International Consortium for Mood & Psychotic Disorder Research, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
J Psychopharmacol. 2021 Aug;35(8):890-900. doi: 10.1177/02698811211013579. Epub 2021 Jul 9.
Successful treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) can be challenging, and failures ("treatment-resistant depression" [TRD]) are frequent. Steps to address TRD include increasing antidepressant dose, combining antidepressants, adding adjunctive agents, or using nonpharmacological treatments. Their efficacy and tolerability remain inadequately tested. In particular, the value and safety of increasingly employed second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and new esketamine, compared to lithium as antidepressant adjuncts remain unclear.
We reviewed randomized, placebo-controlled trials and used random-effects meta-analysis to compare odds ratio (OR) versus placebo, as well as numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) and to-harm (NNH), for adding SGAs, esketamine, or lithium to antidepressants for major depressive episodes.
Analyses involved 49 drug-placebo pairs. By NNT, SGAs were more effective than placebo (NNT = 11 [CI: 9-15]); esketamine (7 [5-10]) and lithium (5 [4-10]) were even more effective. Individually, aripiprazole, olanzapine+fluoxetine, risperidone, and ziprasidone all were more effective (all NNT < 10) than quetiapine (NNT = 13), brexpiprazole (16), or cariprazine (16), with overlapping NNT CIs. Risk of adverse effects, as NNH for most-frequently reported effects, among SGAs versus placebo was 5 [4-6] overall, and highest with quetiapine (NNH = 3), lowest with brexpiprazole (19), 5 (4-6) for esketamine, and 9 (5-106) with lithium. The risk/benefit ratio (NNH/NNT) was 1.80 (1.25-10.60) for lithium and much less favorable for esketamine (0.71 [0.60-0.80]) or SGAs (0.45 [0.17-0.77]).
Several modern antipsychotics and esketamine appeared to be useful adjuncts to antidepressants for acute major depressive episodes, but lithium was somewhat more effective and better tolerated.
Most trials of adding lithium involved older, mainly tricyclic, antidepressants, and the dosing of adjunctive treatments were not optimized.
重度抑郁症(MDD)的治疗效果可能具有挑战性,且治疗失败(“治疗抵抗性抑郁症”[TRD])较为常见。针对 TRD 的措施包括增加抗抑郁药剂量、联合使用抗抑郁药、添加辅助药物或采用非药物治疗。但这些措施的疗效和耐受性仍未得到充分验证。特别是,与锂盐相比,越来越多的第二代抗精神病药(SGAs)和新型艾司氯胺酮在作为抗抑郁药辅助治疗时的价值和安全性仍不清楚。
我们对随机、安慰剂对照试验进行了综述,并采用随机效应荟萃分析比较了添加 SGAs、艾司氯胺酮或锂盐与安慰剂相比治疗重度抑郁发作的优势比(OR)、需要治疗人数(NNT)和有害效应人数(NNH)。
分析共涉及 49 个药物-安慰剂组合。根据 NNT,SGAs 比安慰剂更有效(NNT=11[9-15]);艾司氯胺酮(7[5-10])和锂盐(5[4-10])更有效。具体而言,阿立哌唑、奥氮平+氟西汀、利培酮和齐拉西酮均比喹硫平(NNT=13)、布瑞哌唑(16)或卡利培嗪(16)更有效(所有 NNT<10),重叠的 NNT CI。在 SGAs 与安慰剂相比,大多数报告不良事件的 NNH (最常报告的不良事件的 NNH)为 5[4-6],其中喹硫平最高(NNH=3),布瑞哌唑最低(19),艾司氯胺酮为 5(4-6),锂盐为 9(5-106)。风险效益比(NNH/NNT)锂盐为 1.80(1.25-10.60),艾司氯胺酮(0.71[0.60-0.80])或 SGAs(0.45[0.17-0.77])的风险效益比则低得多。
几种新型抗精神病药和艾司氯胺酮似乎可作为急性重度抑郁发作的抗抑郁药辅助治疗,但锂盐的疗效略高且耐受性更好。
添加锂盐的大多数试验均涉及较老的、主要是三环类的抗抑郁药,辅助治疗的剂量并未优化。