Introduction: The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) was initiated by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) in 2000 with the aim of improving substance use treatment and reducing the time between the discovery of effective treatments and their implementation into clinical practice. While initial trials were conducted almost exclusively in specialty addiction treatment settings, the CTN began evolving strategically in 2010 to conduct research in general medical settings, including healthcare systems, primary care settings, emergency departments, and pharmacies, to broaden impact. The advantages of a research network like the CTN is not only the collective content expertise that investigators contribute to the network, but the collective experience gained by conducting studies in the network and then applying those lessons to future studies. Objective: To summarize trial implementation challenges encountered, and the process by which solutions were identified and implemented, within one of the last early-phase CTN Stage II behavioral intervention studies conducted in a specialty addiction treatment setting. Method and results: We describe the implementation of the CTN-0037 STimulant Reduction Intervention using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE) trial. Issues encountered during study implementation are categorized into four major areas, described in terms useful to future study teams: 1) study team infrastructure challenges, 2) participant-and site- level challenges, 3) intervention-related challenges, and 4) longitudinal study design challenges. Potential consequences of identified problems and the solutions developed to manage these problems are discussed within the context of these four areas. We propose how to extend these implementation lessons and apply them in other healthcare settings to expand the CTN. Conclusions: Effective study management allows for flexible, collaborative solutions to expected and unexpected obstacles to study success. Implementation strategies derived from the first 15 to 20 years of CTN studies are a result of working with providers and participants, and the ongoing collaboration among CTN investigators and network staff. Timely identification and response to problems during study implementation are critical to the success of a trial, regardless of its design. We believe a collaborative approach to identifying and responding to study implementation challenges will increase the likelihood of successful adoption of relevant, efficacious interventions. As the CTN continues to expand, the wealth of successful trial implementation strategies developed during the first 20 years of the CTN need to be applied and adapted to studies in broader network settings, and considered in conjunction with more formalized implementation science processes that are currently available.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate exercise as a treatment for stimulant use disorders. METHODS The STimulant Reduction Intervention using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE) study was a randomized clinical trial conducted in 9 residential addiction treatment programs across the United States from July 2010 to February 2013. Of 497 adults referred to the study, 302 met all eligibility criteria, including DSM-IV criteria for stimulant abuse and/or dependence, and were randomized to either a dosed exercise intervention (Exercise) or a health education intervention (Health Education) control, both augmenting treatment as usual and conducted thrice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary outcome of percent stimulant abstinent days during study weeks 4 to 12 was estimated using a novel algorithm adjustment incorporating self-reported Timeline Followback (TLFB) stimulant use and urine drug screen (UDS) data. RESULTS Mean percent of abstinent days based on TLFB was 90.8% (SD = 16.4%) for Exercise and 91.6% (SD = 14.7%) for Health Education participants. Percent of abstinent days using the eliminate contradiction (ELCON) algorithm was 75.6% (SD = 27.4%) for Exercise and 77.3% (SD = 25.1%) for Health Education. The primary intent-to-treat analysis, using a mixed model controlling for site and the ELCON algorithm, produced no treatment effect (P = .60). In post hoc analyses controlling for treatment adherence and baseline stimulant use, Exercise participants had a 4.8% higher abstinence rate (78.7%) compared to Health Education participants (73.9%) (P = .03, number needed to treat = 7.2). CONCLUSIONS The primary analysis indicated no significant difference between exercise and health education. Adjustment for intervention adherence showed modestly but significantly higher percent of abstinent days in the exercise group, suggesting that exercise may improve outcomes for stimulant users who have better adherence to an exercise dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01141608.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Rates of medical illnesses may be higher among individuals with substance use disorders, complicating their care. This study aimed to expand the understanding of other medical conditions in treatment-seeking adults with stimulant use disorder (SUD) using data from Stimulant Reduction Intervention using Dose Exercise (STRIDE), a randomized, multisite trial investigating exercise augmentation of treatment as usual.METHODS:Utilizing STRIDE baseline data, we examined demographic and clinical characteristics based on the number of self-reported diagnosed medical conditions among participants meeting eligibility criteria (passing medical screening exam and maximal exercise test, non-opioid dependent, no concomitant beta blocker, or opioid replacement therapy).RESULTS:The majority (59%) of study participants (N = 302, mean age all participants = 39 years) did not report any history of other medical problems. Those with two or more conditions were older (mean age 46 years), reported more pain and worse physical functioning, and more psychiatric disorders (average 1.44). Hypertension was more common among participants with cocaine use disorders only (present in 16%) and liver disease was more common in those with cocaine plus other stimulant use disorders (present in 7%).CONCLUSION AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE:In this sample, patients with SUD were in surprisingly good health. A subpopulation had an overall higher burden of illness with worsened physical and psychiatric functioning. Provision of coordinated care may optimize treatment outcomes for patients based on medical comorbidity burden as well as type of drug abused, although these conclusions should be considered preliminary as they are based on self-reported data.

