心衰患者随机抑郁试验中抑郁的轨迹分类:SADHART-CHF试验的再分析

Maragatha N. Kuchibhatla PhD , Gerda G. Fillenbaum PhD
{"title":"心衰患者随机抑郁试验中抑郁的轨迹分类:SADHART-CHF试验的再分析","authors":"Maragatha N. Kuchibhatla PhD ,&nbsp;Gerda G. Fillenbaum PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.09.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The objective of this article was to determine whether, in drug intervention trials, growth mixture modeling (GMM) is able to identify drug-responsive trajectory classes that are not evident in traditional growth modeling approaches.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We reanalyzed acute phase (biweekly data up to 7 occasions) and longitudinal (12 months) data on the 469 patients in the SADHART-CHF study of the safety and efficacy of sertraline for depression in patients with heart failure. GMM was used to identify the trajectory classes present in the treatment and placebo groups, based on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Two distinct trajectory classes were identified in the treatment group: (1) chronic depressives (12%), who remained depressed through the treatment phase; and (2) responders (88%), who had scores indicating nondepression at the conclusion of the acute phase. At baseline, chronic depressives were distinguished by higher Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, the presence of implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and a history of anxiety. During follow-up, they were more likely to have unstable angina. Only responders remitted (70%). Three distinct trajectories were identified in the placebo group: (1) moderating depressives (19%), (2) temporary improvers (13%), and (3) responders (68%). At baseline, the classes differed in mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, responders' scores falling between the other 2 classes, and the proportion with renal disease. Only remission differed at follow-up: responders (76%), moderating depressives (21%), and temporary improvers (3%). Where the traditional analytic approach found improvement from moderate to mild depression but no significant treatment effect, GMM found response in 20% more people in the treatment group than in the placebo group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Unlike conventionally used, standard analytic approaches, which focus on intervention impact at study end or change from baseline to study end, GMM enables maximum use of repeated data to identify unique trajectories of latent classes that are responsive to the intervention. <span>ClinicalTrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg> identifier: <span>NCT00078286</span><svg><path></path></svg>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50811,"journal":{"name":"American Journal Geriatric Pharmacotherapy","volume":"9 6","pages":"Pages 483-494"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.09.001","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trajectory Classes of Depression in a Randomized Depression Trial of Heart Failure Patients: A Reanalysis of the SADHART-CHF Trial\",\"authors\":\"Maragatha N. Kuchibhatla PhD ,&nbsp;Gerda G. Fillenbaum PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.09.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The objective of this article was to determine whether, in drug intervention trials, growth mixture modeling (GMM) is able to identify drug-responsive trajectory classes that are not evident in traditional growth modeling approaches.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We reanalyzed acute phase (biweekly data up to 7 occasions) and longitudinal (12 months) data on the 469 patients in the SADHART-CHF study of the safety and efficacy of sertraline for depression in patients with heart failure. GMM was used to identify the trajectory classes present in the treatment and placebo groups, based on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Two distinct trajectory classes were identified in the treatment group: (1) chronic depressives (12%), who remained depressed through the treatment phase; and (2) responders (88%), who had scores indicating nondepression at the conclusion of the acute phase. At baseline, chronic depressives were distinguished by higher Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, the presence of implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and a history of anxiety. During follow-up, they were more likely to have unstable angina. Only responders remitted (70%). Three distinct trajectories were identified in the placebo group: (1) moderating depressives (19%), (2) temporary improvers (13%), and (3) responders (68%). At baseline, the classes differed in mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, responders' scores falling between the other 2 classes, and the proportion with renal disease. Only remission differed at follow-up: responders (76%), moderating depressives (21%), and temporary improvers (3%). Where the traditional analytic approach found improvement from moderate to mild depression but no significant treatment effect, GMM found response in 20% more people in the treatment group than in the placebo group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Unlike conventionally used, standard analytic approaches, which focus on intervention impact at study end or change from baseline to study end, GMM enables maximum use of repeated data to identify unique trajectories of latent classes that are responsive to the intervention. <span>ClinicalTrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg> identifier: <span>NCT00078286</span><svg><path></path></svg>.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal Geriatric Pharmacotherapy\",\"volume\":\"9 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 483-494\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.09.001\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal Geriatric Pharmacotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1543594611001449\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal Geriatric Pharmacotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1543594611001449","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

本文的目的是确定在药物干预试验中,生长混合物模型(GMM)是否能够识别传统生长模型方法中不明显的药物反应轨迹类别。方法:我们重新分析了SADHART-CHF研究中469例患者的急性期(最多7次)和纵向(12个月)数据,以研究舍曲林治疗心力衰竭患者抑郁的安全性和有效性。基于汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表得分,GMM用于确定治疗组和安慰剂组中存在的轨迹类别。结果治疗组有两个明显的轨迹类别:(1)慢性抑郁症患者(12%),在整个治疗阶段仍保持抑郁状态;(2)有反应者(88%),他们在急性期结束时得分表明无抑郁。在基线时,慢性抑郁症的特点是汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表得分较高,存在植入式心律转复除颤器,并有焦虑史。在随访期间,他们更有可能患有不稳定型心绞痛。只有应答者回复(70%)。在安慰剂组中确定了三个不同的轨迹:(1)抑郁症缓解(19%),(2)暂时改善(13%),(3)缓解(68%)。基线时,两类患者的汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表平均得分不同,应答者的得分介于其他两类之间,肾病患者的比例也不同。只有缓解在随访中有所不同:反应者(76%),抑郁缓和者(21%)和暂时改善者(3%)。传统的分析方法发现从中度到轻度抑郁症有所改善,但没有显著的治疗效果,GMM发现治疗组的反应比安慰剂组多20%。与传统使用的标准分析方法不同,GMM侧重于研究结束时的干预影响或从基线到研究结束的变化,它可以最大限度地利用重复数据来确定对干预有反应的潜在类别的独特轨迹。ClinicalTrials.gov识别码:NCT00078286。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trajectory Classes of Depression in a Randomized Depression Trial of Heart Failure Patients: A Reanalysis of the SADHART-CHF Trial

Objective

The objective of this article was to determine whether, in drug intervention trials, growth mixture modeling (GMM) is able to identify drug-responsive trajectory classes that are not evident in traditional growth modeling approaches.

Methods

We reanalyzed acute phase (biweekly data up to 7 occasions) and longitudinal (12 months) data on the 469 patients in the SADHART-CHF study of the safety and efficacy of sertraline for depression in patients with heart failure. GMM was used to identify the trajectory classes present in the treatment and placebo groups, based on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores.

Results

Two distinct trajectory classes were identified in the treatment group: (1) chronic depressives (12%), who remained depressed through the treatment phase; and (2) responders (88%), who had scores indicating nondepression at the conclusion of the acute phase. At baseline, chronic depressives were distinguished by higher Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, the presence of implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and a history of anxiety. During follow-up, they were more likely to have unstable angina. Only responders remitted (70%). Three distinct trajectories were identified in the placebo group: (1) moderating depressives (19%), (2) temporary improvers (13%), and (3) responders (68%). At baseline, the classes differed in mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, responders' scores falling between the other 2 classes, and the proportion with renal disease. Only remission differed at follow-up: responders (76%), moderating depressives (21%), and temporary improvers (3%). Where the traditional analytic approach found improvement from moderate to mild depression but no significant treatment effect, GMM found response in 20% more people in the treatment group than in the placebo group.

Conclusions

Unlike conventionally used, standard analytic approaches, which focus on intervention impact at study end or change from baseline to study end, GMM enables maximum use of repeated data to identify unique trajectories of latent classes that are responsive to the intervention. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00078286.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal Geriatric Pharmacotherapy
American Journal Geriatric Pharmacotherapy GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信