Suppr超能文献

联合米氮平与 SSRIs 或 SNRIs 治疗难治性抑郁症:MIR RCT。

Combining mirtazapine with SSRIs or SNRIs for treatment-resistant depression: the MIR RCT.

机构信息

Centre for Academic Mental Health, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Mental Health Services Unit, University College London, London, UK.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2018 Nov;22(63):1-136. doi: 10.3310/hta22630.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Depression is usually managed in primary care and antidepressants are often the first-line treatment, but only half of those treated respond to a single antidepressant.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether or not combining mirtazapine with serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants results in better patient outcomes and more efficient NHS care than SNRI or SSRI therapy alone in treatment-resistant depression (TRD).

DESIGN

The MIR trial was a two-parallel-group, multicentre, pragmatic, placebo-controlled randomised trial with allocation at the level of the individual.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from primary care in Bristol, Exeter, Hull/York and Manchester/Keele.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible participants were aged ≥ 18 years; were taking a SSRI or a SNRI antidepressant for at least 6 weeks at an adequate dose; scored ≥ 14 points on the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II); were adherent to medication; and met the , Tenth Revision, criteria for depression.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised using a computer-generated code to either oral mirtazapine or a matched placebo, starting at a dose of 15 mg daily for 2 weeks and increasing to 30 mg daily for up to 12 months, in addition to their usual antidepressant. Participants, their general practitioners (GPs) and the research team were blind to the allocation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was depression symptoms at 12 weeks post randomisation compared with baseline, measured as a continuous variable using the BDI-II. Secondary outcomes (at 12, 24 and 52 weeks) included response, remission of depression, change in anxiety symptoms, adverse events (AEs), quality of life, adherence to medication, health and social care use and cost-effectiveness. Outcomes were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. A qualitative study explored patients' views and experiences of managing depression and GPs' views on prescribing a second antidepressant.

RESULTS

There were 480 patients randomised to the trial (mirtazapine and usual care,  = 241; placebo and usual care,  = 239), of whom 431 patients (89.8%) were followed up at 12 weeks. BDI-II scores at 12 weeks were lower in the mirtazapine group than the placebo group after adjustment for baseline BDI-II score and minimisation and stratification variables [difference -1.83 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.92 to 0.27 points;  = 0.087]. This was smaller than the minimum clinically important difference and the CI included the null. The difference became smaller at subsequent time points (24 weeks: -0.85 points, 95% CI -3.12 to 1.43 points; 12 months: 0.17 points, 95% CI -2.13 to 2.46 points). More participants in the mirtazapine group withdrew from the trial medication, citing mild AEs (46 vs. 9 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not find convincing evidence of a clinically important benefit for mirtazapine in addition to a SSRI or a SNRI antidepressant over placebo in primary care patients with TRD. There was no evidence that the addition of mirtazapine was a cost-effective use of NHS resources. GPs and patients were concerned about adding an additional antidepressant.

LIMITATIONS

Voluntary unblinding for participants after the primary outcome at 12 weeks made interpretation of longer-term outcomes more difficult.

FUTURE WORK

Treatment-resistant depression remains an area of important, unmet need, with limited evidence of effective treatments. Promising interventions include augmentation with atypical antipsychotics and treatment using transcranial magnetic stimulation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06653773; EudraCT number 2012-000090-23.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 22, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

摘要

背景

抑郁症通常在初级保健中进行管理,抗抑郁药通常是一线治疗药物,但只有一半的患者对单一抗抑郁药有反应。

目的

研究米氮平与去甲肾上腺素- 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SNRI)或选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRI)抗抑郁药联合使用是否比 SNRI 或 SSRI 单独治疗治疗抵抗性抑郁症(TRD)更能改善患者结局并提高 NHS 护理效率。

设计

MIR 试验是一项两平行组、多中心、实用、安慰剂对照随机试验,个体水平分配。

地点

参与者从布里斯托尔、埃克塞特、赫尔/约克和曼彻斯特/基尔的初级保健中招募。

参与者

符合条件的参与者年龄≥ 18 岁;正在服用 SSRI 或 SNRI 抗抑郁药,剂量足够,至少 6 周;贝克抑郁量表 II(BDI-II)得分≥ 14 分;对药物有依从性;符合第十版抑郁症标准。

干预措施

参与者使用计算机生成的代码随机分配至口服米氮平或匹配的安慰剂组,起始剂量为每日 15mg,持续 2 周,然后增加至每日 30mg,持续长达 12 个月,同时服用他们的常规抗抑郁药。参与者、他们的全科医生(GP)和研究团队对分配情况不知情。

主要结局测量

主要结局是与基线相比,随机分组后 12 周时的抑郁症状,使用 BDI-II 作为连续变量进行测量。次要结局(12、24 和 52 周)包括反应、抑郁缓解、焦虑症状变化、不良事件(AE)、生活质量、药物依从性、卫生和社会保健使用以及成本效益。结局采用意向治疗进行分析。一项定性研究探讨了患者管理抑郁症的观点和经验,以及 GP 对开第二种抗抑郁药的看法。

结果

共有 480 名患者随机分配至试验(米氮平+常规护理,n=241;安慰剂+常规护理,n=239),其中 431 名患者(89.8%)在 12 周时得到随访。调整基线 BDI-II 评分和最小化及分层变量后,米氮平组的 BDI-II 评分在 12 周时低于安慰剂组[差值-1.83 分,95%置信区间(CI)-3.92 至 0.27 分;  = 0.087]。这小于最小临床重要差异,且 CI 包含了零。在随后的时间点,差异变小(24 周:-0.85 分,95% CI -3.12 至 1.43 分;12 个月:0.17 分,95% CI -2.13 至 2.46 分)。更多的米氮平组患者因轻度 AE 而退出试验药物治疗(46 名 vs. 9 名参与者)。

结论

这项研究没有发现确凿的证据表明米氮平在治疗 TRD 患者时与 SSRI 或 SNRI 抗抑郁药联合使用,与安慰剂相比有临床重要的获益。没有证据表明添加米氮平是 NHS 资源的一种具有成本效益的使用方式。GP 和患者对添加另一种抗抑郁药感到担忧。

局限性

参与者在 12 周主要结局后自愿接受非盲法,使得对长期结局的解释更加困难。

未来工作

治疗抵抗性抑郁症仍然是一个重要的、未满足的需求领域,有效治疗方法的证据有限。有前途的干预措施包括使用非典型抗精神病药增效和使用经颅磁刺激治疗。

试验注册

本项目由英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所卫生技术评估计划资助,全文将在 ; Vol. 22, No. 63 发布。有关该项目的更多信息,请访问英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所期刊图书馆网站。

相似文献

6

引用本文的文献

9
Pharmacological interventions for treatment-resistant depression in adults.成人难治性抑郁症的药物干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 17;12(12):CD010557. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010557.pub2.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验