Fluoxetine versus other types of pharmacotherapy for depression

Beliefs about the causes of depression and treatment preferences

The relation between patients' beliefs about the causes of their depression, treatment preferences, and demographic variables was studied in a sample of 156 patients in a randomized controlled trial for depression (supportive-expressive psychotherapy vs. medication vs. placebo). No gender differences were found in beliefs or preferences. Racial differences were found for causes endorsed, but not preferences. Treatment experience predicted endorsement of characterological and biological causes. Psychotherapy experience predicted preference for medication. Finally, patients preferring psychotherapy endorsed childhood and complex causes more than those preferring medication, but the groups did not differ in other reasons endorsed. Implications of findings are discussed.

The effects of antidepressants and pilocarpine on rat parotid glands: an immunohistochemical study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of antidepressants and pilocarpine on the quantity of myoepithelial cells and on the proliferation index of the epithelial cells of rat parotid glands.

INTRODUCTION

Hyposalivation, xerostomia, and alterations in saliva composition are important clinical side effects related to the use of antidepressants.

METHODS

Ninety male Wistar rats were allocated to nine groups. The control groups received saline for 30 (group C30) or 60 days (group C60) or pilocarpine for 60 days (group Pilo). The experimental groups were administered fluoxetine (group F30) or venlafaxine for 30 days (group V30); fluoxetine (group FS60) or venlafaxine (group VS60) with saline for 60 days; or fluoxetine (group FP60) or venlafaxine (group VP60) with pilocarpine for 60 days. Parotid gland specimens were processed, and the immunohistochemical expression of calponin and proliferating cell nuclear anti-antigen on the myoepithelial and parenchymal cells, respectively, was evaluated. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey HSD and Games-Howell tests were applied to detect differences among groups (p<0.05).

RESULTS

Compared with the controls, chronic exposure to antidepressants was associated with an increase in the number of positively stained cells for calponin. In addition, venlafaxine administration for 30 days was associated with an increase in the number of positively stained cells for proliferating cell nuclear anti-antigen. Fluoxetine and pilocarpine (group FP60) induced a significant decrease in the number of positively stained cells for calponin compared with all other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of positively stained cells for calponin increased after chronic administration of antidepressants. The proliferation index of the epithelial cells of rat parotid glands was not altered by the use of antidepressants for 60 days.

Behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depressionTo examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different BT approaches (behavioural therapy, behavioural activation, social skills training and relaxation training) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural and third wave CBT) for acute depression.

Mindfulness-based 'third wave' cognitive and behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different third wave CBT approaches (ACT, compassionate mind training, functional analytic psychotherapy, meta-cognitive therapy, dialectical behaviour therapy, MBCT, extended behavioural activation and meta-cognitive therapy) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.

Mindfulness-based 'third wave' cognitive and behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different third wave CBT approaches (ACT,compassionate mind training, functional analytic psychotherapy, extended behavioural activation and meta-cognitive therapy) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural) for acute depression.

Integrating medicines management into mental health nursing in UK

There is increasing concern that mental health nurses in UK are inadequately trained in medicines management. Recommended solutions entail proposals for further training to improve safety for service users. Although fundamentally important, these organizational approaches lack a conceptual framework to explain how individual practitioners develop competence in medicines management. This is important because applying knowledge of how individuals learn makes strategic interventions more effective. This article presents empirical evidence of how individual mental health nurse prescribers develop competence in prescribing within the context of the therapeutic relationship. It is proposed that these findings can then be extended to inform medicines management training relevant to all mental health nurses, whether prescribers or not.

Sertraline versus other antidepressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical practice guideline on the treatment of depressive disorder recommended that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors should be the first-line option when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Preliminary evidence suggested that sertraline might be slightly superior in terms of effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of sertraline in comparison with tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs and newer agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE (1966 to 2008), EMBASE (1974 to 2008), the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to July 2008. No language restriction was applied. Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were hand-searched. Pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to sertraline versus any other antidepressive agent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved with another member of the team. A double-entry procedure was employed by two reviewers. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 59 studies, mostly of low quality, were included in the review, involving multiple treatment comparisons between sertraline and other antidepressant agents. Evidence favouring sertraline over some other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression was found, either in terms of efficacy (fluoxetine) or acceptability/tolerability (amitriptyline, imipramine, paroxetine and mirtazapine). However, some differences favouring newer antidepressants in terms of efficacy (mirtazapine) and acceptability (bupropion) were also found. In terms of individual side effects, sertraline was generally associated with a higher rate of participants experiencing diarrhoea.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted a trend in favour of sertraline over other antidepressive agents both in terms of efficacy and acceptability, using 95% confidence intervals and a conservative approach, with a random effects analysis. However, the included studies did not report on all the outcomes that were pre-specified in the protocol of this review. Outcomes of clear relevance to patients and clinicians were not reported in any of the included studies.

