Skip Navigation
Department of Health and Human Services www.hhs.gov
  • Home
  • Search for Research Summaries, Reviews, and Reports
 
 

EHC Component

  • EPC Project

Full Report

Related Products for this Topic

Original Nomination

Save this page in Facebook.com  Save this page in Myspace.com  Save this page in Twitter.com  Save this page on your Google Home Page  Save this page in Windows Live
Save this page in Yahoo  Save this page in Ask.com  Stumble this page.  Save this page in del.ico.us  Digg this page. 

E-mail E-mail   Print Print

Add to My Collections



Executive Summary – Apr. 26, 2012

Treatment for Depression After Unsatisfactory Response to SSRIs

Formats

Current: This report was assessed in January 2013 and conclusions were considered current.

Table of Contents

Background

Depression is a complex mental illness associated with disability and reduced quality of life for the person with depression, as well as substantial societal burden. Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the second leading medical cause of long-term disability, the fourth leading cause of global burden of disease, and is predicted to become the second highest cause of disability by 2020.1,2 Depression exerts a negative impact on physical health; it reduces adherence to medical treatment,3 reduces participation in preventive activities,4 and increases the likelihood of risk factors such as obesity,5 smoking,6 and sedentary lifestyles.7 MDD may be associated with immune dysfunction8-11 and cardiovascular disease,12-15 endocrine and neurological diseases, and a general increase in chronic disease incidence.16 Mortality rates are high: approximately 4 percent of adults with a mood disorder die by their own hand, and about two-thirds of suicides are preceded by depression.17 In adolescents, untreated depression results in significant impairment in school performance, interpersonal relationships, risk of suicidal behavior and completion of suicide, risk of early pregnancy, occupational maladjustment, and impaired social and family functioning.18

Pharmacological agents are one of several treatment modalities used for depression, and one of the most frequently utilized classes of antidepressant medications are the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The rate of treatment response following first-line treatment with SSRIs is moderate, varying from 40 to 60 percent; remission rates vary from 30 to 45 percent.19 Up to one-third of persons taking antidepressant medications will develop recurrent symptoms of depression while on therapy.20 The target goal for acute treatment should be remission, which is defined as a resolution of depressive symptoms (a score within the normal range of the symptom scale). Response to treatment (usually defined as at least a 50 percent reduction in symptom levels21) may not be sufficient as a target outcome because residual depressive symptoms are risk factors for relapse and negative predictors of long-term outcome.22 Clinicians are faced with a number of treatment options following an inadequate response to an SSRI, and these include monotherapy or combined therapy. Monotherapy options include: (1) an optimization strategy (increasing the dose or extending the duration of the SSRI), (2) switching to another SSRI, (3) switching to another class of antidepressants, or (4) switching to a nonpharmacological intervention. Combination or add-on therapy options include: (1) combining the SSRI with an augmenting agent, (2) combining antidepressants, or (3) combining the SSRI with a nonpharmacological therapy (such as psychological therapies, exercise, etc.). It is also an option to switch to a new antidepressant and simultaneously combine that antidepressant with a second pharmacological or nonpharmacological treatment. This is sometimes referred to as an acceleration strategy.

Scope and Purpose of This Review

The primary goal of this comparative effectiveness review is to examine the evidence guiding clinical treatment decisions and ultimately to aid clinicians in their care of patients when SSRI therapy for an index episode does not result in an adequate treatment response. The Key Questions are as follows:

Key Question 1. Among adults and adolescents with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, and subsyndromal depression who are started on an SSRI and who are compliant with treatment but fail to improve either fully, partially, or have no response, what is the benefit (efficacy or effectiveness) of monotherapy and combined therapy?

Key Question 1a. How does efficacy/effectiveness vary among the different monotherapies and combined therapies?

Key Question 2. What are the harms of each of the monotherapies or combined therapies among these adults and adolescents? How do the harms compare across different interventions?

Key Question 3. How do these therapies compare in different populations (e.g., different depressive diagnoses, disease severity, age, gender, racial and socioeconomic group, and medical or psychiatric comorbidities)? These subgroups will be considered with respect to the different interventions.

Key Question 4. What is the range of recommended clinical actions following the failure of one adequate course of an SSRI based on current clinical practice guidelines published between 2004 and April 2011?

Methods

Search Strategy

The search strategy was limited to studies published from 1980 to April 13, 2011, as SSRIs first became available for the treatment of depression in the early 1980s. The databases searched were: MEDLINE®, Cochrane Central®, PsychINFO®, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase®, CINAHL®, and AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine). The grey literature search included systematic searches of relevant citations of Web sites: health technology assessment agencies (Hayes Inc. Health Technology Assessment), regulatory information (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Health Canada, Authorized Medicines for European Community), clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Clinical Trials, Clinical Study Results, WHO Clinical Trials), grants and federally funded research (including National Institute of Health, Health Services Research Projects in Progress [HSRProj]), abstracts and conference proceedings (Conference Papers Index, Scopus), and the New York Academy of Medicine’s Grey Literature Index. Additionally, the sites of specialty organizations were searched for clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), and members of the Technical Expert Panel were queried for any additional guidelines of relevance. CPGs were limited to those published between 2004 and April 2011. Reference lists of eligible citations and systematic reviews were also searched for potentially relevant citations.

Study Selection

The study populations were eligible if they included adults (age ≥18 years of age) or adolescents (12 to 18 years of age) with MDD, dysthymia, or subsyndromal depression, who met the following criteria: (1) they were on SSRI treatment for the index episode at the time of entry into the study; (2) they have been judged to have had an “inadequate response” to an SSRI (fluoxetine, citalopram, fluvoxamine, sertraline, escitalopram, or paroxetin) at the time of entry into the study; or (3) when recruited for entry into the study, they were to be placed on an SSRI for purposes of monitoring prospectively the adequacy of their response. Studies with subjects who failed to respond to a non-SSRI antidepressant or a nonpharmacological therapy or combination treatment were excluded. Subjects not receiving an SSRI at the time of entry into the study, and not recruited to evaluate adequacy of response to an SSRI, were excluded. Studies where the entire sample included subjects with postpartum depression, bipolar depression, depressive psychosis, dysphoria, mourning syndrome, postoperative depression, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, pseudodementia, puerperal depression, or seasonal affective disorder were excluded. Similarly, studies where the entire sample were subjects with a cerebrovascular accident, dementias (including Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, mild cognitive impairment), Parkinson’s disease, hypothyroidism, or Cushings’ syndrome were also excluded.

Experimental studies and observational studies with comparator groups were included in this review. Study designs with no comparison group (e.g., case series, qualitative studies) were excluded. There were no exclusions based on the types of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions, with the exception of electroconvulsive therapy, vagal nerve stimulation, and repetitive transcranial nerve stimulation.

