Skip to main content
To the Editor: Dr. Blier raises two important issues in response to our findings from the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) study: the lack of a double-blind structure and the dosing of antidepressants. We are unable to confirm whether the presence of a double-blind structure would have allowed us to achieve a much higher dosage for the antidepressants, but the indirect evidence from the higher adverse events in the two combination arms suggests that higher doses would have increased dropout rates in these two groups. It is conceivable that significantly higher doses of individual antidepressants could increase the rates of remission; however, some major issues need to be considered.
First, there are distinct differences in the treatment settings and participant population for the CO-MED study when comparing the results with Blier et al. (1); the CO-MED study was conducted in real-world primary and specialty care settings with minimal exclusion criteria (Tables 2 and 3 in our article [2]). For example, over 75% of the population had anxious depression, and unlike the Blier sample, which recruited around 75% with melancholic subtype of major depression disorder, less than 25% of CO-MED patients met criteria for the melancholic subtype. Furthermore, over 75% of CO-MED participants had at least one comorbid axis III disorder. Second, in the two combination arms of our study, a much higher rate of maximum side-effect burden (statistically higher for venlafaxine plus mirtazapine) was used when compared with monotherapy. Third, the daily doses of escitalopram, while slightly lower for those patients taking it in combination with bupropion (14.0 mg [SD=7.2] for single-blind escitalopram compared with 17.6 mg [SD=4.5] in the monotherapy arm), were not drastically different. Finally, while it is true that the Blier et al. study achieved slightly higher doses of mirtaza-pine and venlafaxine, the daily dose of fluoxetine was only 20 mg. The major difference in these findings stems from the fact that remission rates in the fluoxetine arm of the Blier et al. study were significantly lower (25%) relative to the sustained remission rates in the escitalopram monotherapy arm of the CO-MED trial (38.5%). In fact, Fava et al. (3, 4) have shown that increasing the daily dose of fluoxetine from 20 mg to 40–60 mg for partial responders or nonresponders further enhances response rates, indicating that the dosage of fluoxetine monotherapy in the Blier et al. study may have been suboptimal. In summary, while much higher daily doses of venlafaxine and mirtazapine may be theoretically interesting, it is difficult to argue in favor of its clinical utility in real-world clinical populations.

Footnote

Accepted for publication in October 2011.

References

1.
Blier P, Ward HE, Tremblay P, Laberge L, Hebert C, Bergeron R: Combination of antidepressant medications from treatment initiation for major depressive disorder: a double-blind randomized study. Am J Psychiatry 2010; 167:281–288
2.
Rush AJ, Trivedi MH, Stewart JW, Nierenberg AA, Fava M, Kurian BT, Warden D, Morris DW, Luther JF, Husain MM, Cook IA, Shelton RC, Lesser IM, Kornstein SG, Wisniewski SR: Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED): acute and long-term outcomes of a single-blind randomized study. Am J Psychiatry 2011; 168:689–701
3.
Fava M, Alpert J, Nierenberg A, Lagomasino I, Sonawalla S, Tedlow J, Worthington J, Baer L, Rosenbaum JF: 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; 22:379–387
4.
Fava M, Rosenbaum JF, McGrath PJ, Stewart JW, Amsterdam JD, Quitkin FM: Lithium and tricyclic augmentation of fluoxetine treatment for resistant major depression: a double-blind, controlled study. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151:1372–1374

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to American Journal of Psychiatry
Go to American Journal of Psychiatry
American Journal of Psychiatry
Pages: 95 - 96
PubMed: 22223012

History

Accepted: October 2011
Published online: 1 January 2012
Published in print: January 2012

Authors

Affiliations

Madhukar H. Trivedi, M.D.
A. John Rush, M.D.
Ben T. Kurian, M.D.
Andrew A. Nierenberg, M.D.
Stephen R. Wisniewski, Ph.D.
Maurizio Fava, M.D.

Funding Information

The authors' disclosures accompany the original article.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

There are no citations for this item

View Options

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub

Get Access

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login
Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - American Journal of Psychiatry

PPV Articles - American Journal of Psychiatry

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share