Fluvoxamine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

Fluvoxamine, one of the oldest selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), is prescribed to patients with major depression in many countries. Several studies have previously reviewed the efficacy and tolerability of fluvoxamine for the treatment of major depression. However, these reviews are now outdated.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective is to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability and side effect profile of fluvoxamine for major depression in comparison with other anti-depressive agents, including tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs, SNRIs, other newer agents and other conventional psychotropic drugs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register. Trial databases and ongoing trial registers in North America, Europe, Japan and Australia, were handsearched for randomised controlled trials. We checked reference lists of the articles included in the review, previous systematic reviews and major textbooks of affective disorder for published reports and citations of unpublished research. The date of last search was 31 August 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials, published in any language, that compared fluvoxamine with any other active antidepressants in the acute phase treatment of major depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent review authors inspected citations and abstracts, obtained papers, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We analysed dichotomous data using odds ratios (ORs) and continuous data using the standardised mean difference (SMD). A random effects model was used to combine studies.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 54 randomised controlled trials (n = 5122) were included. No strong evidence was found to indicate that fluvoxamine was either superior or inferior to other antidepressants regarding response, remission and tolerability. However, differing side effect profiles were evident, especially with regard to gastrointestinal side effects of fluvoxamine when compared to other antidepressants. For example, fluvoxamine was generally associated with a higher incidence of vomiting/nausea (versus imipramine, OR 2.23, CI 1.59 to 3.14; versus clomipramine, OR 2.13, CI 1.06 to 4.27; versus amitriptyline, OR 2.86, CI 1.31 to 2.63).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no strong evidence that fluvoxamine was either superior or inferior to any other antidepressants in terms of efficacy and tolerability in the acute phase treatment of depression. However, differing side effect profiles were evident. Based on these findings, we conclude that clinicians should focus on practical or clinically relevant considerations, including these differences in side effect profiles.

Cognitive behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all CBT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depressionTo examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different CBT approaches (cognitive therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy, problem-solving therapy, self-control therapy and Coping with Depression course) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all CBT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, third wave CBT) for acute depression.

Humanistic therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different humanistic therapy models (person-centred, gestalt, process-experiential, transactional analysis, existential and non-directive therapies) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural) for acute depression.

Behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different BT approaches (behavioural therapy, behavioural activation, social skills training and relaxation training) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.

Humanistic therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different humanistic therapy models (person-centred, gestalt, process-experiential, transactional analysis, existential and non-directive therapies) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.

Interpersonal, cognitive analytic and other integrative therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different integrative therapy models (IPT, CAT, psychodynamic-interpersonal therapy, CBASP, counselling) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, cognitive-behavioural, third wave CBT) for acute depression.

Psychodynamic therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapy approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different psychodynamic therapy approaches (drive/structural, relational and integrative analytic models) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapy approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (behavioural, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural, 'third-wave' CBT) for acute depression.

Interpersonal, cognitive analytic and other integrative therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different integrative therapies (IPT, CAT, psychodynamic-interpersonal therapy, cognitive behavioural analysis system of psychotherapy and counselling) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.

Psychodynamic therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different psychodynamic therapy models (drive/structural, relational and integrative analytic models) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.

Cognitive behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all cognitive behavioural therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different cognitive behavioural therapy models (cognitive therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy, problem-solving therapy, self-control therapy and the Coping with Depression course) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all cognitive behavioural therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.

Differences in adverse effect reporting in placebo groups in SSRI and tricyclic antidepressant trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Biases in adverse effect reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) [e.g. due to investigator expectations or assessment quality] can be quantified by studying the rates of adverse events reported in the placebo arms of such trials.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the rates of adverse effects reported in the placebo arms of tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) trials and placebo arms of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) trials.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search for RCTs across PUBMED, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Only studies allowing adverse effect analysis were included. Publication year ranged from 1981 to 2007.