The primary outcomes included remission (freedom or near freedom from symptoms; 100 percent change relative to baseline) and response (either partial, from 0 to 49 percent change relative to baseline, or complete, from 50 to 99 percent change relative to baseline). Secondary outcomes of interest included speed of response, relapse, quality of life, adherence, return to work, global change as measured by global assessment scales, and external service utilization.

Data Extraction

Relevant fields of information were extracted from individual studies by trained data extractors using standardized forms and a reference guide; a second reviewer verified the accuracy of the data fields reported. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus or consultation. Extracted data included study and population characteristics, eligibility criteria, types of interventions and treatment specifications, and outcomes.

Assessment of Methodological Quality of Individual Studies

We selected the Risk of Bias Tool by the Cochrane Collaboration23 to assess randomized controlled and controlled clinical trials. Studies were evaluated for adequacy of collecting and reporting harms using the McHarm scale.24,25 The AGREE II instrument was used to assess the methodological quality of the CPG.26

Applicability

Applicability was assessed by establishing a priori the key attributes of the population (wide spectrum of age [8 to 80 years], both genders, range of disease severity, range of the number of previous failures), intervention (using antidepressants with established efficacy in standardized doses), comparator, and outcome (standardized measures) in the context of a wider spectrum of patients in primary care settings; that is, in the context of patients who would likely benefit from these interventions in “real world” conditions. The findings of this review would not apply to subjects who have a primary diagnosis of bipolar disorders, schizophrenia, or major anxiety disorder.

Rating the Body of Evidence

The overall strength of the body of the evidence was assessed using four domains: (1) risk of bias criteria; (2) consistency of results (degree to which study results for an outcome are similar [variability is easily explained, range of results is narrow]); (3) directness of the evidence (assesses whether interventions can be linked directly to the health outcomes); and (4) precision (degree of certainty surrounding an effect estimate for a specific outcome).27 The strength of the evidence is classified in one of four grades: high, moderate, low, or insufficient. Grading of the strength of evidence is applied to individual primary outcomes of benefit (response and remission and also harms [suicidality, weight gain, and sexual dysfunction]).

Data Synthesis

Qualitative synthesis was undertaken separately for adults and adolescents, and for MDD, dysthymia, and subsyndromal depression. Studies were grouped into three categories of treatment strategies that reflected clinical decisionmaking and these included: (1) monotherapy versus monotherapy, (2) monotherapy versus combined therapy, and (3) combined therapy versus combined therapy.

We evaluated the clinical diversity of the study interventions, populations, and outcomes when considering meta-analyzing studies; given the diversity of interventions and populations, summary estimates were not undertaken. Graphs presenting relative risk of individual studies within the various clinical groupings of interventions were prepared to examine differences of effect size.

Results

Description of Eligible Studies and CPGs

From an initial 46,884 citations, 3,147 were screened at full text, and a final set of 44 primary studies (74 publications) and 27 CPGs were eligible for this review. Publications that presented subgroup analyses, secondary analyses, reanalyses, results of different outcomes (not primary outcome measures), or results for different time points on the same study cohort were considered to be secondary records (or companion publications) to the original studies; as such, all STAR*D study publications are counted as a single study (with multiple publications).

Key Question 1. Among adults and adolescents with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, and subsyndromal depression, who are started on an SSRI and who are compliant with treatment but fail to improve either fully, partially, or have no response, what is the benefit (efficacy or effectiveness) of monotherapy and combined therapy?

Key Question 1a. How does the efficacy/effectiveness vary among the different monotherapies and combined therapies?

Forty-one studies (61 publications)28-88 included adults, and three studies (13 publications)89-101 included adolescents. One study evaluated subjects with subsyndromal depression79 and another with dysthymia;67 both of these studies showed no differences between groups when comparing monotherapy or combined therapy treatments. The findings for subjects with MDD are summarized below.

Monotherapy Versus Monotherapies in Adults

Twelve studies (18 publications)30,34,37,39,48,49,51-53,55,59-61,63,65,69,71,72 compared monotherapy interventions relative to other monotherapies. All participants (n=2,611) had MDD and were recruited almost exclusively from outpatient settings. The majority of subjects were white, female, and middle-aged (40 to 49 years). The interventions were a minimum of 4 weeks duration and three of the studies involved dose escalation of sertraline,69 venlaxafine,39 or paroxetine.53 The remaining eight studies (nine publications) evaluated head-to-head comparison following switching from: (1) citalopram to venlaxafine, bupropion, sertraline, or cognitive behavior therapy (CBT);34,59,63 (2) paroxetine to venlaxafine;61 (3) fluoxetine to olanzapine or mianserin;37,71,72 or (4) from an SSRI to duloxetine (tapering methods).52,55 As a group, these 11 studies are at moderate risk of bias across studies, with particular problems in randomization and the role of the funding agency. The findings suggest that there is no certainty of any advantage between different monotherapies (pharmacological or nonpharmacological) for either response to treatment or remission. The exception was a single study that showed that lower-dose sertraline had some small improvement in response, and that the frequency of adverse events decreased at the higher dose; this particular study also suggests that the differences may have been related to the longer trial duration as subjects were randomized after failure to respond to the lower dose.69 There is limited evidence to establish with certainty that a dose escalation or a switch to another antidepressant (SSRI or non-SSRI) is equivalent or superior to any comparator treatment in patients with inadequate response to an initial SSRI; our limited pool of studies would suggest that these monotherapies are equivalent in their treatment effects.

Strength of the Evidence for Monotherapies

When considering any monotherapy versus other monotherapy treatments in adults with MDD, the differing pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions were considered as a single group, given that so few studies were eligible in this category. The studies generally showed no difference between groups. However, taking into consideration the moderate risk of bias, the imprecision, and the applicability of the populations, the evidence was graded as insufficient for both outcomes of benefit (response and remission); harms (suicidality, weight gain, and sexual dysfunction) were not measured or not reported in most studies, and as such were rated as having insufficient strength of evidence (SOE).

Monotherapies Versus Combined Therapies in Adults

A total of 33 studies (49 publications)28-33,35-38,40-51,54,57-64,68-74,76-78,80-87 evaluated the efficacy and effectiveness of monotherapy relative to combined therapies. Participants in the studies (n=4,537) were all diagnosed with MDD and recruited predominately from outpatient settings. The majority of subjects in these studies were middle-aged females of the white race (when ethnicity was reported). Fifteen studies (18 publications)28,29,35-37,44,54,57,58,61-63,68,69,72,74,76,78 determined failure of response to the SSRI prospectively and 16 retrospectively (18 publications).31-33,38,40-43,45-47,64,70,71,73,77,80,84 No studies evaluated subjects specifically for failed response to fluvoxamine alone.