Background: Missing data in substance use disorder (SUD) research pose a significant threat to internal validity. Participants terminate involvement or become less likely to attend intervention and research visits for many reasons, which should be addressed prior to becoming problematic. During a 9-month study targeting stimulant abuse, early dropouts and participant reported attendance barriers led to implementing a structured, pre-randomization protocol with participants about retention and solution-focused strategies (the "Fireside Chat"). Our aim is to outline this approach and present data on intervention participation and research visit attendance after implementation.Methods/design: STimulant Reduction using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE) was a two-arm, multisite randomized clinical trial testing treatment-as-usual for stimulant abuse/dependence augmented by Exercise or Health Education. For both groups, study intervention visits at the site were scheduled 3/week for 12 weeks followed by 1/week for 24 weeks. During The Chat, research staff thoroughly reviewed participants' expectations, and barriers and solutions to retention. Fifteen participants were randomized (to Exercise or Health Education) prior to and fourteen were randomized after Chat implementation. Intervention and monthly follow-up attendance (before and after implementation) were compared at the site (N = 29) that developed and rigorously implemented The Chat.Results: Individuals who participated in The Chat (n = 14) attended significantly more intervention visits during weeks 1-12 (p < 0.001) and weeks 13-36 (p < 0.05) and attended more research visits (p < 0.001).Discussion: Proactive discussion of expectations and barriers prior to randomization was associated with greater study attendance. SUD researchers should consider tailoring this approach to suit their needs. Further investigation is warranted. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

This study aimed to determine if current comorbid psychiatric disorders differ in adults with cocaine use disorder, other stimulant (primarily methamphetamine) use disorder, or both, and identify demographic and clinical characteristics in those with increasing numbers of comorbid disorders. Baseline data from a randomized controlled trial beginning in residential settings (N=302) was used. Mood disorders were present in 33.6%, and anxiety disorders in 29.6%, with no differences among stimulant use disorder groups. Panic disorder was more frequently present with other stimulant use disorder. Those with two or more comorbid psychiatric disorders were more often female, White, had more symptoms of depression, greater propensity and risk for suicidal behavior, lower functioning in psychiatric and family domains, lower quality of life, more symptoms with stimulant abstinence and greater likelihood of marijuana dependence. Those with one or more comorbid disorders had more medical disorder burden, lower cognitive and physical functioning, greater pain, and higher rates of other drug dependence. With current comorbid psychiatric disorders, the morbidity of stimulant use disorders increases. Use of validated assessments near treatment entry, and a treatment plan targeting not only substance use and comorbid psychiatric disorders, but functional impairments, medical disorder burden and pain, may be useful.

