Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, Shandong Province, China.
Department of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong Wendeng Osteopath Hospital, Weihai, Shandong Province, China.
PLoS One. 2024 Apr 26;19(4):e0299020. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299020. eCollection 2024.
To report the first and largest systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) or major depressive disorder(MDD).
We conducted a systematic literature retrieval via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane until April 2023 for RCT, which evaluated the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching for patients with TRD or MDD. Outcomes measured were changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), response and remission rate, and serious adverse events.
Five RCTs, including 4480 patients, were included for meta-analysis. Among them, two RCTs were rated as "high risk" in three aspects (allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel and blinding of outcome assessment) because of the non-blind method, and the quality evaluation of the remaining works of literature was "low risk". Augmentation treatment with Aripiprazole (A-ARI) was associated with a significant higher response rate compared with augmentation treatment with bupropion (A-BUP) (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.25; P = 0.0007; I2 = 23%). Besides, A-ARI had a significant higher remission rate compared with switching to bupropion (S-BUP) (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.49; P = 0.05; I2 = 59%) and A-BUP had a significant higher remission rate compared with S-BUP (RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.36; P = 0.0004; I2 = 0%). In addition, there was no significant difference in remission rate(RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.17; P = 0.42; I2 = 33%), improvement of MADRS(WMD: -2.07; 95% CI: -5.84, 1.70; P = 0.28; I2 = 70%) between A-ARI and A-BUP. No significant difference was observed in adverse events and serious adverse events among the three treatment strategies.
A-ARI may be a better comprehensive antidepressant treatment strategy than A-BUP or S-BUP for patients with TRD or MDD. More large-scale, multi-center, double-blind RCTs are needed to further evaluated the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole or bupropion augmentation and switching treatment strategies.
报告首个也是最大的系统评价和荟萃分析,评估阿立哌唑或安非他酮增效和转换治疗难治性抑郁症(TRD)或重度抑郁症(MDD)患者的疗效和安全性。
我们通过 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 进行了系统文献检索,检索时间截至 2023 年 4 月,以评估阿立哌唑或安非他酮增效和转换治疗 TRD 或 MDD 患者的疗效和安全性。测量的结果包括蒙哥马利-阿斯伯格抑郁评定量表(MADRS)的变化、反应率和缓解率以及严重不良事件。
共纳入 5 项 RCT 研究,包括 4480 例患者进行荟萃分析。其中,有 2 项 RCT 因非盲法在 3 个方面(分配隐藏、参与者和人员盲法以及结局评估盲法)被评为“高风险”,其余文献的质量评价为“低风险”。与安非他酮增效治疗(A-BUP)相比,阿立哌唑增效治疗(A-ARI)的反应率显著更高(RR:1.15;95%CI:1.05,1.25;P=0.0007;I2=23%)。此外,与转换为安非他酮(S-BUP)相比,A-ARI 的缓解率显著更高(RR:1.22;95%CI:1.00,1.49;P=0.05;I2=59%),与 A-BUP 相比,S-BUP 的缓解率显著更高(RR:1.20;95%CI:1.06,1.36;P=0.0004;I2=0%)。此外,在缓解率方面(RR:1.05;95%CI:0.94,1.17;P=0.42;I2=33%)、MADRS 的改善方面(WMD:-2.07;95%CI:-5.84,1.70;P=0.28;I2=70%),A-ARI 与 A-BUP 之间无显著差异。三种治疗策略的不良反应和严重不良反应之间未见显著差异。
对于 TRD 或 MDD 患者,A-ARI 可能是比 A-BUP 或 S-BUP 更好的综合抗抑郁治疗策略。需要更多的大规模、多中心、双盲 RCT 来进一步评估阿立哌唑或安非他酮增效和转换治疗策略的疗效和安全性。