University Center of Psychiatry & Interdisciplinary Center of Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (MZ, ROV), University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands.
Health Service and Population Research Department (KCC), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2019 Sep;27(9):920-931. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2019.03.021. Epub 2019 Apr 6.
Studies have shown that antidepressants are no better than placebo in treating depression in dementia. The authors examined antidepressant efficacy in subgroups of depression in dementia with different depressive symptom profiles.
This study focuses on exploratory secondary analyses on the randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled Health Technology Assessment Study of the Use of Antidepressants for Depression in Dementia (HTA-SADD) trial. The setting included old-age psychiatry services in nine centers in England. The participants included 326 patients meeting National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association probable/possible Alzheimer disease criteria, and Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) scores of 8 or more. Intervention was placebo (n = 111), sertraline (n = 107), or mirtazapine (n = 108). Latent class analyses (LCA) on baseline CSDD items clustered participants into symptom-based subgroups. Mixed-model analysis evaluated CSDD improvement at 13 and 39 weeks by randomization in each subgroup.
LCA yielded 4 subgroups: severe (n = 34), psychological (n = 86), affective (n = 129), and somatic (n = 77). Mirtazapine, but not sertraline, outperformed placebo in the psychological subgroup at week 13 (adjusted estimate: -2.77 [standard error (SE) 1.16; 95% confidence interval: -5.09 to -0.46]), which remained, but lost statistical significance at week 39 (adjusted estimate: -2.97 [SE 1.59; 95% confidence interval: -6.15 to 0.20]). Neither sertraline nor mirtazapine outperformed placebo in the other subgroups.
Because of the exploratory nature of the analyses and the small sample sizes for subgroup analysis there is the need for caution in interpreting these data. Replication of the potential effects of mirtazapine in the subgroup of those with depression in dementia with "psychological" symptoms would be valuable. These data should not change clinical practice, but future trials should consider stratifying types of depression in dementia in secondary analyses.
研究表明,抗抑郁药在治疗痴呆症中的抑郁症方面并不优于安慰剂。作者研究了不同抑郁症状谱的痴呆症抑郁症亚组中抗抑郁药的疗效。
本研究重点是对随机、平行组、双盲、安慰剂对照的抗抑郁药治疗痴呆症抑郁症的健康技术评估研究(HTA-SADD)试验的探索性二次分析。该研究地点包括英格兰九个中心的老年精神病学服务。参与者包括符合国家神经病学和交流障碍及阿尔茨海默病及相关疾病协会(NINCDS-ADRDA)可能/可能阿尔茨海默病标准且 Cornell 痴呆症抑郁量表(CSDD)评分≥8 分的 326 名患者。干预措施为安慰剂(n=111)、舍曲林(n=107)或米氮平(n=108)。基线 CSDD 项目的潜在类别分析(LCA)将参与者分为基于症状的亚组。混合模型分析按随机分组评估了每组亚组在第 13 周和第 39 周时 CSDD 的改善情况。
LCA 产生了 4 个亚组:严重(n=34)、心理(n=86)、情感(n=129)和躯体(n=77)。米氮平而非舍曲林在第 13 周时在心理亚组中优于安慰剂(调整后的估计值:-2.77[标准误差(SE)1.16;95%置信区间:-5.09 至-0.46]),这一结果在第 39 周时仍然存在,但失去了统计学意义(调整后的估计值:-2.97[SE 1.59;95%置信区间:-6.15 至 0.20])。舍曲林和米氮平在其他亚组中均未优于安慰剂。
由于分析的探索性质和亚组分析的小样本量,在解释这些数据时需要谨慎。在那些患有“心理”症状的痴呆症抑郁症患者亚组中,重复米氮平的潜在效果将是有价值的。这些数据不应改变临床实践,但未来的试验应考虑在二级分析中对痴呆症抑郁症的类型进行分层。