Anna L Wrobel's research while affiliated with Deakin University and other places

Background There are no approved pharmacotherapies for methamphetamine use disorder. Two preliminary phase 2 randomised controlled trials have found mirtazapine, a tetracyclic antidepressant, to be effective in reducing methamphetamine use. The proposed Tina Trial is the first phase 3 placebo-controlled randomised trial to examine the effectiveness and safety of mirtazapine as an outpatient pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder. Methods This is a multi-site phase 3 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel trial. Participants are randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either mirtazapine (30 mg/day for 12 weeks) or matched placebo, delivered as a take-home medication. The target population is 340 people aged 18–65 years who have moderate to severe methamphetamine use disorder. The trial is being conducted through outpatient alcohol and other drug treatment clinics in Australia. The primary outcome is measured as self-reported days of methamphetamine use in the past 4 weeks at week 12. Secondary outcomes are methamphetamine-negative oral fluid samples, depressive symptoms, sleep quality, HIV risk behaviour and quality of life. Other outcomes include safety (adverse events), tolerability, and health service use. Medication adherence is being monitored using MEMS® Smart Caps fitted to medication bottles. Discussion This trial will provide information on the safety and effectiveness of mirtazapine as a pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder when delivered as an outpatient medication in routine clinical practice. If found to be safe and effective, this trial will support an application for methamphetamine use disorder to be included as a therapeutic indication for the prescription of mirtazapine. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622000235707. Registered on February 9, 2022.

Background There are no approved pharmacotherapies for methamphetamine use disorder. Two preliminary phase 2 randomised controlled trials have found mirtazapine, a tetracyclic antidepressant, to be effective in reducing methamphetamine use. The proposed Tina Trial is the first phase 3 placebo controlled randomised trial to examine the effectiveness and safety of mirtazapine as an outpatient pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder. Methods This is a multi-site phase 3 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel trial. Participants are randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either mirtazapine (30 mg/day for 12 weeks) or matched placebo, delivered as a take-home medication. The target population is 340 people aged 18–65 years who have moderate to severe methamphetamine use disorder. The trial is being conducted through outpatient alcohol and other drug treatment clinics in Australia. The primary outcome is measured as self-reported days of methamphetamine use in the past 4 weeks at week 12. Secondary outcomes are methamphetamine negative oral fluid samples, depressive symptoms, sleep quality, HIV risk behaviour and quality of life. Other outcomes include safety (adverse events), tolerability, and health service use. Medication adherence is being monitored using MEMS® Smart Caps fitted to medication bottles. Discussion This trial will provide information on the safety and effectiveness of mirtazapine as a pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder when delivered as an outpatient medication in routine clinical practice. If found to be safe and effective, this trial will support an application for methamphetamine use disorder to be included as a therapeutic indication for the prescription of mirtazapine. Trial Registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622000235707). Registered on February 9, 2022.

Populations with common physical diseases – such as cardiovascular diseases, cancer and neurodegenerative disorders – experience substantially higher rates of major depressive disorder (MDD) than the general population. On the other hand, people living with MDD have a greater risk for many physical diseases. This high level of comorbidity is associated with worse outcomes, reduced adherence to treatment, increased mortality, and greater health care utilization and costs. Comorbidity can also result in a range of clinical challenges, such as a more complicated therapeutic alliance, issues pertaining to adaptive health behaviors, drug‐drug interactions and adverse events induced by medications used for physical and mental disorders. Potential explanations for the high prevalence of the above comorbidity involve shared genetic and biological pathways. These latter include inflammation, the gut microbiome, mitochondrial function and energy metabolism, hypothalamic‐pituitary‐adrenal axis dysregulation, and brain structure and function. Furthermore, MDD and physical diseases have in common several antecedents related to social factors (e.g., socioeconomic status), lifestyle variables (e.g., physical activity, diet, sleep), and stressful live events (e.g., childhood trauma). Pharmacotherapies and psychotherapies are effective treatments for comorbid MDD, and the introduction of lifestyle interventions as well as collaborative care models and digital technologies provide promising strategies for improving management. This paper aims to provide a detailed overview of the epidemiology of the comorbidity of MDD and specific physical diseases, including prevalence and bidirectional risk; of shared biological pathways potentially implicated in the pathogenesis of MDD and common physical diseases; of socio‐environmental factors that serve as both shared risk and protective factors; and of management of MDD and physical diseases, including prevention and treatment. We conclude with future directions and emerging research related to optimal care of people with comorbid MDD and physical diseases.

Objective: Bipolar disorder often co-occurs with post-traumatic stress disorder, yet few studies have investigated the impact of post-traumatic stress disorder in bipolar disorder on treatment outcomes. The aim of this sub-analysis was to explore symptoms and functioning outcomes between those with bipolar disorder alone and those with comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. Methods: Participants (n = 148) with bipolar depression were randomised to: (i) N-acetylcysteine alone; (ii) a combination of nutraceuticals; (iii) or placebo (in addition to treatment as usual) for 16 weeks (＋4 weeks discontinuation). Differences between bipolar disorder and comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder on symptoms and functioning at five timepoints, as well as on the rate of change from baseline to week 16 and baseline to week 20, were examined. Results: There were no baseline differences between bipolar disorder alone and comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder apart from the bipolar disorder alone group being significantly more likely to be married (p = 0.01). There were also no significant differences between bipolar disorder alone and comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder on symptoms and functioning. Conclusion: There were no differences in clinical outcomes over time within the context of an adjunctive randomised controlled trial between those with bipolar disorder alone compared to those with comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. However, differences in psychosocial factors may provide targets for areas of specific support for people with comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Background: Family members of people with mental illness (MI) may experience a host of psychological adversities such as increased stress, burden, and reduced wellbeing. However, relatively little is known about siblings. This study aimed to characterise the experience of distress (viz. depressive and anxiety symptoms), burden, and wellbeing in siblings of people with MI. Methods: Studies reporting on quantitative measures of depression, anxiety, burden, or wellbeing in siblings; and/or qualitative findings on siblings' experience were eligible. The literature search was conducted up until 20th October 2022. Results: Sixty-two studies comprising data from 3744 siblings were included. The pooled mean percentage of depressive symptoms fell in the mild range at 15.71 (k = 28, N = 2187, 95% CI 12.99-18.43) and anxiety symptoms fell in the minimal range at 22.45 (k = 16, N = 1122, 95% CI 17.09-27.80). Moderator analyses indicate that siblings of people with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder experience greater depressive symptoms than siblings of people with other types of MI (β = -16.38, p < 0.001). Qualitative findings suggest that individuals may be particularly vulnerable during their siblings' illness onset and times of relapse. Limited communication, confusion about MI, and the need to compensate may contribute to siblings' distress and/or burden. Siblings' experience of wellbeing and caregiving were closely related. Conclusion: This review highlights the complex psychological experience of siblings and the need for greater research and clinical support for this important yet often overlooked cohort.

Objective: The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a tailored quitline tobacco treatment ('Quitlink') among people receiving support for mental health conditions. Methods: We employed a prospective, cluster-randomised, open, blinded endpoint design to compare a control condition to our 'Quitlink' intervention. Both conditions received a brief intervention delivered by a peer researcher. Control participants received no further intervention. Quitlink participants were referred to a tailored 8-week quitline intervention delivered by dedicated Quitline counsellors plus combination nicotine replacement therapy. The primary outcome was self-reported 6 months continuous abstinence from end of treatment (8 months from baseline). Secondary outcomes included additional smoking outcomes, mental health symptoms, substance use and quality of life. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted. Results: In total, 110 participants were recruited over 26 months and 91 had confirmed outcomes at 8 months post baseline. There was a difference in self-reported prolonged abstinence at 8-month follow-up between Quitlink (16%, n = 6) and control (2%, n = 1) conditions, which was not statistically significant (OR = 8.33 [0.52, 132.09] p = 0.131 available case). There was a significant difference in favour of the Quitlink condition on 7-day point prevalence at 2 months (OR = 8.06 [1.27, 51.00] p = 0.027 available case). Quitlink costs AU$9231 per additional quit achieved. Conclusion: The Quitlink intervention did not result in significantly higher rates of prolonged abstinence at 8 months post baseline. However, engagement rates and satisfaction with the 'Quitlink' intervention were high. While underpowered, the Quitlink intervention shows promise. A powered trial to determine its effectiveness for improving long-term cessation is warranted.

Background: Experiences of interpersonal trauma, both in childhood and in adulthood, can affect the trajectory of bipolar disorder (BD). However, the degree to which childhood and/or adult trauma impacts the longitudinal trajectory of depression severity among individuals with BD actively receiving treatment remains unclear. Methods: The effects of childhood trauma (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire) and adult trauma (Life Events Checklist) on depression severity (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale) were investigated in a treatment-receiving subsample with BD (DSM-IV) of the Prechter Longitudinal Study of Bipolar Disorder (2005-present). A mixed-effects linear regression model was used to assess the trajectory of depression severity over 4 years. Results: Depression severity was evaluated in 360 participants, of whom 267 (74.8%) reported a history of interpersonal trauma. A history of childhood trauma alone (n = 110) and childhood and adult trauma combined (n = 108)-but not adult trauma alone (n = 49) -were associated with greater depression severity at the 2-year and 6-year follow-up assessments. However, the trajectory of depression severity (ie, change over time) was similar between participants with a history of childhood trauma, those with a history of adult trauma, and those with no history of interpersonal trauma. Interestingly, participants with a history of both types of trauma showed more improvement in depression severity (ie, from year 2 to year 4: β = 1.67, P = .019). Conclusions: Despite actively receiving treatment for BD, participants with a history of interpersonal trauma-particularly childhood trauma-presented with more severe depressive symptoms at several follow-up assessments. Hence, interpersonal trauma may represent an essential treatment target.