RESULTS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis included 143 placebocontrolled RCTs and data from 12,742 patients. Only 21% of studies used structured and systematic adverse effect ascertainment strategies. The way in which trials recorded adverse events influenced the rate of adverse effects substantially. Systematic assessment led to higher rates than less systematic assessment. Far more adverse effects were reported in TCA-placebo groups compared with SSRI-placebo groups, e.g. dry mouth (odds ratio [OR] = 3.5; 95% CI 2.9, 4.2); drowsiness (OR = 2.7; 95%CI 2.2, 3.4); constipation (OR= 2.7; 95%CI 2.1, 3.6); sexual problems (OR =2.3; 95%CI 1.5, 3.5). Regression analyses controlling for various influencing factors confirmed the results.

CONCLUSION

Adverse effect profiles reported in clinical trials are strongly influenced by expectations from investigators and patients. This difference cannot be attributed to ascertainment methods. Adverse effect patterns of the drug group are closely related to adverse effects of the placebo group. These results question the validity of the assumption that adverse effects in placebo groups reflect the 'drug-unspecific effects'.

Pharmacological and combined interventions for the acute depressive episode: focus on efficacy and tolerability

BACKGROUND

Use of antidepressants is the gold standard therapy for major depression. However, despite the large number of commercially available antidepressant drugs there are several differences among them in efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness. In addition the optimal augmentation strategy is still not clear when dealing with treatment-resistant depression, a condition that affects 15% to 40% of depressed patients.

METHODS

We therefore reviewed the main characteristics of these drugs regarding their efficacy, tolerability, side effects and cost-effectiveness, by accessing all meta-analyses and systematic reviews published from 2004 to 2009. In addition, we reviewed the augmentation strategy of associated antidepressants with neurostimulation therapies (such as transcranial magnetic stimulation [TMS] and transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]). A search was undertaken in MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scielo databases. We included: 21 meta-analyses of antidepressant trials, 15 neurostimulation clinical trials and 8 studies of pharmacoeconomics. We then performed a comprehensive review on these articles.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Although recent meta-analyses suggest sertraline and escitalopram might have increased efficacy/tolerability, other studies and large pragmatic trials have not found these to be superior to other antidepressant drugs. Also, we did not identify any superior drug in terms of cost-effectiveness due to the different designs observed among pharmacoecomics studies. Side effects such as sexual dysfunction, gastrointestinal problems and weight gain were common causes of discontinuation. Tolerability was an important issue for novel neurostimulation interventions, such as TMS and tDCS. These therapies might be interesting augmentation strategies, considering their benign profile of side effects, if proper safety parameters are adopted.

Milnacipran versus other antidepressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

Although pharmacological and psychological interventions are both effective for major depression, antidepressant drugs are frequently used as first-line treatment in primary and secondary care settings. Milnacipran, a dual serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), is one of the antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of milnacipran in comparison with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), heterocyclics, SSRIs and other newer antidepressive agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety & Neurosis review group Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References) were electronically searched in August 2008. References of relevant trials and other reviews were also checked. Trial databases of the drug-approving agencies and ongoing clinical trial registers for all published and unpublished trials were hand-searched in 2007. All relevant authors were contacted for supplemental data. No language restriction was applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing milnacipran with any other active antidepressive agents (including non-conventional agents such as herbal products like hypericum) as monotherapy in the acute phase of major depression were selected.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently checked eligibility, assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the eligible trials using a standardised data extraction form. The number of participants who responded to treatment or those who achieved remission were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, combining data from the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 16 randomised controlled trials (n=2277) were included in the meta-analysis.Despite the size of this sample, the pooled 95% confidence intervals were rather wide and there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy, acceptability and tolerability when comparing milnacipran with other antidepressive agents. However, compared with TCAs, patients taking milnacipran were associated with fewer dropouts due to adverse events (OR 0.55; 95%CI 0.35 to 0.85). There was also some weak evidence to suggest that patients taking milnacipran experienced fewer adverse events of sleepiness/ drowsiness, dry mouth or constipation compared with TCAs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is inadequate evidence to conclude whether milnacipran is superior, inferior or the same as other antidepressive agents in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability in the acute phase treatment of major depression. However, there is some evidence in favour of milnacipran over TCAs in terms of dropouts due to adverse events (acceptability) and the rates of experiencing adverse events (tolerability). Information about other clinically meaningful outcomes such as cost-effectiveness and social functioning, including the ability to return to work, is lacking. Further study is needed to answer whether milnacipran would be the better choice of antidepressant for acute major depression.

