STAR*D: Revising conventional wisdom

被引:237
作者
Rush J.A. [1 ,2 ]
Warden D. [3 ]
Wisniewski S.R. [4 ]
Fava M. [5 ]
Trivedi M.H. [3 ]
Gaynes B.N. [6 ]
Nierenberg A.A. [5 ]
机构
[1] Departments of Clinical Sciences and Psychiatry, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
[2] Department of Clinical Sciences, Duke-National University of Singapore, Graduate Medical School, 169547 Singapore
[3] Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
[4] Epidemiology Data Center, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
[5] Depression Clinical and Research Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
[6] Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC
基金
美国医疗保健研究与质量局;
关键词
Mirtazapine; Buspirone; Cognitive Therapy; Interactive Voice Response; Tranylcypromine;
D O I
10.2165/00023210-200923080-00001
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The STAR*D (Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression) study used a series of sequenced, randomized treatment trials following a first and, if needed, subsequent treatment steps to define the tolerability and effectiveness of various options in both acute and longer term treatment. Adult outpatients (n=4041) with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder, substantial chronic and recurrent depression, and co-morbid psychiatric and general medical conditions were enrolled in 41 representative primary and specialty care settings. About one-third of participants remitted in first step treatment with citalopram, 50% of these within 6 weeks. Poorer outcomes were associated with minority status, socioeconomic disadvantage, more axis I and III co-morbid disorders, lower function and quality of life, and anxious and melancholic features. In step 2 medication switch, there were no significant differences in remission among within-class, out-of-class or dual-action agents: sertraline (27%), bupropion-sustained release (26%) and venlafaxine-extended release (25%). In step 2 medication augmentation of citalopram, there was no significant difference in remission between bupropion-sustained release (39%) and buspirone (33%), although participants using bupropion-sustained release had greater symptom reduction and better tolerability. There were no significant differences in remission in step 2 between cognitive therapy and medication treatment in either the switch (31% vs 27%) or augmentation (31% vs 33%) strategies, although participants in cognitive therapy augmentation had a longer time to remission than those in medication augmentation (55 vs 40 days). In step 3, there were no differences in remission between a switch to mirtazapine (8%) or nortriptyline (12%), or between augmentation with lithium (13%) or T3 (triiodothyronine, liothyronine) [25%], although more participants discontinued lithium due to adverse effects than discontinued T3. In the fourth step, there was no difference in remission between tranylcypromine (14%) or venlafaxine-extended release plus mirtazapine (16%), although the combination treatment had fewer adverse effects and had the advantages of not requiring a washout period or diet restrictions. Participants requiring more than two well delivered treatments may be characterized as treatment resistant given the substantially lower remission rates after that point. Treatment resistance was associated with more concurrent axis I or III co-morbid conditions, socioeconomic disadvantage, chronicity and melancholic or anxious features. However, if participants remained in treatment for up to four steps, about 67% reached remission. Times to remission were not substantially longer for later treatment steps. The importance of reaching remission is highlighted by the lower relapse rates in naturalistic follow-up for participants entering in remission compared with those entering with response but not remission (step 1: 34% vs 59%; step 2: 47% vs 68%; step 3: 42% vs 76%; step 4: 50% vs 83%). Clinical decision making based on the itemized measurement of symptoms and adverse effects at each treatment visit was feasible in STAR*Ds real world settings and resulted in adequate dosages and durations of treatment that generally exceeded those typically found in practice settings. Although switch and augmentation strategies could not be directly compared due to the equipoise stratified randomized design, the higher remission rates at step 2 with medication augmentation are intriguing and merit further study. © 2009 Adis Data Information BV.
引用
收藏
页码:627 / 647
页数:20
相关论文
共 92 条
  • [1] Kessler R.C., Berglund P., Demler O., Et al., The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R), JAMA, 289, 23, pp. 3095-3105, (2003)
  • [2] Lopez A.D., Murray C.C., The global burden of disease, 1990-2020, Nat Med, 4, 11, pp. 1241-1243, (1998)
  • [3] Kashner T.M., Rush A.J., Altshuler K.Z., Measuring costs of guideline-driven mental health care: The Texas Medication Algorithm Project, J Ment Health Policy Econ, 2, 3, pp. 111-121, (1999)
  • [4] Clinical practice guideline, number 5: Depression in primary care, Treatment of major depression, 2, (1993)
  • [5] Rush A.J., Kraemer H.C., Sackeim H.A., Et al., Report by the ACNP Task Force on Response and Remission in Major Depressive Disorder, Neuropsychopharmacology, 31, 9, pp. 1841-1853, (2006)
  • [6] Nierenberg A.A., McLean N.E., Alpert J.E., Et al., Early nonresponse to fluoxetine as a predictor of poor 8-week outcome, Am J Psychiatry, 152, pp. 1500-1503, (1995)
  • [7] Nierenberg A.A., Farabaugh A.H., Alpert J.E., Et al., Timing of onset of antidepressant response with fluoxetine treatment, Am J Psychiatry, 157, 9, pp. 1423-1428, (2000)
  • [8] Fava G.A., Tomba E., Grandi S., The road to recovery from depression: Don't drive today with yesterday's map, Psychother Psychosom, 76, 5, pp. 260-265, (2007)
  • [9] Fava M., Rush A.J., Trivedi M.H., Et al., Background and rationale for the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study, Psychiatr Clin North Am, 26, 2, pp. 457-494, (2003)
  • [10] Rush A.J., Fava M., Wisniewski S.R., Et al., Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D): Rationale and design, Control Clin Trials, 25, 1, pp. 119-142, (2004)