truly psychotic (e.g., poorly defined and short-lasting voices [other than B], fleeting paranoid ideation, or fleeting ideas of reference). 18 subjects (75%) endorsed symptoms of cluster A, 12 (50%) of cluster B, 10 (31%) of cluster C, and 12 (50%) of cluster D. Only subjects who reported symptoms from the D cluster exhibited significantly unfavorable depressive outcomes (compared to those with absence of D symptoms). The authors propose a phenomenological differentiation between benign psychosislike symptoms (clusters A-C) and the expression of the psychotic continuum (cluster D) in depressed Latinos.

Article AbstractBackground: Multiple treatments for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) have demonstrated efficacy, but up to one-third of individuals with MDD do not achieve symptomatic remission despite various interventions. Existing augmentation or combination strategies can have substantial safety concerns that may limit their application. Method: This study investigated the antidepressant efficacy of a flexible dose of the dopamine agonist pramipexole as an adjunct to standard antidepressant treatment in an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in a tertiary-level depression center. We randomized 60 outpatients (aged 18 to 75 years) with treatment-resistant nonpsychotic MDD (diagnosed according to DSM-IV) to either pramipexole (n = 30) or placebo (n = 30). Treatment resistance was defined as continued depression (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale score ≥ 18) despite treatment with at least 1 prior antidepressant in the current depressive episode. Patients were recruited between September 2005 and April 2008. The primary outcome measure was the MADRS score. Results: The analyses that used a mixed-effects linear regression model indicated a modest but statistically significant benefit for pramipexole (P = .038). The last-observation-carried-forward analyses indicated that 40% and 33% of patients randomized to augmentation with pramipexole achieved response (χ2 = 1.2, P = .27) and remission (χ2 = 0.74, P = .61), respectively, compared to 27% and 23% with placebo; however, those differences were not statistically significant. Augmentation with pramipexole was well-tolerated, with no serious adverse effects identified. Conclusion: For patients who have failed to respond to standard antidepressant therapies, pramipexole is a safe and potentially efficacious augmentation strategy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00231959 J Clin Psychiatry 2013;74(7):e636-e641 © Copyright 2013 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc. Submitted: August 13, 2012; accepted December 17, 2012 (doi:10.4088/JCP.12m08093). Corresponding author: Cristina Cusin, MD, Depression Clinical and Research Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, One Bowdoin Square, Ste 630, Boston, MA 02114 (ccusin@partners.org).

The field of non-pharmacological therapies for treatment resistant depression (TRD) is rapidly evolving and new somatic therapies are valuable options for patients who have failed numerous other treatments. A major challenge for clinicians (and patients alike) is how to integrate the results from published clinical trials in the clinical decision-making process.

From The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry: