England's primary care service for psychological therapy (Improving Access to Psychological Therapies [IAPT]) treats anxiety and depression, with a target recovery rate of 50%. Identifying the characteristics of patients who achieve recovery may assist in optimizing future treatment. This naturalistic cohort study investigated pre-therapy characteristics as predictors of recovery and improvement after IAPT therapy.

In a cohort of patients attending an IAPT service in South London, we recruited 263 participants and conducted a baseline interview to gather extensive pre-therapy characteristics. Bayesian prediction models and variable selection were used to identify baseline variables prognostic of good clinical outcomes. Recovery (primary outcome) was defined using (IAPT) service-defined score thresholds for both depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]) and anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder [GAD-7]). Depression and anxiety outcomes were also evaluated as standalone (PHQ-9/GAD-7) scores after therapy. Prediction model performance metrics were estimated using cross-validation.

Predictor variables explained 26% (recovery), 37% (depression), and 31% (anxiety) of the variance in outcomes, respectively. Variables prognostic of recovery were lower pre-treatment depression severity and not meeting criteria for obsessive compulsive disorder. Post-therapy depression and anxiety severity scores were predicted by lower symptom severity and higher ratings of health-related quality of life (EuroQol questionnaire [EQ5D]) at baseline.

Almost a third of the variance in clinical outcomes was explained by pre-treatment symptom severity scores. These constructs benefit from being rapidly accessible in healthcare services. If replicated in external samples, the early identification of patients who are less likely to recover may facilitate earlier triage to alternative interventions.

Despite considerable preclinical evidence, clinical trials assessing the effects of probiotics on individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) are scarce. This study aimed to provide further evidence of the acceptability, tolerability and putative efficacy of probiotics in this patient group and to improve our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of action.

This double-blind randomised placebo-controlled pilot and mechanistic trial investigated the effects of an 8-week adjunctive multi-strain probiotic intervention in adults with MDD taking antidepressants. Psychiatric data and stool and blood samples were collected at baseline, week 4 and week 8. A computer-based emotion recognition task was also administered. Stool samples from 25 matched healthy controls were also obtained.

49 participants, randomised to probiotic (n = 24) or placebo (n = 25), were included in intent-to-treat analyses. Standardised effect sizes (SES) from linear mixed models demonstrated that the probiotic group attained greater improvements in depressive (HAMD week 4: SES [95%CI] = 0.70[0.01, 0.98]; IDS week 8: SES [95%CI] = 0.64 [0.03, 0.87]) and anxiety symptoms (HAMA week 4: SES [95%CI] = 0.67 [0.00, 0.95]; week 8: SES [95%CI] = 0.79 [0.06, 1.05]), compared to the placebo group. Attrition was 8% (n = 3 placebo, n = 1 probiotic), adherence was 97.2% and there were no serious adverse reactions. The probiotic modified the composition of the faecal microbiota by normalising richness and diversity towards healthy control levels. The probiotic also increased levels of specific taxa, including Bacillaceae (FDR p < 0.05), which correlated with reductions in anxiety scores (FDR p < 0.05). There was no impact of treatment on levels of inflammatory cytokines (CRP, TNFα, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-17) or BDNF. However, probiotics showed a tendency to increase positive affective bias and improved the accuracy of recognition of all emotions, except sadness.

Compared to placebo, the probiotic group had greater improvement in depressive and anxiety scores, from as early as 4 weeks. The acceptability, tolerability and estimated effect sizes on key clinical outcomes are promising and encourage further investigation of this probiotic as add-on treatment in MDD. The beneficial effects of probiotics in this patient group may be partially mediated by modification of the composition of the gut microbiota and improvement of affective biases, inherent to depressive disorders.

Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) is a primary care therapy service commissioned by England's National Health Service (NHS) for people with unipolar depression and anxiety-related disorders. Its scope does not extend to ‘severe mental illness’, including bipolar disorders (BD), but evidence suggests there is a high BD prevalence in ostensibly unipolar major depressive disorder (uMDD) samples. This study aimed to indicate the prevalence and characteristics of people with BD in a naturalistic cohort of IAPT patients.

371 participants were assessed before initiating therapy. Participants were categorised by indicated diagnoses: BD type-I (BD-I) or type-II (BD-II) as defined using a DSM diagnostic interview, bipolar spectrum (BSp, not meeting diagnostic criteria but exceeding BD screening thresholds), lifetime uMDD or other. Information about psychiatric history and co-morbidities was examined, along with symptoms before and after therapy.

368 patients provided sufficient data to enable classification. 10% of participants were grouped as having BD-I, 20% BD-II, 40% BSp, 25% uMDD and 5% other. BD and uMDD participants had similar demographic characteristics, but patients meeting criteria for BD-I/BD-II had more complex psychiatric presentations. All three ‘bipolar’ groups had particularly high rates of anxiety disorders. IAPT therapy receipt was comparable between groups, as was therapy response (F9704 = 1.113, p = 0.351).

Notwithstanding the possibility that bipolar diathesis was overestimated, findings illustrate a high prevalence of BD in groups of people notionally with uMDD or anxiety. As well as improving the detection of BD, further substantive investigation is required to establish whether individuals affected by BD should be eligible for primary care psychological intervention.

Overgeneralised self-blame and worthlessness are key symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) and have previously been associated with self-blame-selective changes in connectivity between right superior anterior temporal lobe (rSATL) and subgenual frontal cortices. Another study showed that remitted MDD patients were able to modulate this neural signature using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) neurofeedback training, thereby increasing their self-esteem. The feasibility and potential of using this approach in symptomatic MDD were unknown.

This single-blind pre-registered randomised controlled pilot trial probed a novel self-guided psychological intervention with and without additional rSATL-posterior subgenual cortex (BA25) fMRI neurofeedback, targeting self-blaming emotions in people with insufficiently recovered MDD and early treatment-resistance (n = 43, n = 35 completers). Participants completed three weekly self-guided sessions to rebalance self-blaming biases.

As predicted, neurofeedback led to a training-induced reduction in rSATL-BA25 connectivity for self-blame v. other-blame. Both interventions were safe and resulted in a 46% reduction on the Beck Depression Inventory-II, our primary outcome, with no group differences. Secondary analyses, however, revealed that patients without DSM-5-defined anxious distress showed a superior response to neurofeedback compared with the psychological intervention, and the opposite pattern in anxious MDD. As predicted, symptom remission was associated with increases in self-esteem and this correlated with the frequency with which participants employed the psychological strategies in daily life.

These findings suggest that self-blame-rebalance neurofeedback may be superior over a solely psychological intervention in non-anxious MDD, although further confirmatory studies are needed. Simple self-guided strategies tackling self-blame were beneficial, but need to be compared against treatment-as-usual in further trials. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN10526888

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is classically defined according to the number of suboptimal antidepressant responses experienced, but multidimensional assessments of TRD are emerging and may confer some advantages. Patient characteristics have been identified as risk factors for TRD but may also be associated with TRD severity. The identification of individuals at risk of severe TRD would support appropriate prioritisation of intensive and specialist treatments.

To determine whether TRD risk factors are associated with TRD severity when assessed multidimensionally using the Maudsley Staging Method (MSM), and univariately as the number of antidepressant non-responses, across three cohorts of individuals with depression.

Three cohorts of individuals without significant TRD, with established TRD and with severe TRD, were assessed (n = 528). Preselected characteristics were included in linear regressions to determine their association with each outcome.

Participants with more severe TRD according to the MSM had a lower age at onset, fewer depressive episodes and more physical comorbidities. These associations were not consistent across cohorts. The number of episodes was associated with the number of antidepressant treatment failures, but the direction of association varied across the cohorts studied.

Several risk factors for TRD were associated with the severity of resistance according to the MSM. Fewer were associated with the raw number of inadequate antidepressant responses. Multidimensional definitions may be more useful for identifying patients at risk of severe TRD. The inconsistency of associations across cohorts has potential implications for the characterisation of TRD.

Individuals with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) experience a high burden of illness. Current guidelines recommend a stepped care approach for treating depression, but the extent to which best-practice care pathways are adhered to is unclear.

To explore the extent and nature of ‘treatment gaps’ (non-adherence to stepped care pathways) experienced by a sample of patients with established TRD (non-response to two or more adequate treatments in the current depressive episode) across three cities in the UK.

Five treatment gaps were considered and compared with guidelines, in a cross-sectional retrospective analysis: delay to receiving treatment, lack of access to psychological therapies, delays to medication changes, delays to adjunctive (pharmacological augmentation) treatment and lack of access to secondary care. We additionally explored participant characteristics associated with the extent of treatment gaps experienced.

Of 178 patients with TRD, 47% had been in the current depressive episode for >1 year before initiating antidepressants; 53% had received adequate psychological therapy. A total of 47 and 51% had remained on an unsuccessful first and second antidepressant trial respectively for >16 weeks, and 24 and 27% for >1 year before medication switch, respectively. Further, 54% had tried three or more antidepressant medications within their episode, and only 11% had received adjunctive treatment.

There appears to be a considerable difference between treatment guidelines for depression and the reality of care received by people with TRD. Future research examining representative samples of patients could determine recommendations for optimising care pathways, and ultimately outcomes, for individuals with this illness.

In-patients on mental health wards are commonly prescribed hypnotics for the long-term management of disturbed sleep. Specific sleep disorders remain underdiagnosed and effective behavioural interventions are underused. We developed a suite of three educational interventions (a video, poster and handbook) about sleep, sleep disorders, the safe prescribing of hypnotics and use of psychological strategies (sleep hygiene and cognitive–behavioural therapy for insomnia, CBTi) using co-design and multiprofessional stakeholder involvement. This controlled before-and-after study evaluated the effectiveness of these interventions across seven in-patient psychiatric wards, examining their impact on hypnotic prescribing rates and staff confidence scores (data collected by retrospective drug chart analysis and survey respectively).

A marked reduction was seen in the percentage of patients prescribed hypnotics on in-patient prescription charts (−24%), with a 41% reduction in the number of hypnotics administered per patient (mean reduction −1.142 administrations/patient).

These simple educational strategies about the causes and treatment of insomnia can reduce hypnotic prescribing rates and increase staff confidence in both the medical and psychological management of insomnia.

Major depressive episodes (MDEs) show diverse cortisol level alterations. Heterogeneity in symptom profiles, symptom severity and cortisol specimens may explain these heterogeneous results. Less severely ill out-patients with a non-melancholic MDE (NM-MDE) may have a variation in the rhythm of cortisol secretion rather than in its concentration.

Cortisol measures were taken (a) over a short-term period (12 h) by measuring daily salivary output using the area under the curve with respect to the ground (AUCg) and (b) over a long-term period (3 months) in hair. Additionally, cortisol reactivity measures in saliva – the cortisol awakening response and the 30 min delta cortisol secretion after awakening (DELTA) – were investigated in 19 patients with a melancholic MDE (M-MDE) and 52 with a NM-MDE, and in 40 matched controls who were recruited from the UK and Chile. Depression severity scores were correlated with different cortisol measures.

The NM-MDE group showed a decreased AUCg in comparison with controls (P = 0.02), but normal cortisol reactivity and long-term cortisol levels. The M-MDE group did not exhibit any significant cortisol alterations nor an association with depression severity scores. Higher Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score was linked with decreased hair cortisol concentration (HCC, P = 0.05) and higher DELTA (P = 0.04) in NM-MDEs, whereas decreased HCC was the sole alteration associated with out-patients with severe M-MDEs.

The contrasting short- and long-term cortisol output results are compatible with an alteration in the rhythm of cortisol secretion in NM-MDEs. This alteration may consist of large and/or intense episodes of hypercortisolaemia in moderate NM-MDEs and frequent, but brief and sharp early-morning DELTAs in its severe form. These changes may reflect the effects of environmental factors or episodes of nocturnal hypercortisolaemia that were not measured by the short-term samples used in this study.

Childhood maltreatment is one of the strongest predictors of adulthood depression and alterations to circulating levels of inflammatory markers is one putative mechanism mediating risk or resilience.

To determine the effects of childhood maltreatment on circulating levels of 41 inflammatory markers in healthy individuals and those with a major depressive disorder (MDD) diagnosis.

We investigated the association of childhood maltreatment with levels of 41 inflammatory markers in two groups, 164 patients with MDD and 301 controls, using multiplex electrochemiluminescence methods applied to blood serum.

Childhood maltreatment was not associated with altered inflammatory markers in either group after multiple testing correction. Body mass index (BMI) exerted strong effects on interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein levels in those with MDD.

Childhood maltreatment did not exert effects on inflammatory marker levels in either the participants with MDD or the control group in our study. Our results instead highlight the more pertinent influence of BMI.

D.A.C. and H.W. work for Eli Lilly Inc. R.N. has received speaker fees from Sunovion, Jansen and Lundbeck. G.B. has received consultancy fees and funding from Eli Lilly. R.H.M.-W. has received consultancy fees or has a financial relationship with AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cyberonics, Eli Lilly, Ferrer, Janssen-Cilag, Lundbeck, MyTomorrows, Otsuka, Pfizer, Pulse, Roche, Servier, SPIMACO and Sunovian. I.M.A. has received consultancy fees or has a financial relationship with Alkermes, Lundbeck, Lundbeck/Otsuka, and Servier. S.W. has sat on an advisory board for Sunovion, Allergan and has received speaker fees from Astra Zeneca. A.H.Y. has received honoraria for speaking from Astra Zeneca, Lundbeck, Eli Lilly, Sunovion; honoraria for consulting from Allergan, Livanova and Lundbeck, Sunovion, Janssen; and research grant support from Janssen. A.J.C. has received honoraria for speaking from Astra Zeneca, honoraria for consulting with Allergan, Livanova and Lundbeck and research grant support from Lundbeck.

Most people with bipolar disorder spend a significant percentage of their lifetime experiencing either subsyndromal depressive symptoms or major depressive episodes, which contribute greatly to the high levels of disability and mortality associated with the disorder. Despite the importance of bipolar depression, there are only a small number of recognised treatment options available. Consecutive treatment failures can quickly exhaust these options leading to treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD). Remarkably few studies have evaluated TRBD and those available lack a comprehensive definition of multi-therapy-resistant bipolar depression (MTRBD).

To reach consensus regarding threshold definitions criteria for TRBD and MTRBD.

Based on the evidence of standard treatments available in the latest bipolar disorder treatment guidelines, TRBD and MTRBD criteria were agreed by a representative panel of bipolar disorder experts using a modified Delphi method.

TRBD criteria in bipolar depression was defined as failure to reach sustained symptomatic remission for 8 consecutive weeks after two different treatment trials, at adequate therapeutic doses, with at least two recommended monotherapy treatments or at least one monotherapy treatment and another combination treatment. MTRBD included the same initial definition as TRBD, with the addition of failure of at least one trial with an antidepressant, a psychological treatment and a course of electroconvulsive therapy.

The proposed TRBD and MTRBD criteria may provide an important signpost to help clinicians, researchers and stakeholders in judging how and when to consider new non-standard treatments. However, some challenging diagnostic and therapeutic issues were identified in the consensus process that need further evaluation and research.

In the past 3 years, M.B. has received grant/research support from the NIH, Cooperative Research Centre, Simons Autism Foundation, Cancer Council of Victoria, Stanley Medical Research Foundation, MBF, NHMRC, Beyond Blue, Rotary Health, Geelong Medical Research Foundation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Glaxo SmithKline, Meat and Livestock Board, Organon, Novartis, Mayne Pharma, Servier, Woolworths, Avant and the Harry Windsor Foundation, has been a speaker for Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Glaxo SmithKline, Janssen Cilag, Lundbeck, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Synthelabo, Servier, Solvay and Wyeth and served as a consultant to Allergan, Astra Zeneca, Bioadvantex, Bionomics, Collaborative Medicinal Development, Eli Lilly, Grunbiotics, Glaxo SmithKline, Janssen Cilag, LivaNova, Lundbeck, Merck, Mylan, Otsuka, Pfizer and Servier. A.J.C. has in the past 3 years received honoraria for speaking from Astra Zeneca and Lundbeck, honoraria for consulting from Allergan, Janssen, Lundbeck and LivaNova and research grant support from Lundbeck. G.M.G. holds shares in P1Vital and has served as consultant, advisor or CME speaker for Allergan, Angelini, Compass pathways, MSD, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Takeda, Medscape, Minervra, P1Vital, Pfizer, Servier, Shire and Sun Pharma. J.G. has received research funding from National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Stanley Medical Research Institute and Wellcome. H.G. received grants/research support, consulting fees or honoraria from Gedeon Richter, Genericon, Janssen Cilag, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Pfizer and Servier. R.H.M.-W. has received support for research, expenses to attend conferences and fees for lecturing and consultancy work (including attending advisory boards) from various pharmaceutical companies including Astra Zeneca, Cyberonics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Liva Nova, Lundbeck, MyTomorrows, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, SPIMACO and Sunovion. R.M. has received research support from Big White Wall, Electromedical Products, Johnson and Johnson, Magstim and P1Vital. S.N. received honoraria from Lundbeck, Jensen and Otsuka. J.C.S. has received funds for research from Alkermes, Pfizer, Allergan, J&J, BMS and been a speaker or consultant for Astellas, Abbott, Sunovion, Sanofi. S.W has, within the past 3 years, attended advisory boards for Sunovion and LivaNova and has undertaken paid lectures for Lundbeck. D.J.S. has received honoraria from Lundbeck. T.S. has reported grants from Pathway Genomics, Stanley Medical Research Institute and Palo Alto Health Sciences; consulting fees from Sunovion Pharamaceuticals Inc.; honoraria from Medscape Education, Global Medical Education and CMEology; and royalties from Jones and Bartlett, UpToDate and Hogrefe Publishing. S.P. has served as a consultant or speaker for Janssen, and Sunovion. P.T. has received consultancy fees as an advisory board member from the following companies: Galen Limited, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd, myTomorrows and LivaNova. E.V. received grants/ research support, consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, AB-Biotics, Allergan, Angelini, Dainippon Sumitomo, Ferrer, Gedeon Richter, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka and Sunovion. L.N.Y. has received grants/research support, consulting fees or honoraria from Allergan, Alkermes, Dainippon Sumitomo, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Sanofi, Servier, Sunovion, Teva and Valeant. A.H.Y. has undertaken paid lectures and advisory boards for all major pharmaceutical companies with drugs used in affective and related disorders and LivaNova. He has also previously received funding for investigator-initiated studies from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck and Wyeth. P.R.A.S. has received research funding support from Corcept Therapeutics Inc. Corcept Therapeutics Inc fully funded attendance at their internal conference in California USA and all related expenses. He has received grant funding from the Medical Research Council UK for a collaborative study with Janssen Research and Development LLC. Janssen Research and Development LLC are providing non-financial contributions to support this study. P.R.A.S. has received a presentation fee from Indivior and an advisory board fee from LivaNova.

Depression is considered to have the highest disability burden of all conditions. Although treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is a key contributor to that burden, there is little understanding of the best treatment approaches for it and specifically the effectiveness of available augmentation approaches.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to search and quantify the evidence of psychological and pharmacological augmentation interventions for TRD.

Participants with TRD (defined as insufficient response to at least two antidepressants) were randomised to at least one augmentation treatment in the trial. Pre-post analysis assessed treatment effectiveness, providing an effect size (ES) independent of comparator interventions.

Of 28 trials, 3 investigated psychological treatments and 25 examined pharmacological interventions. Pre-post analyses demonstrated N-methyl-d-aspartate-targeting drugs to have the highest ES (ES = 1.48, 95% CI 1.25–1.71). Other than aripiprazole (four studies, ES = 1.33, 95% CI 1.23–1.44) and lithium (three studies, ES = 1.00, 95% CI 0.81–1.20), treatments were each investigated in less than three studies. Overall, pharmacological (ES = 1.19, 95% CI 1.08–1.30) and psychological (ES = 1.43, 95% CI 0.50–2.36) therapies yielded higher ESs than pill placebo (ES = 0.78, 95% CI 0.66–0.91) and psychological control (ES = 0.94, 95% CI 0.36–1.52).

Despite being used widely in clinical practice, the evidence for augmentation treatments in TRD is sparse. Although pre-post meta-analyses are limited by the absence of direct comparison, this work finds promising evidence across treatment modalities.

In the past 3 years, A.H.Y. received honoraria for speaking from AstraZeneca, Lundbeck, Eli Lilly and Sunovion; honoraria for consulting from Allergan, Livanova and Lundbeck, Sunovion and Janssen; and research grant support from Janssen. In the past 3 years, A.J.C. received honoraria for speaking from AstraZeneca and Lundbeck; honoraria for consulting with Allergan, Janssen, Livanova, Lundbeck and Sandoz; support for conference attendance from Janssen; and research grant support from Lundbeck. B.B. has recently been (soon to be) on the speakers/advisory board for Hexal, Lilly, Lundbeck, Mundipharma, Pfizer, and Servier. No other conflicts of interest.