Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Recent data indicate that lithium use for bipolar disorder has declined over the last decade and that lithium largely has been replaced with alternate, commercially promoted medications that may or may not result in better outcomes. PURPOSE: This article describes the rationale and study design of LiTMUS, a multi-site, prospective, randomized clinical trial of outpatients with bipolar disorder. LiTMUS seeks to address whether initiating therapy at lower doses of lithium as part of optimized treatment (OPT, guideline-informed, evidence-based, and personalized pharmacotherapy) improves outcomes and decreases the need for other medication changes across 6 months of therapy. METHODS: LiTMUS will randomize 284 adults with bipolar disorder (Type I or II) across 6 study sites. The co-primary outcomes are overall illness severity on clinical global improvement scale for bipolar disorder and a novel measure, necessary clinical adjustments. This metric provides a composite that reflects both clinical response and tolerability. Other relevant outcomes include full symptomatic recovery, quality of life, suicidal behaviors, and moderators of suicidality. RESULTS: As of August 28th, 2009, we have consented 338 patients and randomized 281 for this study. LIMITATIONS: The potential limitations of the study include an arbitrary definition of 'low, but effective' doses of lithium, lack of a placebo-controlled group, open treatment, and use of a new outcome measure (i.e., necessary clinical adjustments). CONCLUSION: We expect that this study will inform our understanding of the effectiveness of low to moderate doses of lithium therapy for individuals with bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Post-stroke major depressive episode is very frequent, but underdiagnosed. Researchers have investigated major depressive episode symptomatology, which may increase its detection. This study was developed to identify the depressive symptoms that better differentiate post-stroke patients with major depressive episode from those without major depressive episode. METHOD: We screened 260 consecutive ischemic stroke patients admitted to the neurology clinic of a university hospital. Seventy-three patients were eligible and prospectively evaluated. We assessed the diagnosis of major depressive episode using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV and the profile of depressive symptoms using the 31-item version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. For data analysis we used cluster analyses and logistic regression equations. RESULTS: Twenty-one (28.8%) patients had a major depressive episode. The odds ratio of being diagnosed with major depressive episode was 3.86; (95% CI, 1.23-12.04) for an increase of one unit in the cluster composed by the domains of fatigue/interest and retardation, and 2.39 (95% CI, 1.21-4.71) for an increase of one unit in the cluster composed by the domains of cognitive, accessory and anxiety symptoms. The domains of eating/weight and insomnia did not contribute for the major depressive episode diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The domains of retardation and interest/fatigue are the most relevant for the diagnosis of major depressive episode after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Many subjects with bipolar disorder experience significant cognitive dysfunction, even when euthymic, but few studies assess biological correlates of or treatment strategies for cognitive dysfunction. METHOD: Nineteen subjects with bipolar disorder in remission, who reported subjective cognitive deficits, were treated with open-label galantamine-ER 8-24 mg/day for 4 months. Ten healthy volunteers matched for age and gender were also assessed. Mood and subjective cognitive questionnaires were administered monthly. At the beginning and the end of the trial all subjects were administered neuropsychological tests, including tests of attention (Conners CPT) and episodic memory (CVLT). Bipolar subjects underwent proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) measurements before and after treatment, healthy volunteers completed baseline 1H-MRS. We acquired 1H-MRS data at 4.0 T from voxels centered on the left and right hippocampus to measure hippocampal N-acetyl aspartate (NAA, a measure of neuronal viability) and choline containing compounds (Cho, a marker of lipid metabolism and membrane turn-over). RESULTS: Compared to healthy volunteers, bipolar subjects had higher baseline subjective cognitive deficits and lower scores on objective tests of attention (Conner's CPT) and verbal episodic memory (CVLT). After treatment, bipolar subjects experienced significant improvement of subjective cognitive scores and on objective tests of attention (Conner's CPT) and verbal episodic memory (CVLT). In the left hippocampus NAA increased and choline (Cho) decreased in bipolar subjects during treatment. CONCLUSION: Bipolar subjects had cognitive dysfunction; treatment with Galantamine-ER was associated with improved cognition and with increases in neuronal viability and normalization of lipid membrane metabolism in the left hippocampus. This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00181636).