A randomized controlled trial of sertraline for the treatment of depression in persons with traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy of sertraline in the treatment of depression after traumatic brain injury (TBI).

DESIGN

Double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Research center at a major urban medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects were a referred and volunteer sample of 52 participants with TBI, a diagnosis of major depression disorder (MDD), and a score on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) of 18 or greater. The majority of the sample was male (58%), had less than 14 years of education (73%), had incomes below $20,000 (82%), and were from minority backgrounds (75%). Approximately one third of the sample had mild brain injuries, and two thirds had moderate to severe brain injuries. The mean age was 47+/-11, and the mean time since injury was 17+/-14 years. One participant withdrew from the study because of side effects.

INTERVENTION

Daily oral sertraline in doses starting at 25mg and increasing to therapeutic levels (up to 200mg) or placebo for 10 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The HAM-D, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Life-3 quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found at baseline between drug and placebo groups on baseline measures of depression (24.8+/-7.3 vs 27.7+/-7.0), anxiety (16.4+/-12.3 vs 24.0+/-14.9), or QOL (2.96+/-1.0 vs 2.9+/-0.9). The income level of those receiving placebo was significantly lower than those participants receiving medication. Analyses of covariance revealed significant changes from preintervention to posttreatment for all 3 outcome measures (P<.001) but no group effects. Random-effects modeling did not find any significant difference in patterns of scores of the outcome measures between the placebo and medication groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both groups showed improvements in mood, anxiety, and QOL, with 59% of the experimental group and 32% of the placebo group responding to the treatment, defined as a reduction of a person's HAM-D score by 50%.

Escitalopram versus other antidepressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

Although pharmacological and psychological interventions are both effective for major depression, antidepressant drugs remain the mainstay of treatment in primary and secondary care settings. During the last 20 years, antidepressant prescribing has risen dramatically in western countries, mainly because of the increasing consumption of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and newer antidepressants, which have progressively become the most commonly prescribed antidepressants. Escitalopram is the pure S-enantiomer of the racemic citalopram.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of escitalopram in comparison with tricyclics, other SSRIs, heterocyclics and newer agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases were searched up to July 2008. Trial databases of drug-approving agencies were hand-searched for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing escitalopram against any other antidepressant (including non-conventional agents such as hypericum) for patients with major depressive disorder (regardless of the diagnostic criteria used).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were entered by two review authors (double data entry). Responders and remitters to treatment were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. For dichotomous data, odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous data were analysed using standardised mean differences (with 95% CI) using the random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials compared escitalopram with another SSRI and eight compared escitalopram with a newer antidepressive agent (venlafaxine, bupropion and duloxetine). Escitalopram was shown to be significantly more effective than citalopram in achieving acute response (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.87). Escitalopram was also more effective than citalopram in terms of remission (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.93). Significantly fewer patients allocated to escitalopram withdrew from trials compared with patients allocated to duloxetine, for discontinuation due to any cause (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.99).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some statistically significant differences favouring escitalopram over other antidepressive agents for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found, in terms of efficacy (citalopram and fluoxetine) and acceptability (duloxetine). There is insufficient evidence to detect a difference between escitalopram and other antidepressants in early response to treatment (after two weeks of treatment). Cost-effectiveness information is also needed in the field of antidepressant trials. Furthermore, as with most standard systematic reviews, the findings rely on evidence from direct comparisons. The potential for overestimation of treatment effect due to sponsorship bias should also be borne in mind.

Sertraline versus other antidepressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical practice guideline on the treatment of depressive disorder recommended that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors should be the first-line option when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Preliminary evidence suggested that sertraline might be slightly superior in terms of effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of escitalopram in comparison with tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs and newer agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE (1966 to 2008), EMBASE (1974 to 2008), the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to July 2008. No language restriction was applied. Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were hand-searched. Pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to sertraline versus any other antidepressive agent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved with another member of the team. A double-entry procedure was employed by two reviewers. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 59 studies, mostly of low quality, were included in the review, involving multiple treatment comparisons between sertraline and other antidepressant agents. Evidence favouring sertraline over some other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression was found, either in terms of efficacy (fluoxetine) or acceptability/tolerability (amitriptyline, imipramine, paroxetine and mirtazapine). However, some differences favouring newer antidepressants in terms of efficacy (mirtazapine) and acceptability (bupropion) were also found. In terms of individual side effects, sertraline was generally associated with a higher rate of participants experiencing diarrhoea.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted a trend in favour of sertraline over other antidepressive agents both in terms of efficacy and acceptability, using 95% confidence intervals and a conservative approach, with a random effects analysis. However, the included studies did not report on all the outcomes that were pre-specified in the protocol of this review. Outcomes of clear relevance to patients and clinicians were not reported in any of the included studies.