All but one study59,62,63 employed a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, and all studies included a pharmacological intervention for at least one treatment arm. The majority of studies employed a study design that had the comparator arm receive ongoing treatment with an SSRI to which the subjects had not had an adequate response by the start of the study; fewer studies employed a design in which patients were switched to a new treatment in at least one study arm.

Four studies31,32,47,62,68 had one treatment arm that evaluated a combination therapy that included the non-SSRI antidepressants clomipramine, bupropion, or desipramine. Twenty-six of 33 studies evaluated combination therapies that included augmenting agents. From these, only five augmenting agents were evaluated in two or more studies; these included atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine and risperidone),37,44,57,72 lithium,47,61,68,74 buspirone,41,46,59,62,63,70,80 mianserin,69,72 and pindolol.42,45 Five studies evaluated the use of nonpharmacological interventions including CBT,43,59 dialectical behavior therapy,78 interpersonal therapy,83,85,87 and exercise.77 Method of randomization, compliance with treatment, and the role of the funder were at high risk of bias for over 75 percent of these studies. Eighteen studies (22 publications) were funded solely by industry,28,29,35-37,41,44,46,50,54,57,58,61,64,69-72,80-82,84 ten (13 publications) by non-industry sources,38,43,47,59,62,63,68,74,77,78,83,85,87 and one by both.33 Overall, these studies were rated as having moderate risk of bias. Inadequate sample size was a factor in many studies.

The majority of studies showed no certainty of any difference for any monotherapy treatment, relative to the comparator combined therapy, for the outcomes of response and remission. The exception was with the atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, ariprazole, quetiapine) used as augmenting agents, which showed small differences favoring the combination therapy. Overall, there is limited supportive evidence for any single augmenting drug or for switching to a different antidepressant (monotherapy) relative to adding another treatment (pharmacological or nonpharmacological).

SOE for Monotherapies Versus Combined Treatment

The SOE for the studies evaluating monotherapies relative to combined therapies had more eligible studies that were categorized into distinct intervention groups. When considering augmenting agents as a single group, the studies were at moderate risk of bias, inconsistent, and imprecise, and as such both the outcomes of benefit and harm were rated as of insufficient SOE. We also partitioned the studies into relevant subgroups based on the type of augmenting agent (atypical antipyschotics, buspirone, lithium, or mianserin). With the exception of atypical antipsychotics (low SOE) and switching to buspirone (low SOE), all other groupings for the different augmenting agents were given a rating of insufficient for evaluating both the outcomes of benefit and harm. When considering the grouping of interventions into those where switching to a new agent (monotherapy) was compared with switching and adding another treatment (such as a new SSRI, non-SSRI, or nonpharmacological treatment), the SOE was graded as low. The STAR*D trial contributed to many of the comparisons and affected the final grade in this treatment category.

Combined Therapies Versus Combined Therapies in Adults

There were six studies (n=832)35,47,59,62,68,75 for which there were treatment arms that compared combination therapies with each other. All but one study75 were RCTs. Women were the majority in all studies, and age ranges varied from 37 to 59 years. Only two studies reported racial composition,59,62 and these subjects were predominately white. Two studies35,75 compared different doses of the same combination drug therapies (ziprasidone and lithium). In addition to SSRIs, added therapies included lithium, desipramine, buspirone, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, or CBT. Overall, these studies were rated as having a moderate risk of bias, with problems in randomization, reporting compliance, and balancing prognostic indicators between groups. Adequate sample size was an issue in these studies. There was no certainty of a difference between any combination therapy, including a dose escalation, for the added augmenting agent.

SOE for Combined Therapies

All interventions within the combined therapies relative to other combined therapies were grouped as one category for grading SOE; the overall grade was assigned as insufficient for both the outcomes of benefit and harm due to serious risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision.

Treatment in Adolescents

Two studies (trials) evaluated therapies in children and adolescents who had failed to respond to a previous SSRI; one trial of patients ages 12 to 18,89,92,93,96-101 and a second trial of ages 8 to 18.90 In the Treatment for Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA) trial, the majority of the sample (68 to 72 percent) were girls, with an average age of 16 years.89,92,93,96-101 Study subjects were randomized to four treatment arms that included venlafaxine alone or combined with CBT, or a switch to an SSRI (citalopram, fluoxetine, or paroxetine) alone, or with CBT. This study was at low risk of bias. The trial stated that it aimed to demonstrate the superiority of venlaxafine, but the findings failed to reject the null hypothesis showing no differences between the medication groups. There was a statistically significant difference in favor of including CBT for all outcomes, however. The second trial evaluated a dose escalation of fluoxetine in a small sample, and was suggestive of some benefit to the higher dose, but the study was underpowered to detect a difference.90

SOE for Adolescent Studies

SOE was evaluated for the findings from the TORDIA trial alone. This trial had low risk of bias, and harms were well monitored and reported. The SOE was rated as low due to the potential imprecision of this study.

Key Question 2. What are the harms of each of the monotherapies or combined therapies among these adults and adolescents? How do the harms compare across different interventions?

Harms for interventions used for both adults and adolescents with MDD who had failed to respond to an SSRI were predominately derived from RCTs that evaluated treatment strategies in this population. No observational studies met the eligibility criteria. A clear trend for harms was difficult to specify across the differing interventions in adults. In general, the majority of harms reported were consistent with those associated with antidepressant use and were likely mild to moderate in nature.

With the exception of the studies evaluating children and adolescents, the reporting and collecting of harms was problematic, particularly for predefining harms (e.g., nausea for >1 day), including serious and severe events, and for reporting the total number of events per group in studies with adults. The two studies evaluating adolescents provide good evidence for harms within this population as they were generally at low risk of bias. In studies with adult MDD populations, severe events and serious events such as suicidality were reported inconsistently. A limited number of studies undertook statistical evaluation comparing harms between groups.

Key Question 3. How do these therapies compare in different populations (e.g., different depressive diagnoses, disease severity, age, gender, racial and socioeconomic group, and medical or psychiatric comorbidities)? These subgroups will be considered with respect to the different interventions.

Seven studies undertook stratified or subgroup analyses evaluating factors that may impact treatment outcomes in adults,30,37,41,46,51,64,66,68-70,80 and one for adolescents.89,92,93 The effects of baseline severity, previous treatment failure, age, gender, and race were not sufficiently evaluated and were inconsistent in their impact on outcomes in adults. There is some evidence from the STAR*D level 2 cohort that would suggest that persons with concurrent anxiety symptoms have less likelihood of achieving remission. There is some evidence from the TORDIA trial that milder depression, less family conflict, and the absence of suicidal behavior are associated with greater likelihood of a positive treatment response to combined therapy at 12 weeks in adolescents. A history of physical and sexual abuse may predict response to combined therapy in adolescents.