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the recognition of depressive symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) by general practitioners. INTRODUCTION: MDD is underdiagnosed in medical settings, possibly because of difficulties in the recognition of specific depressive symptoms. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 316 outpatients at their first visit to a teaching general hospital. We evaluated the performance of 19 general practitioners using Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) to detect depressive symptoms and compared them to 11 psychiatrists using Structured Clinical Interview Axis I Disorders, Patient Version (SCID I/P). We measured likelihood ratios, sensitivity, specificity, and false positive and false negative frequencies. RESULTS: The lowest positive likelihood ratios were for psychomotor agitation/retardation (1.6) and fatigue (1.7), mostly because of a high rate of false positive results. The highest positive likelihood ratio was found for thoughts of suicide (8.5). The lowest sensitivity, 61.8%, was found for impaired concentration. The sensitivity for worthlessness or guilt in patients with medical illness was 67.2% (95% CI, 57.4-76.9%), which is significantly lower than that found in patients without medical illness, 91.3% (95% CI, 83.2-99.4%). DISCUSSION: Less adequately identified depressive symptoms were both psychological and somatic in nature. The presence of a medical illness may decrease the sensitivity of recognizing specific depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Programs for training physicians in the use of diagnostic tools should consider their performance in recognizing specific depressive symptoms. Such procedures could allow for the development of specific training to aid in the detection of the most misrecognized depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of frontal EEG as predictor of clinical response to SSRIs or venlafaxine in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: 82 subjects (age 35.9+/-13.0; 47.6% female) meeting DSM-IV criteria for MDD entered an 8-week prospective treatment with SSRIs or venlafaxine. At baseline and week 1 we recorded serial, 4-channel EEGs (F7-Fpz, F8-Fpz, A1-Fpz, A2-Fpz). We evaluated prospectively the relative theta power as predictor of treatment outcome. We also developed an Antidepressant Treatment Response (ATR) index using EEG parameters assessed at baseline and week 1. RESULTS: 45 subjects (54.9%) responded to treatment (HAM-D-17 reduction>or=50%). At baseline, frontal relative theta power (i.e., 4-8 Hz power/2-20 Hz power) was significantly (p=0.017) lower (21%) in treatment responders than in non-responders (24%). Baseline relative theta power predicted treatment response with 63% accuracy [64% sensitivity, 62% specificity, 66% area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) (p=0.014)]. Relative theta power at week 1 predicted treatment response with 60% accuracy [62% sensitivity, 57% specificity, 61% AUROC (p=0.089)]. ATR predicted response with 70% accuracy [82% sensitivity, 54% specificity, 72% AUROC (p=0.001)]. CONCLUSION: Using automated analysis of frontal EEG collected during the first week of antidepressant treatment it may be possible to facilitate prediction of SSRI or venlafaxine efficacy in MDD.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the treatment of depression in older patients with heart failure. This study was developed to investigate the effectiveness of antidepressant treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) in the elderly with heart failure. METHODS: We enrolled 72 older outpatients with ejection fraction <50 and diagnosed with MDD by the structured clinical interview for DSM-IV. Thirty-seven patients, 19 on citalopram and 18 on placebo, initiated an 8-week double-blind treatment phase. Measurements were performed with the 31-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (Ham-D-31), the Montgomery-Asberg rating scale (MADRS) and the Systematic Assessment for Treatment Emergent Effects (SAFTEE). A psychiatrist followed up the patients weekly, performing a consultation for about 20 min to field complaints after the measurements. RESULTS: A trend toward superiority of citalopram over placebo in reducing depression was observed in MADRS scores (15.05+9.74 vs 9.44+9.25, P=.082) but not on HAM-D scores. The depressive symptomatology significantly decreased in both groups (P < .001). The high rate of placebo response during the double-blind phase (56.3%) led us to conclude the study at the interim analysis with 37 patients. CONCLUSION: Citalopram treatment of MDD in older patients with heart failure is well-tolerated with low rates of side effects, but was not significantly more effective than placebo in the treatment of depression. Weekly psychiatric follow-up including counseling may contribute to the improvement of depression in this population. Scales weighted on psychological symptoms such as the MADRS are possibly better suited to measure depression severity and improvement in patients with heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: Major depressive disorder is characterized by impaired reward