This study explored Hispanic subgroup differences in substance use treatment outcomes, and the relationship of acculturation characteristics to these outcomes. Data were from a multisite randomized clinical trial of motivational enhancement therapy versus treatment as usual in a sample of Spanish-speaking substance abusers. Participants were Cuban American (n=34), Mexican American (n=209), Puerto Rican (n=78), and other Hispanic American (n=54). Results suggested that Cuban Americans and individuals with more connection to Hispanic culture had lower treatment retention. Hispanics born in the U.S and those who spoke English at home had a lower percentage of days abstinent during weeks 5–16, although Puerto Ricans born in the U.S. and Cuban Americans living more years in the U.S. had a higher percentage of days abstinent in weeks 1–4 and 5–16, respectively. Results may inform future hypothesis-driven studies in larger Hispanic treatment seeking samples of the relationship between acculturation and treatment outcome.

Background. Non-adherence to antidepressant treatment is not routinely measured in practical clinical trials. It has not been related to outcomes in a large sample of adults with chronic and/or recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) or any sample treated with antidepressant combinations. Methods. Adult outpatients with chronic and/or recurrent MDD were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with bupropion-SR plus escitalopram, venlafaxine-XR plus mirtazapine, or escitalopram plus placebo. We compared non-adherence (the frequency with which daily medications were not taken) and specifically the frequency of temporarily stopping and/or skipping medication, or reducing or increasing the dose across treatments in 567 participants using a self-report questionnaire collected at each visit. We tested the association between non-adherence, and both treatment type and outcomes. Results. A non-adherence rate under 10% was reported by 77.9%, 70.9%, and 71.6% of participants during weeks 1-4, 5-12, and 1-12, respectively. Antidepressant combinations were associated with a higher non-adherence rate than monotherapy during weeks 1-4 and 1-12. During weeks 1-4, 24.1% stopped/skipped doses and 6.1% reduced the dose. During weeks 5-12, 34.7% stopped/skipped doses and 9.4% reduced the dose. Across 12 weeks, 43.2% stopped/skipped doses, and 12.9% reduced the dose. Stopping/skipping doses during all time frames and dose decreases during weeks 1-12 occurred most frequently with combination treatments. Non-adherence was unrelated to symptom remission, response, or symptom change. Conclusions. With closely monitored treatment, non-adherence is low and unrelated to depressive symptom outcome. Nonadherence is highest with antidepressant combinations. Specific non-adherent events are most often sporadic.

Background: Menopausal status and use of hormonal contraception or menopausal hormone therapy (HT) may affect treatment response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). This report evaluates whether menopausal status and use of hormonal contraceptives or menopausal HT affect outcome in women treated with citalopram.Methods: In the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study, 896 premenopausal and 544 postmenopausal women were treated with citalopram for 12-14 weeks. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were used in adjusted analysis of the effect of menopausal status and use of hormonal contraceptives or menopausal HT on outcomes. Remission was defined as final Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 (HRSD17) <= 7 or Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16)score <= 5 and response as >= 50% decrease from the baseline QIDS-SR16 score.Results: Premenopausal and postmenopausal women differed in multiple clinical and demographic baseline variables but did not differ in response or remission rates. Premenopausal women taking hormonal contraceptives had significantly greater unadjusted remission rates on the HRSD17 and the QIDS-SR16 than women not taking contraception. Response and remission rates were not different between postmenopausal women taking vs. not taking HT. Adjusted results showed no significant difference in any outcome measure across menopause status in women who were not taking contraception/HT. There were no significant differences in adjusted results across HT status in premenopausal or postmenopausal women.Conclusions: In this study, citalopram treatment outcome was not affected by menopausal status. Hormonal contraceptives and HT also did not affect probability of good outcome.

Objective: To identify clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with suicidal ideation (SI) among patients seeking care for depression in routine primary and psychiatric care settings. Methods: We examined data from 4041 treatment-seeking outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) to compare baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of those with and without SI, and the presence or absence of baseline depressive symptoms and psychiatric comorbidities in those with SI. Results: SI was significantly (P < 0.01) associated with numerous sociodemographic characteristics (that is, lower level of education, Caucasian or African American, male, unemployed, and treated in psychiatric care) and clinical features (that is, previous suicide attempt, younger age of MDD onset, greater baseline depressive symptom severity, greater number of depressive symptoms, and presence of agoraphobia and [or] generalized anxiety disorder). Elevated levels of SI at baseline were associated with decreased remission rates. Conclusions: Consistent with past findings, increased rates of SI were associated with greater depressive symptom severity as well as other features suggestive of severity of illness. Our results confirm previous findings of associations between SI and panic and (or) phobic symptoms and anxiety, but did not confirm previous findings of an association between SI and alcohol or drug use and (or) dependence. While selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor monotherapy appeared significantly helpful in reducing SI during the course of treatment, the presence of SI at baseline was found to be a associated with decreased treatment response, with patients reporting SI at the start of treatment being less likely to achieve remission. Clinical Trial Registration Number: Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression, NCT00021528.

Background: In opioid dependent youth there is substantial attrition from medication-assisted treatment. If youth at risk for attrition can be identified at treatment entry or early in treatment, they can be targeted for interventions to help retain them in treatment.Methods: Opioid dependent adolescents and young adults (n = 152), aged 15-21, were randomized to 12 weeks (BUP, n = 74) or 2 weeks of detoxification (DETOX, n = 78) with buprenorphine/naloxone (Bup/Nal), both in combination with 12 weeks of psychosocial treatment Baseline and early treatment related predictors of treatment attrition were identified in each group using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression.Results: In the DETOX group 36% left between weeks 2 and 4, at the end of the dose taper, while in the BUP group only 8% left by week 4. In the BUP group, early adherence to Bup/Nal, early opioid negative urines, use of any medications in the month prior to treatment entry, and lifetime non-heroin opioid use were associated with retention while prior 30-day hallucinogen use was associated with attrition. In the DETOX group, only use of sleep medications was associated with retention although not an independent predictor. A broad range of other pre-treatment characteristics was unrelated to attrition.Conclusions: Prompt attention to those with early non-adherence to medication or an early opioid positive urine, markers available in the first 2 weeks of treatment, may improve treatment retention. Extended Bup/Nal treatment appeared effective in improving treatment retention for youth with opioid dependence across a wide range of demographics, and pre-treatment clinical characteristics. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background Prior studies have suggested that major depressive disorder (MDD) with pre-adult onset represents a distinct subtype with greater symptom severity and higher rates of suicidal ideation. Whether these patients have poorer response to various types of antidepressant treatment than those with adult-onset MDD is unclear. Method A total of 665 psychiatric and primary care out-patients (aged 18–75 years) with non-psychotic chronic or recurrent MDD participated in a single-blind, randomized trial that compared the efficacy of escitalopram plus placebo, bupropion sustained-release plus escitalopram, or venlafaxine extended-release plus mirtazapine. We compared participants who self-reported MDD onset (before age 18) to those with a later onset (adult onset) with respect to baseline characteristics and treatment/outcome variables at 12 and 28 weeks. Results Early-onset chronic/recurrent MDD was associated with a distinct set of sociodemographic (female, younger age) and clinical correlates (longer duration of illness, greater number of prior episodes, greater likelihood of atypical features, higher rates of suicidality and psychiatric co-morbidity, fewer medical problems, poorer quality of life, greater history of child abuse/neglect). However, results from unadjusted and adjusted analyses showed no significant differences in response, remission, tolerability of medications, quality of life, or retention at 12 or 28 weeks. Conclusions Although early-onset chronic/recurrent MDD is associated with a more severe clinical picture, it does not seem to be useful for predicting differential treatment response to antidepressant medication. Clinicians should remain alert to an increased risk of suicidality in this population.

