Background: The current analysis utilized data collected via an online patient community platform, PatientsLikeMe (PLM) to compare patient-reported experiences in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) with suicidal ideation (MDSI) to those with MDD but without suicidal ideation. Methods: PLM members who joined PLM between May-2007 and February-2018 and reported a diagnosis of MDD were included. The MDSI cohort included patients with MDD who reported at least one suicide-related symptom at a severity greater than "none". Demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, and side-effects were compared between MDSI and MDD cohorts. Factors correlated with suicidal ideation (SI) were determined by a random forest procedure. Results: Patients in the MDSI cohort (n = 266) were younger (median age, 36 vs 44 years) with an earlier disease onset (before 30 years, 83% vs 71%), and a longer diagnosis latency (median, 4 vs 2 years) vs patients in the MDD cohort (n = 11,963). Majority of patients were women in both cohorts (73% vs 83%). Median number of psychiatric comorbidities was higher in the MDSI cohort (4 vs 3). Unprompted symptoms (e.g., loneliness, feeling of hopelessness, social anxiety, impulsivity, and self-hating thoughts) were more frequent in the MDSI cohort. Hopelessness, loneliness, anhedonia, social anxiety, and younger age were highly correlated with suicidal ideation. Conclusions: This analysis utilized patient-reported data to better understand symptoms, experiences, and characteristics of patients with MDSI compared to patients with MDD. The results identified various risk factors correlated with suicidal ideation that may help guide clinical judgement for patients with MDD who may not voluntarily report suicidal ideation.

Background: Comorbid anxiety is generally associated with poorer response to antidepressant treatment. This post hoc analysis explored the efficacy of esketamine plus an antidepressant in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) with or without comorbid anxiety. Methods: TRANSFORM-2, a double-blind, flexible-dose, 4-week study (NCT02418585), randomized adults with TRD to placebo or esketamine nasal spray, each with a newlyinitiated oral antidepressant. Comorbid anxiety was defined as clinically noteworthy anxiety symptoms (7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD-7] score ≥10) at screening and baseline or comorbid anxiety disorder diagnosis at screening. Treatment effect based on change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, and response and remission were examined by presence/absence of comorbid anxiety using analysis of covariance and logistic regression models. Results: Approximately 72% (162/223) of patients had baseline comorbid anxiety. Esketamine-treated patients with and without anxiety demonstrated significant reductions in MADRS (mean [SD] change from baseline at day 28: −21.0 [12.51] and −22.7 [11.98], respectively). Higher rates of response and remission, and a significantly greater decrease in MADRS score at day 28 were observed compared to antidepressant/placebo, regardless of comorbid anxiety (with anxiety: difference in LS means [95% CI] −4.2 [−8.1, −0.3]; without anxiety: −7.5 [−13.7, −1.3]). There was no significant interaction of treatment and comorbid anxiety (p = .371). Notably, in the antidepressant/placebo group improvement was similar in those with and without comorbid anxiety. Conclusion: Post hoc data support efficacy of esketamine plus an oral antidepressant in patients with TRD, regardless of comorbid anxiety.

Background Esketamine nasal spray was recently approved for treatment-resistant depression. The current analysis evaluated the impact of symptom-based treatment frequency changes during esketamine treatment on clinical outcomes. Methods This is a post-hoc analysis of an open-label, long-term (up to 1 year) study of esketamine in patients with treatment-resistant depression (SUSTAIN 2). During a 4-week induction phase, 778 patients self-administered esketamine twice weekly plus a new oral antidepressant daily. In responders (≥50% reduction in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score from baseline), esketamine treatment frequency was thereafter decreased during an optimization/maintenance phase to weekly for 4 weeks and then adjusted to the lowest frequency (weekly or every other week) that maintained remission (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale ≤ 12) based on a study-defined algorithm. The relationship between treatment frequency and symptom response, based on clinically meaningful change in Clinical Global Impression–Severity score, was subsequently evaluated 4 weeks after treatment frequency adjustments in the optimization/maintenance phase. Results Among 580 responders treated with weekly esketamine for the first 4 weeks in the optimization/maintenance phase (per protocol), 26% continued to improve, 50% maintained clinical benefit, and 24% worsened. Thereafter, when treatment frequency could be reduced from weekly to every other week, 19% further improved, 49% maintained benefit, and 32% worsened. For patients no longer in remission after treatment frequency reduction, an increase (every other week to weekly) resulted in 47% improved, 43% remained unchanged, and 10% worsened. Conclusions These findings support individualization of esketamine nasal spray treatment frequency to optimize treatment response in real-world clinical practice. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02497287

No abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship of sleep disturbance to the antidepressant effects of esketamine. Materials and Methods: Two double-blind, 4-week studies randomized adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) to placebo or esketamine nasal spray, each with newly initiated antidepressant. Sleep was assessed using Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) item 4. Change in response (≥50% decrease in MADRS total score) and remission (total MADRS score ≤12) at day 28 was examined by presence/absence of baseline sleep disturbance using logistic regression models. Impact on reported sleep disturbance (MADRS item 4 score) was examined using ANCOVA models. Results: At baseline, most patients reported disturbed sleep -moderate/severe (65.3%, 369/ 565), mild (25.3%, 143/565), or none/slightly (9.4%, 53/565) -with similar distribution between treatment groups. A higher proportion of esketamine-treated patients achieved response (OR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.40-3.02; P < 0.001) and remission (OR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.23-2.66; P = 0.003) at day 28 compared to antidepressant plus placebo, regardless of presence/severity of sleep disturbance. Consistent with this, sleep (MADRS item 4 score) improved in both groups after the first dose, more so with esketamine by day 8 (betweengroup difference: P ≤ 0.02 at all time points). Across both treatment groups, 1-point improvement in sleep at day 8 increased the probability of antidepressant response on day 28 by 26% (OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.12-1.42; P < 0.001), and remission by 28% (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.14-1.43; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Antidepressant efficacy of esketamine was demonstrated in patients with TRD, regardless of the presence of sleep disturbance. After 8 days of treatment and thereafter, significantly more esketamine-treated patients reported improvement in sleep versus antidepressant plus placebo.