Disruptive insights in psychiatry: transforming a clinical discipline

Mental disorders such as schizophrenia, bipolar illness, and depression have become the predominant chronic diseases of young people, accounting for approximately 40% of the medical burden for people aged 15-44 in the United States and Canada. Research is transforming our understanding of these disorders, as exemplified in the articles in this Review Series. Important, "disruptive" insights into pathophysiology are emerging from studies addressing these illnesses as brain disorders, developmental disorders, and complex genetic disorders--rather than only as psychological conflicts or chemical imbalances, as they were considered in the past. Current medications are not sufficient for most patients. A new and deep understanding of the pathophysiology of these disabling disorders is our best hope for a new generation of treatments that will help patients to recover.

Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials?

Antidepressants, in particular newer agents, are among the most widely prescribed medications worldwide with annual sales of billions of dollars. The introduction of these agents in the market has passed through seemingly strict regulatory control. Over a thousand randomized trials have been conducted with antidepressants. Statistically significant benefits have been repeatedly demonstrated and the medical literature is flooded with several hundreds of "positive" trials (both pre-approval and post-approval). However, two recent meta-analyses question this picture. The first meta-analysis used data that were submitted to FDA for the approval of 12 antidepressant drugs. While only half of these trials had formally significant effectiveness, published reports almost ubiquitously claimed significant results. "Negative" trials were either left unpublished or were distorted to present "positive" results. The average benefit of these drugs based on the FDA data was of small magnitude, while the published literature suggested larger benefits. A second meta-analysis using also FDA-submitted data examined the relationship between treatment effect and baseline severity of depression. Drug-placebo differences increased with increasing baseline severity and the difference became large enough to be clinically important only in the very small minority of patient populations with severe major depression. In severe major depression, antidepressants did not become more effective, simply placebo lost effectiveness. These data suggest that antidepressants may be less effective than their wide marketing suggests. Short-term benefits are small and long-term balance of benefits and harms is understudied. I discuss how the use of many small randomized trials with clinically non-relevant outcomes, improper interpretation of statistical significance, manipulated study design, biased selection of study populations, short follow-up, and selective and distorted reporting of results has built and nourished a seemingly evidence-based myth on antidepressant effectiveness and how higher evidence standards, with very large long-term trials and careful prospective meta-analyses of individual-level data may reach closer to the truth and clinically useful evidence.

Self-mutilative behaviors in male veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder

Self-mutilative behaviors (SMB) were examined in a sample of male veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of SMB and any physical, cognitive, or affective antecedents and correlates for these behaviors. Participants included 509 male veterans with PTSD and levels of PTSD, depression, alcohol use, hostility, and impulsivity were evaluated to determine if these variables were related to SMB. Antecedents and sequelae of SMB were also examined to generate hypotheses regarding the functions of these behaviors. A second type of habit behavior, body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRB), was also examined as part of the study. Findings indicated that veterans who engaged in either type of habit behavior were younger than those who did not engage in SMB or BFRB. Veterans reporting SMB also reported higher levels of PTSD, depression, hostility, and impulsivity compared to the BFRB and no-habit groups. Examination of habit antecedents and sequelae showed support for the automatic-positive reinforcement function of SMB. These findings are discussed in the context of research and treatment involving male veterans with PTSD who engage in SMB.

Effectiveness of paroxetine in the treatment of acute major depression in adults: a systematic re-examination of published and unpublished data from randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Concern has been raised about the efficacy of antidepressant therapy for major depression in adults. We undertook a systematic review of published and unpublished clinical trial data to determine the effectiveness and acceptability of paroxetine.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to December 2006. Published and unpublished randomized trials comparing paroxetine with placebo in adults with major depression were eligible for inclusion. We selected the proportion of patients who left a study early for any reason as the primary outcome measure because it represents a hard measure of treatment effectiveness and acceptability.

