Mark Hyman Rapaport

The authors provide a detailed clinical description of minor depression: its symptoms, level of disability, stability, and relationship to patient and family history of major depressive disorder. Rigorous criteria for minor depression, including functional disability, were used to identify 226 individuals for a three-phase treatment study. This report presents data obtained on that study group during the first study phase, a 4-week placebo lead-in period. One hundred sixty-two subjects (72% of the initial study group) remained in the study for 4 weeks and continued to meet criteria for minor depression. Minor depression in these subjects was primarily characterized by mood and cognitive symptoms, not the classical neurovegetative signs and symptoms of depression. Approximately one-third of the subjects with minor depression had a past history of major depressive disorder, and nearly half had a family history of unipolar depressive disorder; however, neither factor affected the severity or quality of minor depressive symptoms. These data suggest that 1) minor depression is not evanescent; 2) minor depression is characterized by mood and cognitive symptoms rather than neurovegetative symptoms; 3) minor depression may occur either independently of a lifetime history of major depressive disorder or as a stage of illness in the course of recurrent unipolar depressive disorder; and 4) depressive disorders should be conceptualized as a continuum of severity.

In this article, the authors review the most recent advances in the pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, and combined therapy for panic disorder. The authors focus on peerre-viewed data and on pragmatic clinical approaches that may help patients suffering from panic disorder.

More than 50% of patients who seek psychiatric care for panic disorder have previously received prescriptions for a benzodiazepine (BZ). Research on the treatment of generalized anxiety suggests that a history of BZ exposure might decrease the efficacy and tolerability of treatment with a serotonergic anxiolytic. This study examines the effect of prior BZ treatment on the efficacy and tolerability of sertraline treatment for panic disorder. Data were pooled (N = 705) from four double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of the efficacy of sertraline for the treatment of panic. Two of the studies were 12-week fixed-dose studies with starting doses of 50 mg, whereas 2 were flexible-dose studies of 10-week duration with starting doses of 25 mg. The effect of study treatment on the frequency of panic attacks, Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Improvement Scale, and tolerability was examined for patients with or without prior BZ treatment. The efficacy of sertraline was not affected by prior treatment with BZs. The mean endpoint reduction in panic attack frequency was identical in patients with or without prior BZ use: 79% vs. 80% (not significant). A history of good versus poor response to prior BZ treatment did not significantly influence CGI responder rates for sertraline-treated patients (67% vs. 61%, respectively). Sertraline CGI responder rates were significantly greater than placebo response, which was 47% for the good-response prior-BZ subgroup (p = 0.007), and 36% for the poor-response BZ subgroup (p = 0.013). Placebo response was lower in patients with any prior BZ use by 10% on an intent-to-treat last-observation-carried-forward analysis (p = 0.106) and by 15% on a completer analysis (p = 0.045). Prior BZ use did not influence either rates of adverse events or discontinuation rates within the first 3 weeks in patients treated with either sertraline or placebo. Sertraline is both well-tolerated and has significant efficacy in patients with panic disorder, including the subset of patients with panic disorder who have previously been treated with BZs.

More than one third of panic disorder patients have a chronic and/or recurrent form of the disorder, accounting for much of the individual and societal cost associated with the illness. Six clinical variables have been most consistently identified as high-risk predictors of poor outcome: (1) panic severity, (2) presence of agoraphobia, (3) comorbid depression, (4) comorbid personality disorder, (5) duration of illness, and (6) female sex. No published research has systematically examined the differential antipanic efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in patients at high risk for poor outcome. Data were pooled (N = 664) from 4 double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of the efficacy of sertraline for the treatment of DSM-III-R panic disorder. Two of the studies were 12-week fixed-dose studies with starting daily doses of sertraline, 50 mg, and 2 were 10-week flexible-dose studies with starting daily doses of sertraline, 25 mg. All other study design features were the same, except for the exclusion of women of childbearing potential in the 2 fixed-dose studies. Exclusion of patients with marked personality disorders and depression meant that only 4 of the poor-outcome variables could be evaluated. Clinical improvement was similar for patients treated with sertraline whether or not they carried an agoraphobia diagnosis, had a duration of illness > 2 years, or were female. Patients with high baseline panic severity had significantly (p = .01) less improvement on the endpoint Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale than patients with moderate severity, although the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale change score was higher in the patients with high severity (-2.00 vs. -1.31). For patients with 3 or more high-risk variables, there was a modest, but statistically significant, tendency for reduced global improvement (endpoint CGI-I score of 2.7 for the high-risk vs. 2.4 for the non-high-risk group; p = .017), although the high-risk group actually had a similar endpoint reduction in frequency of panic attacks (82%) compared with the non-high-risk group (78%). Treatment of panic disorder with sertraline was generally effective, even in the presence of baseline clinical variables that have been associated with poor treatment response. The main limitations of the analysis were the reliance on pooled data from 4 studies (even if the designs were similar) and our inability to examine the impact of depression and personality disorders on response to treatment because of the exclusion criteria of the clinical trials.

This article summarizes the results of a combined analysis from two identical multicenter clinical trials that investigated the efficacy and safety of sertraline versus placebo for treating panic disorder. Patients with panic disorder who were treated with sertraline had a statistically significant reduction in the mean number of panic attacks per week (the primary efficacy measure) as compared with placebo (4.8 vs. 2.5, p < .001). Sertraline-treated patients also showed greater improvement that was statistically significant on several ratings of panic disorder symptomatology and functioning. The design characteristics, clinical rating measures, and outcome measures in these trials included most of the features deemed essential by Shear and Maser (1994) in their summary of the NIMH Consensus Conference for the development of standardized assessments for panic disorder. This suggests that the NIMH Consensus Conference played a key role in developing successful multicenter pharmacological treatment studies, such as this one that ultimately demonstrated that sertraline was an effective treatment for panic disorder.

Gender may play an important role in the etiopathophysiology of psychiatric illness and has become a subject of increasing interest because of its possible effects on biological markers, treatment outcome, and prognosis. Intrigued by this issue and as part of our attempt to further characterize research subjects in San Diego, we evaluated male and female research subjects from our affective disorders clinical research center on a variety of measures. Based on epidemiologic data, we postulated that female and male subjects would be similar to epidemiologic samples and would differ in terms of comorbid diagnoses and that female subjects would be more likely to have had a history of previous treatment. The demographic characteristics; coffee, tobacco, and alcohol consumption patterns; symptom patterns; and current and lifetime comorbid DSM-III-R Axis I diagnoses of 124 female and 69 male outpatient research subjects were contrasted. Female research subjects had more comorbid problems with anxiety disorders, were more likely to have been previously treated, and were more likely to have a family history of psychiatric illness. Male and female research subjects were remarkably similar with respect to most characteristics assessed but, as postulated, differed in terms of their comorbid diagnoses and prior treatment history.