Key Question 4. What is the range of recommended clinical actions following the failure of one adequate course of SSRI based on current clinical practice guidelines published between 2004 and April 2011?

There were a total of 27 CPGs sponsored by unique organizations and described in 33 publications.18,102-133 Seven CPGs were specific only to adolescents,18,126-131 18 CPGs were for adults alone,102,103,105,107-111,113-117,119,121,123-125 and 2 CPGs were applicable to both.132,133 Four CPGs for adults107,109,116,119 and three for adolescents18,127,130 did not provide any recommendations for patients with previous inadequate responses. Five of the 27 guidelines included patients with dysthymia and subsyndromal depression103,123,126,132,133 but none of the recommendations were for patients with this diagnosis who had failed to respond to previous treatment (pharmacological or nonpharmacological). The majority of CPGs did not specify a definition for inadequate response. All CPGs were applicable to patients from primary care and outpatient settings. The domains within the AGREE II showed great variability in the scores, suggesting significant differences amongst the CPGs. Domains with the greatest variability included domain 3 (rigor of development), domain 5 (applicability), and domain 6 (editorial independence). For adults, increasing the dose or duration was frequently recommended (often a first approach), but the interval or change in dose was not specified. The majority of CPGs did not recommend any specific type of antidepressant when recommending switching to monotherapy strategies. When combination therapy was recommended, there was a greater tendency to specify the drug for adding to the antidepressants. However, there was great variability in the augmenting agents recommended. For adolescents, there was an approximately equal number of CPGs that specified the agents to consider for monotherapy and for combined therapies. Many CPGs expressed a preference to commence treatment using nonpharmacological approaches prior to pharmacological treatment in this population. Some adolescent guidelines cited adult evidence as the evidentiary basis for suggesting treatment strategies.

Recommendations for Future Research

  1. Future trials should specify a priori the intent of the trial as establishing either equivalence, noninferiority, or superiority of the head-to-head comparisons. Justification for the margin of inferiority or superiority should be specified. Ideally, designing trials to establish superiority is preferred, as this may assist clinicians in selecting amongst competing treatment strategies. Similarly, in studies designed to involve a population of patients who have failed to respond to treatment, determining this failure in a prospective manner as the first part of a two-part study, rather than simply asking patients about failure, confers methodological advantages with regard to minimizing bias and allowing disentanglement of the reasons for failure (adverse events, compliance, or physiological response). Sample sizes in future research studies should be sufficient to establish important margins of difference between groups and to evaluate potentially important confounders, such as age, gender, and baseline severity.
  2. Future research should include a broader representation of adult patients with respect to age (>50 and <40 years), gender (equal proportion of men), and ethnicity (increased proportion of nonwhite or non-Caucasian, or broader representation of all ethnic groups). Similarly, a broader representation of participants with the medical or psychiatric comorbidities typically found in the primary care setting should be included.
  3. Studies should be more consistent in reporting the manner for determining previous history of failed treatment trials and past episodes of depression.
  4. There is a need to increase the number of studies including subjects with dysthymia and subsyndromal depression who have failed to respond to previous SSRI treatments.
  5. There is also a need to increase research in children (ages 8 to 12 years) and adolescents (ages 12 to 18 years).
  6. Trials of new add-on treatments for patients not responding to an antidepressant medication have not examined whether the add-on agent is equally effective when added to a range of antidepressant classes. There appears to be an assumption among investigators in this field that response and remission will be comparable regardless of the class of background medication; the clinical or neurobiological data to support this assumption should be confirmed or revisited.
  7. Future clinical trials should conform to CONSORT134 (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) reporting standards for harms. Severe and serious events (including suicidality) were inconsistently reported and improvement is necessary in this area.
  8. Development of future CPGs for adolescents or adults should provide a clear definition of inadequate response for both pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, and should include standardized methods for establishing this in “real world” settings. Future CPG recommendations should provide greater clarity with regards to recommended treatment actions and should make clear the link between the recommendation and the evidence.

Conclusions

Studies in adults with MDD who have had an inadequate response to an SSRI included a preponderance of subjects with multiple past depressive episodes and multiple past unsuccessful treatment trials. The generalizability of these data to people with few past episodes of depression and few past unsuccessful treatments for depression may be limited. In addition, these studies included a high proportion of caucasians and women, and tended to have an average patient age in the early forties. Studies are needed with a sufficient sample size to explore whether there are differences in race, gender, or across the age spectrum.

The number of studies comparing single medications against each other (monotherapy compared with monotherapy) following an inadequate response to an SSRI are few and evaluate different agents. Extant studies are limited in type of agents utilized, sample sizes, and population characteristics. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether there is a difference between various single-agent therapies in the outcomes of response and remission following an inadequate response to an SSRI.

There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the benefits of ongoing monotherapy with an SSRI compared with combination treatment involving the addition of another antidepressant medication to the initial SSRI. There is low-grade evidence that comparable results are achieved following the switch to an alternate antidepressant medication (monotherapy with a new antidepressant) when compared with adding a nonantidepressant treatment to the initial SSRI (traditional augmentation approach). There is low-grade evidence that adding an atypical antipsychotic medication to ongoing SSRI treatment is associated with higher response and remission rates compared with adding a placebo to ongoing SSRI treatment (following inadequate response to the SSRI). There is insufficient evidence to confirm that there is an improvement in response and remission rates following the addition of any other augmentation agents. There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the benefits or harms of specific combinations of treatments relative to alternative combinations. There is a single study evaluating patients with subsyndromal symptoms and dysthymia who had had an inadequate response to SSRI medications; the evidence base is limited in these populations.

There are three studies evaluating children and adolescents. Only one study provided evidence to support the use of CBT in combination with an antidepressant following inadequate response to an SSRI for adolescents ages 12 to 18 years with MDD. A second study, a pilot with small sample size evaluating dose escalation, showed no effect.

A clear trend for harms was difficult to specify across the differing interventions in adults, although there were some studies (particularly for children and adolescents) where harms were well evaluated and clinically important differences between treatment groups were not apparent. The reporting and collecting of harms was problematic, particularly for predefining harms, including serious and severe events and reporting the total number of events per group in studies with adults.

The majority of CPGs for adults were applicable to patients with MDD in outpatient and primary care settings. Most CPGs did not specify definitions of “inadequate response” but did provide suggestions for treatment approaches. Recommendations for monotherapy (including dose or interval changes, switching to a different SSRI, or to a non-SSRI) were nonspecific as to the drug, interval, or dose change. Recommendations for combination therapy tended to endorse switching or adding different classes of antidepressants and augmenting agents. However, there was inconsistency across CPGs with regard to the types of augmenting agents to use. The variation amongst CPGs reflects the limitations of the evidentiary base.

References

  1. Canal M, Legangneux E, van Lier JJ, et al. Lack of effect of amisulpride on the pharmacokinetics and safety of lithium. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2003;6(2):103-9. PMID:12890302
  2. World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2001: Mental health: New understanding, new hope. 2001 Oct 4. http://www.who.int/whr/2001/en/ Exit Disclaimer. Accessed November 13, 2011.
  3. Ciechanowski PS, Katon WJ, Russo JE. Depression and diabetes: Impact of depressive symptoms on adherence, function, and costs. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(21):3278-85. PMID:11088090
  4. Aro AR, de Koning HJ, Absetz P, et al. Psychosocial predictors of first attendance for organised mammography screening. J Med Screen. 1999;6(2):82-8. PMID:10444726
  5. McIntyre RS, Soczynska JK, Konarski JZ, et al. The effect of antidepressants on glucose homeostasis and insulin sensitivity: Synthesis and mechanisms. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2006;5(1):157-68. PMID:16370964
  6. Murphy JM, Horton NJ, Monson RR, et al. Cigarette smoking in relation to depression: Historical trends from the Stirling County Study. Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160(9):1663-9. PMID:12944343
  7. Van Gool CH, Kempen GI, Penninx BW, et al. Relationship between changes in depressive symptoms and unhealthy lifestyles in late middle aged and older persons: Results from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Age Ageing. 2003;32(1):81-7. PMID:12540353
  8. Corcos M, Guilbaud O, Hjalmarsson L, et al. Cytokines and depression: An analogic approach. Biomed Pharmacother. 2002;56(2):105-10. PMID:12000135
  9. Kop WJ, Gottdiener JS, Tangen CM, et al. Inflammation and coagulation factors in persons > 65 years of age with symptoms of depression but without evidence of myocardial ischemia. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89(4):419-24. PMID:11835923
  10. Musselman DL, Miller AH, Porter MR, et al. Higher than normal plasma interleukin-6 concentrations in cancer patients with depression: preliminary findings. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(8):1252-7. PMID:11481159
  11. Penninx BW, Kritchevsky SB, Yaffe K, et al. Inflammatory markers and depressed mood in older persons: Results from the Health, Aging and Body Composition study. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54(5):566-72. PMID:12946885
  12. Kop WJ. The integration of cardiovascular behavioral medicine and psychoneuroimmunology: New developments based on converging research fields. Brain Behav Immun. 2003;17(4):233-7. PMID:12831824
  13. Taylor CB, Youngblood ME, Catellier D, et al. Effects of antidepressant medication on morbidity and mortality in depressed patients after myocardial infarction. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(7):792-8. PMID:15997021
  14. Wassertheil-Smoller S, Shumaker S, Ockene J, et al. Depression and cardiovascular sequelae in postmenopausal women. The Women's Health Initiative (WHI). Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(3):289-98. PMID:14769624
  15. Gilmour H. Depression and risk of heart disease. Health Reports Vol.19, no.3, 82-003-XPE. Statistics Canada; 2008. http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2008/statcan/82-003-X/82-003-XIE2008003.pdf Exit Disclaimer. Accessed November 13, 2011.
  16. Patten SB, Williams JV, Lavorato DH, et al. Major depression as a risk factor for chronic disease incidence: Longitudinal analyses in a general population cohort. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2008;30(5):407-13. PMID:18774423
  17. Seguin M, Lesage A, Chawky N, et al. Suicide cases in New Brunswick from April 2002 to May 2003: The importance of better recognizing substance and mood disorder comorbidity. Can J Psychiatry. 2006;51(9):581-6. PMID:17007225
  18. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening and treatment for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. J Am Acad Pediatr. 2009;123(4):1223-8. PMID:19336383
  19. Carvalho AF, Cavalcante JL, Castelo MS, et al. Augmentation strategies for treatment-resistant depression: A literature review. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007;32(5):415-28. ISI:000249450400001
  20. Souery D, Papakostas GI, Trivedi MH. Treatment-resistant depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2006;67(Suppl. 6):16-22.
  21. McIntyre RS, Fallu A, Konarski JZ. Measurable outcomes in psychiatric disorders: Remission as a marker of wellness. Clin Ther. 2006;28(11):1882-91. PMID:17213009
  22. Paykel ES, Ramana R, Cooper Z, et al. Residual symptoms after partial remission: An important outcome in depression. Psychol Med. 1995;25(6):1171-80. PMID:8637947
  23. Higgins JPT. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2. 2008. www.cochrane-handbook.org/ Exit Disclaimer. Accessed on November 13, 2011.
  24. Santaguida P and Raina P. Development of a quality assessment scale specific to harms in studies evaluating the efficacy of health technologies: Manual for using the McHarm. 2010. http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/epc/mcharm.pdf Exit Disclaimer. Accessed November 13, 2011.
  25. Chou R, Aronson N, Atkins D, et al. AHRQ series paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the effective health-care program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(5):502-12. PMID:18823754
  26. The AGREE Next Steps Consortium. Appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II (AGREE II). The AGREE Research Trust; 2009. www.agreetrust.org/?o=1397 Exit Disclaimer
  27. Owens DK, Lohr KN, Atkins D, et al. AHRQ series paper 5: Grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions—Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(5):513-23. PMID:19595577
  28. Berman RM, Fava M, Thase ME, et al. Aripiprazole augmentation in major depressive disorder: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with inadequate response to antidepressants. CNS Spect. 2009;14(4):197-206. PMID:19407731
  29. Preskorn SH, Baker B, Kolluri S, et al. An innovative design to establish proof of concept of the antidepressant effects of the NR2B subunit selective N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist, CP-101,606, in patients with treatment-refractory major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(6):631-7. PMID:19011431
  30. Rush AJ, Wisniewski SR, Warden D, et al. Selecting among second-step antidepressant medication monotherapies: Predictive value of clinical, demographic, or first-step treatment features. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2008;65(8):870-80. PMID:18678792
  31. Altamura AC, Dell'Osso B, Buoli M, et al. Intravenous augmentative citalopram versus clomipramine in partial/nonresponder depressed patients: A short-term, low dose, randomized, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(4):406-10. PMID:18626267
  32. Altamura AC, Dell'Osso B, Buoli M, et al. Short-term intravenous citalopram augmentation in partial/nonresponders with major depression: A randomized placebo-controlled study. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(4):198-202. PMID:18545057
  33. George TP, Sacco KA, Vessicchio JC, et al. Nicotinic antagonist augmentation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-refractory major depressive disorder: A preliminary study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(3):340-4. PMID:18480694
  34. Lenox-Smith AJ, Jiang Q. Venlafaxine extended release versus citalopram in patients with depression unresponsive to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(3):113-9. PMID:18408525