Although the selection of appropriate clinical sites has a significant impact on the successful conduct of clinical trials, no generally accepted model is available for site selection. Use of an appropriate site selection process is even more pertinent when conducting large scale, practical clinical trials in practice settings. This report provides a rationale for selecting sites by identifying both a set of basic site selection criteria important to most trials as well as criteria specific to the features of a particular study's design. In this two-tier system, although all these criteria must be met, some criteria are firm and viewed as essential for a site to conduct the trial. Other criteria, such as those that support study recruitment or participant retention, are flexible. These flexible criteria may be addressed through several alternative solutions that meet the original intent of the criterion. We illustrate how the study specific features and requirements of Stimulant Reduction Intervention using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE), a multisite clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of exercise or health education, added to treatment as usual for stimulant abuse are linked to firm and flexible site selection criteria. We also present an iterative, multi-step approach to site selection including building awareness about the study and screening and evaluating sites using these criteria. This simple model could maximize the chance that selected sites will implement a study successfully and achieve trial aims. It may be helpful to researchers who are developing criteria and methods for site selection for specific clinical trials.

BACKGROUND Regular exercise is thought to be associated with low rates of mental illness, but this association has been inadequately studied. The purpose of this study was to test the hypotheses that the recommended amount of self-reported vigorous exercise would be cross-sectionally associated with reduced prevalence and incidence of various DSM-IV psychiatric disorders, as well as increased rates of remission. METHOD Data were collected from 2001 to 2005 as part of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC), a 2-wave face-to-face survey conducted by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. For this study, the sample consisted of 23,505 nondisabled adults aged between 18 and 65 years. RESULTS Individuals who engaged in vigorous exercise at Wave 2 were significantly more likely than were nonexercisers to be diagnosed with a current psychiatric disorder (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.22, 95% CI, 1.12-1.34 for the nationally recommended amount vs no exercise), significantly less likely to attain remission from a psychiatric disorder between waves (AOR = 0.77, 95% CI, 0.65-0.91), and significantly more likely to relapse or be newly diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder between waves (AOR = 1.15, 95% CI, 1.02-1.30). Alcohol dependence and bipolar II disorder were the disorders most strongly associated with exercise. CONCLUSIONS This investigation suggests that the pursuit of vigorous exercise is associated with a vulnerability to mental illness. This surprising finding may be due to reward-related factors that influence both exercise engagement and the expression of certain psychiatric disorders. Prospective trials will be helpful in further clarifying the associations between exercise and mental illness, as the relationships between the 2 are more complex than previously believed.

Novel approaches to the treatment of stimulant abuse and dependence are needed. Clinical data examining the use of exercise as a treatment for the abuse of nicotine, alcohol, and other substances suggest that exercise may be a beneficial treatment for stimulant abuse. In addition, exercise has been associated with improvements in many other health-related areas that may be adversely affected by stimulant use or its treatment, such as sleep disturbance, cognitive function, mood, weight, quality of life, and anhedonia. Neurobiological evidence provides plausible mechanisms by which exercise could positively affect treatment outcomes in stimulant abuse. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network (CTN) CTN-0037 Stimulant Reduction Intervention using Dosed Exercise (STRIDE) study is a multisite randomized clinical trial that compares exercise to health education as potential treatments for stimulant abuse or dependence. If effective, exercise may provide an additional approach to the treatment of stimulant use disorders.

Objective: Monitoring suicidality and risk following initiation of antidepressant treatment is an essential component of clinical care, but few brief, reliable ratings of suicidal ideation and behavior in adults are available. This report evaluates the psychometric properties of a brief self- and clinician-rated measure of factors related to the risk of suicide attempt or completion.Method: Adult outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (MDD) (n =240) were enrolled from July 2007 through February 2008 and treated in an 8-week, open-label trial with the clinician's choice of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor at 6 primary care and 9 psychiatric clinical care settings in the National Institute of Mental Health-funded Depression Trials Network. Diagnosis of MDD was determined by the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire and an MDD checklist based on DSM-IV-TR criteria. Suicidal ideation and behavior are 1 of 9 symptoms of MDD (depressed mood, loss of interest, appetite or weight change, sleep disturbance, reduced concentration or indecisiveness, fatigue or decreased energy, psychomotor agitation or retardation, feelings of worthlessness, or excessive guilt). The newly developed Concise Health Risk Tracking (CHRT) scale was administered both as the CHRT Self-Report (CHRT-SR) and Clinician Rating (CHRT-C) scales. Psychometric evaluations were conducted on both scales.Results: The internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) was .77 for the 7-item CHRT-C and .78 for the 7-item CHRT-SR with a consistent factor structure, and 3 independent factors (current suicidal thoughts and plans, perceived lack of social support, and hopelessness) for both versions.Conclusions: The 7-item CHRT-C and the 7-item CHRT-SR have excellent psychometric properties and can be used to monitor suicidal risk in clinical practice and research settings. Whether either scale will predict suicide attempts or completions in actual practice would require a very large prospective study sample.