RESULTS

We included in our review 29 published and 11 unpublished clinical trials, with a total of 3704 patients who received paroxetine and 2687 who received with placebo. There was no difference between paroxetine and placebo in terms of the proportion of patients who left the study early for any reason (random effect relative risk [RR] 0.99, 99% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-1.11). Paroxetine was more effective than placebo, with fewer patients who did not experience improvement in symptoms of at least 50% (random effect RR 0.83, 99% CI 0.77-0.90). Significantly more patients in the paroxetine group than in the placebo group left their respective studies because of side effects (random effect RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.44-2.18) or experienced suicidal tendencies (odds ratio 2.55, 95% CI 1.17-5.54).

INTERPRETATION

Among adults with moderate to severe major depression in the clinical trials we reviewed, paroxetine was not superior to placebo in terms of overall treatment effectiveness and acceptability. These results were not biased by selective inclusion of published studies.

Neuroprotection by Imipramine against lipopolysaccharide-induced apoptosis in hippocampus-derived neural stem cells mediated by activation of BDNF and the MAPK pathway

Depression is accompanied by the activation of the inflammatory-response system, and increased production of proinflammatory cytokines may play a role in the pathophysiology of depressive disorders. Imipramine (IM), a tricyclic antidepressant drug, has recently been shown to promote neurogenesis and improve the survival rate of neurons in the hippocampus. However, whether IM elicits a neuroprotective or anti-inflammatory effect, or promotes the differentiation of neural stem cells (NSCs) remains to be elucidated. In this study, we cultured NSCs derived from the hippocampal tissues of adult rats as an in vitro model to evaluate the NSCs drug-modulation effects of IM. Our results showed that 3 microM IM treatment significantly increased the survival rate of NSCs, and up-regulated the mRNA and protein expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and Bcl-2 in Day-7 IM-treated NSCs. Similar to BDNF-treated effect, incubation of NSCs with 3 microM IM increased Bcl-2 protein levels and further prevented lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced apoptosis through the activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)/extracellular-regulated kinase (ERK) pathway. Inhibition of BDNF expression with small interfering RNA (siRNA), or blocking the MAPK pathway with U0126 further significantly decreased Bcl-2 protein levels and abrogated the neuroprotective effects of IM against LPS-induced apoptosis in NSCs. In addition, the percentages of serotonin and MAP-2-positive neuronal cells in the Day 7 culture of IM-treated NSCs were significantly increased. By using microdialysis with high performance liquid chromatography-electrochemical detection, the functional release of serotonin in the process of serotoninergic differentiation of IM-treated NSCs was concomitantly increasing and mediated by the activation of the BDNF/MAPK/ERK pathway/Bcl-2 cascades. In sum, the study results indicate that IM can increase the neuroprotective effects, suppress the LPS-induced inflammatory process, and promote serotoninergic differentiation in NSCs via the modulation of the BDNF/MAPK/ERK pathway/Bcl-2 cascades.

The Prevention of Recurrent Episodes of Depression with Venlafaxine for Two Years (PREVENT) study: outcomes from the acute and continuation phases

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the comparative efficacy and safety of venlafaxine extended release (ER) and fluoxetine in the acute and continuation phases of treatment.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind study, outpatients with recurrent unipolar major depression were randomly assigned to receive venlafaxine ER (75-300 mg/day; n = 821) or fluoxetine (20-60 mg/day; n = 275). After a 10-week acute treatment phase, responders entered a 6-month continuation phase of ongoing therapy with double-blind venlafaxine ER (n = 530) or fluoxetine (n = 185). In the acute phase, the primary outcome was response, defined as a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score < or =12 or > or =50% decrease from baseline; the secondary outcome was remission, defined as a HDRS score < or =7. In the continuation phase, the primary outcome was the proportion of patients who sustained response or remission. Secondary measures included time to onset of sustained response or remission (i.e., meeting criteria at two or more consecutive visits), relapse rates, and quality-of-life measures.

RESULTS

At the acute treatment phase end point, response rates were 79% for both venlafaxine ER and fluoxetine; remission rates were 49% and 50% for venlafaxine ER and fluoxetine, respectively. In the continuation phase, response rates were 90% and 92%, and remission rates were 72% and 69% for venlafaxine ER and fluoxetine, respectively. Rates of sustained remission at the end of the continuation phase were 52% and 58% for venlafaxine ER and fluoxetine, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Venlafaxine ER and fluoxetine were comparably effective during both acute and continuation phase therapy.