  35. Dunner DL, Amsterdam JD, Shelton RC, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive ziprasidone in treatment-resistant depression: A randomized, open-label, pilot study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68(7):1071-7. PMID:17685744
  36. Michelson D, Adler LA, Amsterdam JD, et al. Addition of atomoxetine for depression incompletely responsive to sertraline: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68(4):582-7. PMID:17474814
  37. Thase ME, Corya SA, Osuntokun O, et al. A randomized, double-blind comparison of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination, olanzapine, and fluoxetine in treatment-resistant major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68(2):224-36. PMID:17335320
  38. Shapira B, Nemets B, Trachtenberg A, et al. Phenytoin as an augmentation for SSRI failures: A small controlled study. J Affect Disord. 2006;96(1-2):123-6. PMID:16814397
  39. Thase ME, Shelton RC, Khan A. Treatment with venlafaxine extended release after SSRI nonresponse or intolerance: A randomized comparison of standard- and higher-dosing strategies. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006;26(3):250-8. PMID:16702889
  40. Seidman SN, Miyazaki M, Roose SP. Intramuscular testosterone supplementation to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in treatment-resistant depressed men: Randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2005;25(6):584-8. PMID:16282843
  41. Landen M, Hogberg P, Thase ME. Incidence of sexual side effects in refractory depression during treatment with citalopram or paroxetine. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66(1):100-6. PMID:15669895
  42. Perry EB, Berman RM, Sanacora G, et al. Pindolol augmentation in depressed patients resistant to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(2):238-43. PMID:15003079
  43. Wiles NJ, Hollinghurst S, Mason V, et al. A randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavioural therapy as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy in primary care based patients with treatment resistant depression: A pilot study. Behav Cognit Psychother. 2008;36(1):21-33.
  44. Keitner GI, Garlow SJ, Ryan CE, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of risperidone augmentation for patients with difficult-to-treat unipolar, non-psychotic major depression. J Psychiatr Res. 2009;43(3):205-14.
  45. Sokolski KN, Conney JC, Brown BJ, et al. Once-daily high-dose pindolol for SSRI-refractory depression. Psychiatry Res. 2004;125(2):81-6.
  46. Landén M, Björling G, Agren H, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of buspirone in combination with an SSRI in patients with treatment-refractory depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(12):664-8.
  47. Fava M, Rosenbaum JF, McGrath PJ, et al. Lithium and tricyclic augmentation of fluoxetine treatment for resistant major depression: A double-blind, controlled study. Am J Psychiatry. 1994;151(9):1372-4.
  48. Fava M, Rush AJ, Alpert JE, et al. Difference in treatment outcome in outpatients with anxious versus nonanxious depression: A STAR*D report. Am J Psychiatry. 2008;165(3):342-51. ISI:000253779400014
  49. Rush AJ, Warden D, Wisniewski SR, et al. STAR*D: Revising conventional wisdom. CNS Drugs. 2009;23(8):627-47. PMID:19594193
  50. Amsterdam JD, Williams D, Michelson D, et al. Tachyphylaxis after repeated antidepressant drug exposure in patients with recurrent major depressive disorder. Neuropsychobiol. 2009;59(4):227-33. PMID:19571597
  51. Warden D, Rush AJ, Wisniewski SR, et al. What predicts attrition in second step medication treatments for depression?: A STAR*D Report. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2009;12(4):459-73. PMID:18611293
  52. Perahia DG, Quail D, Desaiah D, et al. Switching to duloxetine in selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor non- and partial-responders: Effects on painful physical symptoms of depression. J Psychiatr Res. 2009;43(5):512-8. PMID:18707693
  53. Ruhe HG, Booij J, Weert HC, et al. Evidence why paroxetine dose escalation is not effective in major depressive disorder: A randomized controlled trial with assessment of serotonin transporter occupancy. Neuropsychopharmacol. 2009;34(4):999-1010. PMID:18830236
  54. Marcus RN, McQuade RD, Carson WH, et al. The efficacy and safety of aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder: A second multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(2):156-65. PMID:18344725
  55. Perahia DG, Quail D, Desaiah D, et al. Switching to duloxetine from selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants: A multicenter trial comparing 2 switching techniques. J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;69(1):95-105. PMID:18312043
  56. Alexopoulos GS, Canuso CM, Gharabawi GM, et al. Placebo-controlled study of relapse prevention with risperidone augmentation in older patients with resistant depression. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2008;16(1):21-30. PMID:17928573
  57. Mahmoud RA, Pandina GJ, Turkoz I, et al. Risperidone for treatment-refractory major depressive disorder: A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(9):593-602. PMID:17975181
  58. Berman RM, Marcus RN, Swanink R, et al. The efficacy and safety of aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68(6):843-53. PMID:17592907
  59. Thase ME, Friedman ES, Biggs MM, et al. Cognitive therapy versus medication in augmentation and switch strategies as second-step treatments: A STAR*D report. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(5):739-52. PMID:17475733
  60. Rush AJ, Trivedi MH, Wisniewski SR, et al. Acute and longer-term outcomes in depressed outpatients requiring one or several treatment steps: A STAR*D report. Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163(11):1905-17. PMID:17074942
  61. Bondolfi G, Aubry JM, Golaz J, et al. A stepwise drug treatment algorithm to obtain complete remission in depression: A Geneva study. Swiss Med Week. 2006;136(5-6):78-85. PMID:16633950
  62. Trivedi MH, Fava M, Wisniewski SR, et al. Medication augmentation after the failure of SSRIs for depression. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(12):1243-52. PMID:16554526
  63. Rush AJ, Trivedi MH, Wisniewski SR, et al. Bupropion-SR, sertraline, or venlafaxine-XR after failure of SSRIs for depression. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(12):1231-42. PMID:16554525
  64. Fava M, Thase ME, DeBattista C. A multicenter, placebo-controlled study of modafinil augmentation in partial responders to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors with persistent fatigue and sleepiness. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66(1):85-93. PMID:15669893
  65. Birkenhager TK, van den Broek WW, Mulder PG, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of tranylcypromine versus phenelzine: A double-blind study in antidepressant-refractory depressed inpatients. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(11):1505-10. PMID:15554763
  66. Perlis RH, Alpert J, Nierenberg AA, et al. Clinical and sociodemographic predictors of response to augmentation, or dose increase among depressed outpatients resistant to fluoxetine 20 mg/day. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2003;108(6):432-8. PMID:14616224
  67. Rocca P, Marchiaro L, Rasetti R, et al. A comparison of paroxetine versus paroxetine plus amisulpride in the treatment of dysthymic disorder: Efficacy and psychosocial outcomes. Psychiatry Res. 2002;112(2):145-52. PMID:12429360