OBJECTIVE Two antidepressant medication combinations were compared with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor monotherapy to determine whether either combination produced a higher remission rate in first-step acute-phase (12 weeks) and long-term (7 months) treatment. METHOD The single-blind, prospective, randomized trial enrolled 665 outpatients at six primary and nine psychiatric care sites. Participants had at least moderately severe nonpsychotic chronic and/or recurrent major depressive disorder. Escitalopram (up to 20 mg/day) plus placebo, sustained-release bupropion (up to 400 mg/day) plus escitalopram (up to 20 mg/day), or extended-release venlafaxine (up to 300 mg/day) plus mirtazapine (up to 45 mg/day) was delivered (1:1:1 ratio) by using measurement-based care. The primary outcome was remission, defined as ratings of less than 8 and less than 6 on the last two consecutive applications of the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Report. Secondary outcomes included side effect burden, adverse events, quality of life, functioning, and attrition. RESULTS Remission and response rates and most secondary outcomes were not different among treatment groups at 12 weeks. The remission rates were 38.8% for escitalopram-placebo, 38.9% for bupropion-escitalopram, and 37.7% for venlafaxine-mirtazapine, and the response rates were 51.6%-52.4%. The mean number of worsening adverse events was higher for venlafaxine-mirtazapine (5.7) than for escitalopram-placebo (4.7). At 7 months, remission rates (41.8%-46.6%), response rates (57.4%-59.4%), and most secondary outcomes were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS Neither medication combination outperformed monotherapy. The combination of extended-release venlafaxine plus mirtazapine may have a greater risk of adverse events.

