More people than ever are receiving support for mental health crises, and instances of suicide continue to grow. Mental health funding has recently increased, focusing on improving services that provide an alternative to emergency departments, such as urgent helplines and crisis cafés. However, there is a lack of literature examining the efficacy of these services, despite research suggesting they may be associated with lower hospital admission rates.

We aimed to evaluate the perspectives of people with lived experience of accessing a variety of mental health crisis services in the UK.

One-to-one interviews were conducted with 25 individuals as part of a qualitative grounded theory analysis.

The following themes were identified as important for recovery: more than a diagnosis (a need for person-centred care); instilling hope for the future (access to creative spaces and community); and a safe space for recovery (out-of-hours crisis cafés). Many have credited crisis cafés with saving their lives and felt there should be increased funding provided for collaboration between the National Health Service (NHS) and the third sector. Participants highlighted the need for interim support for those awaiting therapy via the NHS and continuity of care as key areas for improvement.

NHS services are struggling to meet the mental health needs of the population, resulting in lengthy waiting times for therapy and an over-reliance on the third sector. While crisis cafés are currently provided at a low cost and appear to result in satisfaction, policymakers must ensure they receive adequate funding and do not become overburdened.

Extant literature implicates the role of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) on modulating alcohol-associated behaviours, with a particular emphasis of these agents on neural circuits subserving reward and appetite control. Herein, we explore the potential effects of GLP-1RAs on alcohol-associated behaviours in brain regions implicated in reward processing facilitating the repurposing of these agents for the treatment and prevention of problematic drinking. Understanding how GLP-1’s analogues interact with alcohol-related behaviours may underscore the development of therapeutic strategies for alcohol use disorder (AUD) and those with comorbid metabolic disorders.

A systematic review was conducted, wherein relevant literature was identified through Web of Science, PubMed, and OVID (MedLINE, Embase, AMED, PsycInfo, JBI EBP) from database inception to October 27th, 2024. Preclinical and clinical studies examining the association between GLP-1RAs and alcohol-related behaviours were assessed.

Preclinical studies (n = 19) indicate that GLP-1RAs attenuate alcohol-related behaviours, with exenatide demonstrating significant dose-dependent effects in high alcohol-consuming phenotypes. Semaglutide and liraglutide are associated with reduced alcohol intake, though their effects were often transient. In human studies (n = 2) with AUD, semaglutide significantly reduced alcohol consumption, while exenatide showed mixed results, with reductions in alcohol drinking within high BMI subpopulations.

Extant preclinical and clinical literature provides preliminary support for the potential therapeutic role of GLP-1RAs in attenuating alcohol consumption and preference. There is a need for large well controlled studies evaluating the effect of GLP-1RAs as a treatment strategy for behavioural modifications in individuals living with alcohol use disorder.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) administration has been associated with neuroproliferative effects and modulatory effects in neuronal pathways. Herein, we conducted a comprehensive synthesis of the effects of GLP-1 and GLP-1 RAs on neurogenesis.

We examined studies that investigate changes in neurogenesis mediated by GLP-1 and GLP-1 RA administration in both human and animal populations. Relevant articles were retrieved through OVID (MedLine, Embase, AMED, PsychINFO, JBI EBP Database), PubMed, and Web of Science from database inception to July 2nd. Primary studies investigating the role of GLP-1 and GLP-1 RAs on neurogenesis were included for analysis.

GLP-1 and GLP-1 RAs (i.e. exenatide, geniposide, liraglutide, lixisenatide, and semaglutide), increased neurogenesis within the dentate gyrus, hippocampus, olfactory bulb, and the medial striatum in animal models. Additionally, GLP-1 and GLP-1 RAs were associated with modulating changes in multiple apoptotic pathways and upregulating survival pathways.

GLP-1 and GLP-1 RAs are positively associated with neurogenesis. This effect may have translational implications insofar as disparate mental disorders that are characterised by neurogenesis defects (e.g. depressive disorders and neurocognitive disorders) may be benefitted by these agents.

Esketamine nasal spray (ESK) is approved in combination with an oral antidepressant (OAD) for the treatment of adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD); however, direct comparisons with atypical antipsychotics for TRD are limited. This secondary analysis of the ESCAPE-TRD study compared rates of remission and response, and improvements in depressive symptoms over time, between ESK and quetiapine extended-release (XR) in patients with TRD treated in accordance with US prescribing information (USPI).

ESCAPE-TRD (NCT04338321) was a randomized, open-label, rater-blinded phase 3b trial investigating ESK versus quetiapine XR for acute and maintenance treatment of patients with TRD. This secondary analysis included patients aged 18–64 years who were treated/dosed according to USPI. The primary endpoint was remission, defined as Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≤ 10. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) leading to discontinuation were summarized descriptively.

Among 636 patients in this secondary analysis (ESK, n = 316; quetiapine XR, n = 320), significantly more ESK-treated patients achieved remission starting at week 8 (28.3% versus 18.6%; P = 0.005) through week 32 (55.7% versus 36.3%; P < 0.001), compared with quetiapine XR–treated patients. There were clinically and statistically significant improvements in MADRS scores with ESK versus quetiapine XR at each visit from day 8 onwards. Fewer patients discontinued treatment because of TEAEs with ESK (4.5%) versus quetiapine XR (10.1%).

Consistent with the primary analysis, this secondary analysis demonstrated that ESK improves short- and long-term outcomes compared with quetiapine XR in patients with TRD treated according to USPI.

Improving functioning in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) is a priority therapeutic objective.

This retrospective post hoc secondary analysis evaluated 108 patients with MDD or BD receiving the antidepressants vortioxetine, ketamine, or infliximab. The analysis aimed to determine if changes in objective or subjective cognitive function mediated the relationship between depression symptom severity and workplace outcomes. Cognitive function was measured by the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ-5), the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and the Trail Making Test Part B (TMT-B). Depression symptom severity was measured by the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Workplace function was measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) work–school item.

When co-varying for BMI, age, and sex, the association between MADRS and SDS work scores was partially mediated by PDQ-5 total scores and DSST total scores, but not DSST error scores and TMT-B time.

This study was insufficiently powered to perform sub-group analyses to identify distinctions between MDD and BD populations as well as between antidepressant agents.

These findings suggest that cognitive impairment in adults with MDD and BD is a critical mediator of workplace function and reinforces its importance as a therapeutic target.

Anhedonia characterizes major depressive episodes in bipolar depression and is associated with more severe illness/poor prognosis. These post hoc analyses assess effect of cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d on anhedonia symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression.

Data were pooled from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled bipolar I depression trials in cariprazine. Cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d versus placebo were evaluated in patient subgroups stratified by median baseline MADRS anhedonia score (higher anhedonia=score ≥19; lower anhedonia=score <19). Outcomes included mean change from baseline to week 6 in MADRS total and anhedonia factor score (sum of apparent sadness, reported sadness, concentration, lassitude, and inability to feel items). The proportion of patients with week 6 anhedonia factor response (≥50% improvement from baseline) was also determined. Changes from baseline were analyzed using a mixed-effect model for repeated measures.

There were 760 patients in the higher anhedonia subgroup (placebo=249, cariprazine: 1.5 mg/d=261; 3 mg/d=250) and 623 patients in the lower anhedonia subgroup (placebo=211, cariprazine: 1.5 mg/d=200; 3 mg/d=212). Mean baseline MADRS total score was higher in the higher anhedonia subgroup (total=33.6) than in the lower anhedonia subgroup (total=27.6). Change from baseline to week 6 in MADRS total score was greater for both cariprazine doses versus placebo in the higher anhedonia subgroup (least squares mean difference [LSMD] and 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5 mg/d=-3.01 [-4.84, -1.19], P=.0012; 3 mg/d: -3.26 [-5.12, -1.40], P=.0006); in the lower anhedonia subgroup, cariprazine 1.5 mg/d was statistically significant versus placebo (-2.61 [-4.28, -0.93], P=.0024). In the higher anhedonia subgroup at week 6, change from baseline in anhedonia factor score was significant versus placebo for both cariprazine doses (1.5 mg/d=-1.97 [-3.13, -0.81], P=.0009; 3 mg/d=-2.07 [-3.26, -0.89], P=.0006); in the lower subgroup, the difference was significant versus placebo for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d (-1.70 [-2.77, -0.62], P=.0021). After adjusting for changes in other depressive symptoms, LSMDs versus placebo in the anhedonia factor score remained significant for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d (-1.21 [-2.05, -0.36], P=.0052) and 3 mg/d (-1.00 [-1.86, -0.14], P=.0233) in the higher anhedonia subgroup, and for 1.5 mg/d (-1.06 [-1.92, -0.19], P=.0164) in the lower subgroup. In the higher anhedonia subgroup, rates of anhedonia factor response were greater versus placebo (31.7%) for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d (44.8%, P=.0028) and 3 mg/d (45.6%, P=.0019); in the lower subgroup, response rates were 39.3% for placebo, 48.0% for 1.5 mg/d, and 46.7% for 3 mg/d. Adverse events in ≥5% cariprazine and twice placebo were nausea, akathisia, restlessness, and EPS.

Those with bipolar depression and anhedonia cariprazine demonstrated a potent antidepressant and antianhedonic effect in higher/lower anhedonia subgroups.

AbbVie

This data was previously presented at the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Congress; Barcelona, Spain; October 7 – 10, 2023.

Anhedonia, a multidimensional domain including the reduced ability to experience pleasure, is a core diagnostic symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD) and a common residual symptom. In patients with MDD, anhedonia has been associated with poor treatment outcomes, suicide and reduced functioning and quality of life. This post-hoc analysis of data from a phase 3 trial (NCT03738215) evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive cariprazine (CAR) treatment on anhedonia symptoms in patients with MDD.

Patients with MDD and inadequate response to ongoing antidepressant therapy (ADT) were randomized to CAR 1.5 mg/d + ADT, CAR 3 mg/d + ADT, or placebo + ADT for 6 weeks of double-blind treatment. Post hoc analyses evaluated the change from baseline to Week 6 in Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, MADRS anhedonia subscale score (items: 1 [apparent sadness], 2 [reported sadness], 6 [concentration difficulties], 7 [lassitude], and 8 [inability to feel]), and MADRS anhedonia item 8 in the overall modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population and in subgroups of patients with baseline MADRS anhedonia item 8 score of ≥4 or baseline anhedonia subscale score of ≥18. Least square (LS) mean change from baseline to Week 6 was analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures.

There were 751 patients in the mITT population (CAR + ADT: 1.5 mg/d=250, 3 mg/d=252; placebo + ADT=249). At baseline, 508 (67.6%) patients had MADRS anhedonia item 8 scores ≥4, and 584 (77.8%) had MADRS anhedonia subscale scores ≥18. In the overall mITT population, LS mean change from baseline to Week 6 in anhedonia subscale score was significantly greater for CAR 1.5 mg/d + ADT (-8.4) and CAR 3 mg/d + ADT (-7.9) than for placebo + ADT (-6.8; both P<.05). The LS mean change from baseline in MADRS individual item 8 was also significantly greater for CAR 1.5 mg/d + ADT (-1.7) vs placebo + ADT (-1.3; P=.0085). In both subgroups of patients with baseline anhedonia, CAR 1.5 mg/d + ADT was associated with significantly greater reduction in MADRS total score, MADRS anhedonia subscale score, and MADRS item 8 score compared with placebo + ADT (all P<.05). In the CAR 3 mg/d + ADT group, significantly greater reductions vs placebo + ADT were observed for MADRS total score and MADRS anhedonia subscale score in the subgroup of patients with baseline anhedonia subscale scores ≥18 (both P<.05).

Adjunctive treatment with CAR was associated with a reduction in symptoms of anhedonia relative to adjunctive placebo in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT alone. In subgroups of patients with moderate-to-severe anhedonia at baseline, CAR + ADT demonstrated greater improvements than placebo + ADT in overall depressive symptoms and symptoms of anhedonia. These results suggest that adjunctive CAR treatment may be effective for improving symptoms of anhedonia in patients with MDD who have symptoms of anhedonia.

AbbVie