  68. Fava M, Alpert J, Nierenberg A, et al. Double-blind study of high-dose fluoxetine versus lithium or desipramine augmentation of fluoxetine in partial responders and nonresponders to fluoxetine. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2002;22(4):379-87. PMID:12172337
  69. Licht RW, Qvitzau S. Treatment strategies in patients with major depression not responding to first-line sertraline treatment. A randomised study of extended duration of treatment, dose increase or mianserin augmentation. Psychopharmacol. 2002;161(2):143-51. PMID:11981594
  70. Appelberg BG, Syvalahti EK, Koskinen TE, et al. Patients with severe depression may benefit from buspirone augmentation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: results from a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, placebo wash-in study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2001;62(6):448-52. PMID:11465522
  71. Ferreri M, Lavergne F, Berlin I, et al. Benefits from mianserin augmentation of fluoxetine in patients with major depression non-responders to fluoxetine alone. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2001;103(1):66-72. PMID:11202131
  72. Shelton RC, Tollefson GD, Tohen M, et al. A novel augmentation strategy for treating resistant major depression. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(1):131-4. PMID:11136647
  73. Nemets B, Mishory A, Levine J, et al. Inositol addition does not improve depression in SSRI treatment failures. J Neural Transm. 1999;106(7-8):795-8. PMID:10907738
  74. Baumann P, Nil R, Souche A, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of citalopram with and without lithium in the treatment of therapy-resistant depressive patients: A clinical, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacogenetic investigation. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1996;16(4):307-14. PMID:8835706
  75. Dinan TG. Lithium augmentation in sertraline-resistant depression: A preliminary dose-response study. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1993;88(4):300-1. PMID:8256650
  76. Thase ME, Trivedi MH, Nelson JC, et al. Examining the efficacy of adjunctive aripiprazole in major depressive disorder: A pooled analysis of 2 studies. Prim Care Comp J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;10(6):440-7.
  77. Carta MG, Hardoy MC, Pilu A, et al. Improving physical quality of life with group physical activity in the adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. 2008;4(1):1-6.
  78. Lynch TR, Cheavens JS, Cukrowicz KC, et al. Treatment of older adults with co-morbid personality disorder and depression: A dialectical behavior therapy approach. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007;22(2):131-43.
  79. Zourkova A. Effect of mirtazapine and paroxetine on residual symptoms of depressive disorders and their effect on P450 CYP 2D6 activity. Homeost Health Dis. 2001;41(6):242-9.
  80. Landén M, Eriksson E, Agren H, et al. Effect of buspirone on sexual dysfunction in depressed patients treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 1999;19(3):268-71.
  81. Nelson JC, Mankoski R, Baker RA, et al. Effects of aripiprazole adjunctive to standard antidepressant treatment on the core symptoms of depression: A post-hoc, pooled analysis of two large, placebo-controlled studies. J Affect Disord. 2010;120(1-3):133-40. PMID:19656577
  82. Reimherr F, Amsterdam J, Dunner D, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in the treatment of depression: speculations from an augmentation study using atomoxetine. Psychiatry Res. 2010;175(1-2):67-73. PMID:19969374
  83. Martire LM, Schulz R, Reynolds CF, III, et al. Treatment of late-life depression alleviates caregiver burden. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58(1):23-9. PMID:19943833
  84. Bauer M, El-Khalili N, Datto C, et al. A pooled analysis of two randomised, placebo-controlled studies of extended release quetiapine fumarate adjunctive to antidepressant therapy in patients with major depressive disorder. [Review]. J Affect Disord. 2010;127(1-3):19-30. PMID:20884063
  85. Greenlee A, Karp JF, Dew MA, et al. Anxiety impairs depression remission in partial responders during extended treatment in late-life. Depress Anxiety. 2010;27(5):451-6. PMID:20186975
  86. Nelson JC, Thase ME, Trivedi MH, et al. Safety and tolerability of adjunctive aripiprazole in major depressive disorder: A pooled post hoc analysis (studies CN138-139 and CN138-163). Prim Care Comp J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;11(6):344-52.
  87. Reynolds CFI, Dew MA, Martire LM, et al. Treating depression to remission in older adults: A controlled evaluation of combined escitalopram with interpersonal psychotherapy versus escitalopram with depression care management. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2010;25(11):1134-41.
  88. Rapaport MH, Gharabawi GM, Canuso CM, et al. Effects of risperidone augmentation in patients with treatment-resistant depression: Results of open-label treatment followed by double-blind continuation. Neuropsychopharmacol. 2006;31(11):2505-13.
  89. Brent D, Emslie G, Clarke G, et al. Switching to another SSRI or to venlafaxine with or without cognitive behavioral therapy for adolescents with SSRI-resistant depression: The TORDIA randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2008;299(8):901-13. PMID:18314433
  90. Heiligenstein JH, Hoog SL, Wagner KD, et al. Fluoxetine 40-60 mg versus fluoxetine 20 mg in the treatment of children and adolescents with a less-than-complete response to nine-week treatment with fluoxetine 10-20 mg: A pilot study. Journal of Child & Adolescent Psychopharmacology. 2006;16(1-2):207-17. PMID:16553541
  91. Vitiello B, Brent DA, Greenhill LL, et al. Depressive Symptoms and clinical status during the treatment of adolescent suicide attempters (TASA) study. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009;48(10):997-1004.
  92. Brent DA, Emslie GJ, Clarke GN, et al. Predictors of spontaneous and systematically assessed suicidal adverse events in the treatment of SSRI-resistant depression in adolescents (TORDIA) study. Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166(4):418-26.
  93. Asarnow JR, Emslie G, Clarke G, et al. Treatment of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression in adolescents: Predictors and moderators of treatment response. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009;48(3):330-9.
  94. Brent DA, Greenhill LL, Compton S, et al. The Treatment of Adolescent Suicide Attempters Study (TASA): Predictors of suicidal events in an open treatment trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009;48(10):987-96.
  95. Stanley B, Brown G, Brent DA, et al. Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Suicide Prevention (CBT-SP): Treatment model, feasibility, and acceptability. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009;48(10):1005-13.
  96. Brent D, Melhem N, Ferrell R, et al. Association of FKBP5 polymorphisms with suicidal events in the Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA) study. Am J Psychiatry. 2010;167(2):190-7. PMID:20008943
  97. Goldstein BI, Shamseddeen W, Spirito A, et al. Substance use and the treatment of resistant depression in adolescents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009;48(12):1182-92.
  98. Emslie GJ, Mayes T, Porta G, et al. Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA): Week 24 outcomes. Am J Psychiatry. 2010;167(7):782-91. PMID:20478877
  99. Sakolsky DJ, Perel JM, Emslie GJ, et al. Antidepressant exposure as a predictor of clinical outcomes in the Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA) study. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2011;31(1):92-7.