processing, possibly due to dysfunction in the basal ganglia. However, few neuroimaging studies of depression have distinguished between anticipatory and consummatory phases of reward processing. Using functional MRI (fMRI) and a task that dissociates anticipatory and consummatory phases of reward processing, the authors tested the hypothesis that individuals with major depression would show reduced reward-related responses in basal ganglia structures. METHOD: A monetary incentive delay task was presented to 30 unmedicated individuals with major depressive disorder and 31 healthy comparison subjects during fMRI scanning. Whole-brain analyses focused on neural responses to reward-predicting cues and rewarding outcomes (i.e., monetary gains). Secondary analyses focused on the relationship between anhedonic symptoms and basal ganglia volumes. RESULTS: Relative to comparison subjects, participants with major depression showed significantly weaker responses to gains in the left nucleus accumbens and the caudate bilaterally. Group differences in these regions were specific to rewarding outcomes and did not generalize to neutral or negative outcomes, although relatively reduced responses to monetary penalties in the major depression group emerged in other caudate regions. By contrast, evidence for group differences during reward anticipation was weaker, although participants with major depression showed reduced activation to reward cues in a small sector of the left posterior putamen. In the major depression group, anhedonic symptoms and depression severity were associated with reduced caudate volume bilaterally. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that basal ganglia dysfunction in major depression may affect the consummatory phase of reward processing. Additionally, morphometric results suggest that anhedonia in major depression is related to caudate volume.

BACKGROUND: We have recently developed the Massachusetts General Hospital Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (CPFQ), a brief scale to measure cognitive and executive dysfunction in mood and anxiety disorders, and we here report on its reliability and validity. METHODS: The internal consistency of the CPFQ was assessed by computing Cronbach's coefficient alpha based upon the average intercorrelation of the 7 items of the CPFQ in a sample of depressed outpatients and by factor analyzing data from the same sample to confirm that the scale is unifactorial and measuring a single construct. Test-retest reliability of the CPFQ was assessed in a different sample of depressed outpatients by computing Pearson's correlation coefficient between pretreatment screening scores and pretreatment baseline scores. Sensitivity to change of the CPFQ was assessed by computing the dependent t test for the subjects in the active treatment condition in the second sample of depressed outpatients. Finally, convergent validity for the CPFQ was assessed in two different ways. RESULTS: We found that the CPFQ is a unifactorial scale, with strong internal consistency. It has good temporal stability as indicated by high test-retest reliability. The CPFQ was also found to be sensitive to change with treatment and displayed convergent validity by significant correlations with other measures of sleepiness, fatigue, apathy and neuropsychological functioning. Although, as expected, the CPFQ was significantly correlated with a measure of depression, the moderate correlation (r approximately 0.30) indicates that the CPFQ is measuring a different construct. CONCLUSION: In summary, the CPFQ is a unifactorial scale, with strong internal consistency, good temporal stability and sensitivity to change with treatment. Further studies will be needed to assess the validity and reliability of this instrument in other psychiatric and neuropsychiatric conditions associated with cognitive dysfunction.

Objective: To investigate the presence of psychiatric disorders in patients with chest pain not responsive to treatment. Method: We evaluated 18 patients judged by their physicians to have a chest pain not responsive to usual treatment, which included anti-pain medicines and investigation and treatment of possible etiological causes such as coronary artery disease, and gastroesophageal reflux disease. A psychiatrist interviewed the patients using the Present State Examination and made the diagnosis based on the DSM-III-R criteria. Current major depression was diagnosed in 6 (30%) patients, somatization in 1 (6%) and panic disorder in 1 (6%) patient. Seven patients were receiving tricyclics antidepressant with doses &gt;= 75 mg/day. Discussion: Patients were receiving doses of tricyclics antidepressants efficacious for pain but not for major depression. It is possible that the low dose of antidepressants used to treat pain may partially ameliorate depressive symptoms, making the appropriate diagnosis and treatment of major depression even more difficult, consequently contributing to the persistence of pain and other complains. Considering the wide alternatives to effectively treat depression, a focus on detection and treatment of major depression in patients with chest pain is warranted by clinicians and researchers.