Both the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD(17)) and 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Clinician-rated (IDS-C(30)) contain a subscale that assesses anxious symptoms. We used classical test theory and item response theory methods to assess and compare the psychometric properties of the two anxiety subscales (HRSD(ANX) and IDS-C(ANX)) in a large sample (N = 3453) of outpatients with non-psychotic major depressive disorder in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR(star)D) study. Approximately 48% of evaluable participants had at least one concurrent anxiety disorder by the self-report Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire (PDSQ). The HRSD(ANX) and IDS-C(ANX) were highly correlated (r = 0.75) and both had moderate internal consistency given their limited number of items (HRSD(ANX) Cronbach's alpha = 0.48; IDS-C(ANX) Cronbach's alpha = 0.58). The optimal threshold for ascribing the presence/absence of anxious features was found at a total score of eight or nine for the HRSD(ANX) and seven or eight for the IDS-C(ANX). It would seem beneficial to delete item 17 (loss of insight) from the HRSD(ANX) as it negatively correlated with the scale's total score. Both the HRSD(ANX) and IDS-C(ANX) subscales have acceptable psychometric properties and can be used to identify anxious features for clinical or research purposes. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Little is known about the quantity or quality of residual depressive symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who have responded but not remitted with antidepressant treatment. This report describes the residual symptom domains and individual depressive symptoms in a large representative sample of outpatients with nonpsychotic MDD who responded without remitting after up to 12 weeks of citalopram treatment in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study. Response was defined as 50% or greater reduction in baseline 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) by treatment exit, and remission as a final QIDS-SR16 of less than 6. Residual symptom domains and individual symptoms were based on the QIDS-SR16 and classified as either persisting from baseline or emerging during treatment. Most responders who did not remit endorsed approximately 5 residual symptom domains and 6 to 7 residual depressive symptoms. The most common domains were insomnia (94.6%), sad mood (70.8%), and decreased concentration (69.6%). The most common individual symptoms were midnocturnal insomnia (79.0%), sad mood (70.8%), and decreased concentration/decision making (69.6%). The most common treatment-emergent symptoms were midnocturnal insomnia (51.4%) and decreased general interest (40.0%). The most common persistent symptoms were midnocturnal insomnia (81.6%), sad mood (70.8%), and decreased concentration/decision making (70.6%). Suicidal ideation was the least common treatment-emergent symptom (0.7%) and the least common persistent residual symptom (17.1%). These findings suggest that depressed outpatients who respond by 50% without remitting to citalopram treatment have a broad range of residual symptoms. Individualized treatments are warranted to specifically address each patient's residual depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVE:The investigators examined whether outcomes differ by race-ethnicity for patients with major depressive disorder in acute- (12 weeks) and continuation-phase (weeks 12-28) treatment with one of two antidepressant combinations or one selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.METHODS:This single-blind, seven-month prospective, randomized trial enrolled 352 non-Hispanic white (59%), 169 black (28%), and 79 white Hispanic (13%) participants from six primary and nine psychiatric care U.S. sites. Patients had nonpsychotic chronic or recurrent major depressive disorder (or both) of at least moderate severity. Escitalopram plus placebo, bupropion sustained-release plus escitalopram, or venlafaxine extended-release plus mirtazapine were delivered according to measurement-based care. The primary outcome was remission (last two consecutive 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report ratings <8 and <6); secondary outcomes included side effects, adverse events, quality of life, function, and attrition.RESULTS:Black participants had greater baseline psychiatric and medical comorbidity. Baseline depression severity did not significantly differ between groups. In both phases more blacks than those in other groups exited the trial early. There were only minor differences in side effects, no significant differences in remission rates, and no significant differences between groups in other outcomes for each treatment.CONCLUSIONS:Despite differences in sociodemographic characteristics and comorbidities, when measurement-based care was used, members of different minority groups had similar outcomes when treated with one antidepressant or a combination of two antidepressants. Black participants had the highest attrition rate, an important issue to address in clinical care.

Background: The clinical effects of antidepressant combinations vs. monotherapy as initial treatment for major depression with melancholic features (MDD-MF) are unknown.Methods: Outpatients with chronic or recurrent major depression (MDD) were randomized to initial treatment with escitalopram + placebo (the MONO condition), bupropion-sustained release + escitalopram, or venlafaxine-extended release + mirtazapine (the COMB conditions) in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial. Secondary data analyses were conducted to compare demographic and clinical characteristics, and contrast clinical responses according to drug treatment, in patients with MDD-MF (n = 124) and non-melancholic MDD (n =481).Results: While numerically lower, remission rates in MDD-MF did not differ significantly from those with non-melancholic MDD either at 12 (33.1% vs. 41.0%, aOR 1.16, p = 0.58) or 28 (39.5% vs. 46.8%, aOR = 1.02, p= 0.93) weeks of treatment. Remission rates did not differ significantly between combination and monotherapy groups in either MDD-MF or non-melancholic MDD patients at either time point. Similar conclusions were reached for response rates, premature study discontinuation, and self-rated depression symptom severity.Limitations: This is a secondary analysis of data from the CO-MED trial, which was not designed to address differential treatment response in melancholic and non-melancholic MDD.Conclusions: We found no evidence of differential remission or response rates to antidepressant combination or monotherapy between melancholic/non-melancholic MDD patients, or according to antidepressant treatment group, after 12 and 28 weeks. Melancholic features may not be a valid predictor of more favorable response to antidepressant combination therapy as initial treatment. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.