  100. Shamseddeen W, Asarnow JR, Clarke G, et al. Impact of physical and sexual abuse on treatment response in the treatment of resistant depression in adolescent study (TORDIA). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011;50(3):293-301.
  101. Lynch FL, Dickerson JF, Clarke G, et al. Incremental cost-effectiveness of combined therapy vs medication only for youth with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression: Treatment of SSRI-resistant depression in adolescents trial findings. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(3):253-62.
  102. Jaehne, M. E. Health care guideline: Major depression in adults in primary care 12th edition. Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement.
  103. Qaseem A, Snow V, Denberg TD, et al. Using second-generation antidepressants to treat depressive disorders: A clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(10):725-33. PMID:19017591
  104. Karasu B, Gelenberg A, Merriam A, et al. Practice guideline for treatment of patients with depression disorder second edition. APA Practice Guidlines. 2009;1-78.
  105. Depression clinical practice guidelines. National Guidline Clearinghouse. 2004;1-20.
  106. National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health. Depression: Management of depression in primary and secondary care. National Clinical Practice Guideline Number 23. 2004.
  107. Steinman LE, Frederick JT, Prohaska T, et al. Recommendations for treating depression in community-based older adults. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(3):175-81. PMID:17826575
  108. Bauer M, Bschor T, Pfennig A, et al. World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders in primary care. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2007;8(2):67-104. PMID:17455102
  109. Davidson KW, Kupfer DJ, Bigger JT, et al. Assessment and treatment of depression in patients with cardiovascular disease: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group Report. Psychosom Med. 2006;68(5):645-50. PMID:17012516
  110. Ellis P, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists Clinical Practice Guidelines Team for Depression. Australian and New Zealand clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression. Aust NZ J Psychiatry. 2004;38(6):389-407. PMID:15209830
  111. Malhi GS, Adams D, Porter R, et al. Clinical practice recommendations for depression. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(Suppl. 439):8-26.
  112. Ravindran AV. If a patient does not respond to a full dose of fluvoxamine for at least 12 weeks, what alternatives should be considered? J Psychiatry Neurosci. 1998;23(2):136 PMID:9549254
  113. Ravindran AV, Lam RW, Filteau MJ, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. V. Complementary and alternative medicine treatments. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(Suppl. 1):S54-S64
  114. Parikh SV, Segal ZV, Grigoriadis S, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. II. Psychotherapy alone or in combination with antidepressant medication. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(Suppl. 1):S15-S25
  115. Lam RW, Kennedy SH, Grigoriadis S, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. III. Pharmacotherapy. J Affect Disord. 2009;117(Suppl. 1):S26-S43
  116. Conn DK, Gibson M, Feldman S, et al. National guidelines for seniors' mental health: The assessment and treatment of mental health issues in long-term care homes (focus on mood and behaviour symptoms). Can J Geriatr. 2006;9(Suppl. 2):S59-S64
  117. R Mahendran, H L Yap. Clinical practice guidelines for depression. Singapore Med J 200546(11):610-5. 2005.
  118. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Depression: The treatment and management of depression in adults. 2009:1-585. 2009.
  119. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for depression and anxiety. 200697. 2006.
  120. Pilling S, Anderson I, Goldberg D, et al. Guidelines: Depression in adults, including those with a chronic physical health problem: Summary of NICE guidance. Br Med J. 2009;339(7728):1025-7.
  121. Nutt DJ, Davidson JR, Gelenberg AJ, et al. International consensus statement on major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;71(Suppl E1):e08.
  122. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem: Treatment and management. NICE clinical guideline 91. London: NICE; 2009.
  123. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Depression in adults (update): Depression: The treatment and management of depression in adults. Final Version of guideline 90. London: NICE; 2009.
  124. Harter M, Klesse C, Bermejo I, et al. Unipolar depression: Diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations from the current S3/National Clinical Practice Guideline. Deutsches Arzteblatt International. 2010;107(40):700-8. PMID:21031129
  125. Gelenberg A, Freeman M, Markowitz J et al. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder. American Psychiatric Association; 2010.
  126. Birmaher B, Brent D, Bernet W, et al. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with depressive disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(11):1503-26. PMID:18049300
  127. Zuckerbrot R, Cheung M.H, Jensen P, et al. Guidelines for adolescent Depression in primary care (GLAD-PC) I, Identification, assessment, and initial management. Pediatr. 2009;120(5):1299-312.
  128. Hughes CW, Emslie GJ, Crismon ML, et al. Texas Children's Medication Algorithm Project: update from Texas Consensus Conference Panel on medication treatment of childhood major depressive disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(6):667-86. PMID:17513980
  129. Cheung AH, Zuckerbrot RA, Jensen PS, et al. Guidelines for adolescent depression in primary care (GLAD-PC): II. Treatment and ongoing management. J Am Acad Pediatr. 2007;120(5):e1313-e1326
  130. Gallagher R. Evidence-based psychotherapies for depressed adolescents: A review and clinical guidelines. Prim Psychiatry. 2005;12(9):33-9.
  131. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Depression in Children and Young People : Identification and management in primary, community and secondary care. 2005:1-233. 2005.
  132. Anderson IM, Ferrier IN, Baldwin RC, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: A revision of the 2000 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines. J Psychopharmacol (Oxf). 2008;22(4):343-96. PMID:18413657
  133. New Zealand Guidelines Group. Identification of common mental disorders and management of depression in primary care. 2008:1-190. 2008.
  134. Ioannidis JPA, Evans SJW, Gotzsche PC, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: An extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(10):781-8. ISI:000225206900005.

Full Report

This executive summary is part of the following document: Santaguida P, MacQueen G, Keshavarz H, Levine M, Beyene J, Raina P. Treatment for Depression After Unsatisfactory Response to SSRIs. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 62. (Prepared by McMaster University Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. HHSA 290-2007-10060-I.) AHRQ Publication No.12-EHC050-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; April 2012. www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcix.htm.

For More Copies

For more copies of Treatment for Depression After Unsatisfactory Response to SSRIs: Comparative Effectiveness Review Executive Sumary No. 62 (AHRQ Publication No. 12-EHC050-1), please call the AHRQ Publications Clearinghouse at 1-800-358-9295 or email ahrqpubs@ahrq.gov.

Return to Top of Page