Aaronson, Scott T.

Importance There is a need for greater recognition of clinical psychopharmacology endpoints, including instances where specific psychotropic medications may become unnecessary, redundant, contradictory, or otherwise inappropriate and therefore merit deprescribing. Objective To address circumstances warranting psychotropic medication deprescribing. Evidence Review The American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology convened a panel of 45 international psychopharmacology experts who developed and completed a multiround Delphi survey and conducted a focused literature review between January and May of 2025, in order to identify areas of consensus or disagreement on key aspects of the deprescribing of psychotropic medications. These included collaborative risk-benefit assessments with patients; pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors; pharmacogenomics; distinguishing redundant or conflictual from complementary mechanisms of action; managing adverse effects; assuring medication adherence; drug tolerance or tachyphylaxis; medication misuse; and the psychological context and ramifications of deprescribing. Findings Consensus was achieved on 44 of 50 final Delphi statements (88%). Panelists unanimously agreed that components of a pharmacotherapy regimen should undergo periodic review to ensure that treatments target relevant symptoms and have favorable risk-benefit ratios. Key points of consensus were that deprescribing: (1) should not occur without first assessing medication adherence; (2) merits consideration if less than partial therapeutic response is apparent, or if treatment goals have been reached and relapse prevention is not a long-term objective; (3) involves psychological ramifications that warrant attention; (4) should be followed by close clinical monitoring; and (5) risk-benefit decisions should ideally involve active patient participation within a shared decision-making model. Conclusions and Relevance Through this Consensus Statement, the Task Force identified circumstances in which the selective elimination of certain psychotropic medications may be clinically indicated. Empirical trials are needed to assess the implementation of deprescribing protocols and gauge their safe, effective, and acceptable outcomes.

Introduction: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a promising intervention for adolescents with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). However, the durability of TMS-related improvement in adolescents is unclear. This 6-month study followed adolescents with TRD who had responded to TMS and provided TMS retreatment for adolescents with a partial relapse. Methods: The study enrolled adolescents (12–21 years) with TRD who had at least a partial response to sham or active TMS in a randomized controlled trial. Partial response was defined as ≥25% reduction of Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-24 (HAMD24). Participants with a partial relapse (≥1 point increase in Clinical Global Impression–Severity) received retreatment with daily 10 Hz TMS sessions until depressive symptom severity returned to the baseline score or after 30 TMS treatments. Results: There were 84 eligible participants, 66 were enrolled, and 41 completed the 6-month study. Twenty-eight participants (42%) were retreated with TMS. TMS retreatment courses had a mean of 22 sessions. At the 6-month follow-up, the complete sample exhibited reduced depressive symptoms (mean HAMD24 of 5.24) compared with baseline at entry into follow-up (mean HAMD24 of 8.21). Baseline depressive symptom severity was positively correlated with the risk of partial relapse, while the number of previous TMS interventions showed no correlation with the risk of partial relapse. TMS was well tolerated. Conclusions: This is the largest, long-term follow-up study with TMS retreatment for adolescents with TRD. These findings demonstrate the feasibility and clinical effects of a TMS retreatment protocol for adolescents with TRD, following a standard course of acute TMS.

Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics of adolescents with antidepressant treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD) and to examine the utility of the Antidepressant Treatment Record (ATR) in categorizing treatment resistance in this population. Methods: Adolescents with treatment-resistant MDD enrolled in an interventional study underwent a baseline evaluation with the ATR, Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scales. Demographic and clinical characteristics were examined with regard to ATR-defined level of resistance (level 1 to ≥3) using analysis of variance and χ 2 tests. Results: In adolescents with treatment-resistant MDD ( N = 97), aged 12–21 years, most were female (65%), white (89%), and had recurrent illness (78%). Patients were severely ill (median CGI-S score of 5), had a mean CDRS-R score of 63 ± 10, and 17.5% had been hospitalized for depression-related symptoms. Fifty-two patients were classified as ATR 1, whereas 32 were classified as ATR level 2 and 13 patients as ≥3, respectively. For increasing ATR-defined levels, illness duration increased from 12.0 (range: 1.5–31.9) to 14.8 (range: 1.8–31.7) to 19.5 (range: 2.5–36.2) months and the likelihood of treatment with serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) and dopamine norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (DNRIs) similarly increased ( p = 0.006 for both SNRIs and DNRIs) as did the likelihood of treatment with mixed dopamine serotonin receptor antagonists (χ 2 = 17, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study underscores the morbidity and chronicity of treatment-resistant MDD in adolescents. The present characterization of related clinical features describes the use of nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in adolescents with treatment-resistant depression and raises the possibility that those with the greatest medication treatment resistance are less likely to have had recurrent episodes. The study also demonstrates the utility of the ATR in categorizing treatment resistance in adolescents with MDD.