Metareview on short-term effectiveness and safety of antidepressants for depression: an evidence-based approach to inform clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

To examine the available scientific literature for answers to clinically relevant questions regarding the effectiveness and tolerability of antidepressant drugs (ADs) for the acute phase treatment of depression and to assess the degree to which the literature supports the findings.

METHODS

We used several sources to identify primary reviews: MEDLINE (1955 to April 2006), EMBASE (1980 to April 2006), PsycINFO (1980 to April 2006), and the Cochrane Library 2006 Issue 1. Additional searches were also carried out on the following databases of the National Health Service Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment, and Turning Research into Practice. We also searched the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidance website. We carried out a metareview of selected high-quality systematic reviews of short-term pharmacologic interventions with ADs for major depression. To assess efficacy, we followed the hierarchy of evidence proposed by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (Oxford), including only reviews of randomized controlled trials. To assess tolerability, we also considered observational data when randomized evidence was not available.

RESULTS

There was randomized evidence that ADs are efficacious in primary care settings and that there may be small, but clinically important, differences in efficacy between ADs. There was no good evidence that an AD combined with an antipsychotic is superior to AD monotherapy in cases of psychotic depression or that intravenous administration leads to more rapid response. There was evidence that monoamine oxidase inhibitors are superior to tricyclic antidepressants, but not to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in treating atypical depression. There is some evidence of harm related to the use of SSRIs in pregnancy but not to their use when breastfeeding. There is evidence that SSRIs may increase suicidal thoughts, but not actual suicide, in early-phase therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a substantial body of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of ADs in the treatment of depressive disorder. Nonetheless, there remains considerable residual uncertainty. The evidence is inadequate for generally applicable recommendations; in most cases, the balance between risks and benefits will need to be considered for individual patients. Clinicians should also be guided by the recommendations and warnings issued by drug regulatory authorities.

An evaluation of the cardiovascular safety profile of duloxetine: findings from 42 placebo-controlled studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In recent years, new classes of medication, such as the serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), have been developed for use in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). For many years, treatment options were largely limited to the use of monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). However, there have been published reports of orthostatic hypotension, arrhythmias and corrected QT (QTc) interval changes in patients treated with TCAs. As new medications become available, it is important to understand how their cardiovascular safety profile compares with that of more established agents to aid clinicians and patients in choosing the best treatment options. This study was designed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety profile of the SNRI duloxetine through evaluation of cardiovascular-related parameters and adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

The cardiovascular safety of duloxetine was assessed using all placebo-controlled duloxetine clinical trial data as of December 2005. This consisted of data from 42 placebo-controlled clinical trials of 8504 patients who were treated with duloxetine. Additional information from a high-dose clinical pharmacology study and postmarketing safety surveillance are also presented. Of the placebo-controlled trials included in this analysis, clinical indications under investigation included MDD (15 studies), diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (3 studies), fibromyalgia (2 studies), generalised anxiety disorder (3 studies) and lower urinary tract disorders (19 studies, all related to incontinence). Cardiovascular safety was evaluated based on vital signs, ECGs and the incidence of treatment-emergent AEs potentially related to cardiovascular safety. These safety parameters were analysed across all indications. To identify both serious and non-serious cardiovascular-related AEs, as well as AEs reported as the reason for discontinuation, a comprehensive list of terms derived from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (version 8.0) was generated and used to search the duloxetine databases for cardiovascular-related events.

RESULTS

Calculation of change from baseline to maximum in ECG parameters showed significant differences between treatment groups for all parameters, with decreases from baseline in RR, QRS and QT intervals for patients receiving duloxetine and increases from baseline for patients treated with placebo. These shifts were related to small heart rate changes, but the mean differences were not considered clinically relevant. Categorical analyses of shifts from normal to abnormal (or abnormal to normal) for heart rate and QT corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) values showed that most patients did not shift from their baseline category. Patients with MDD who were treated for up to 1 year with duloxetine had blood pressure changes early in treatment that then stabilised. Even in patients with elevated blood pressure at baseline in these clinical trials, no increased risk of sustained blood pressure elevation with duloxetine treatment was found.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the findings presented here support our conclusions that use of duloxetine does not appear to be associated with significant cardiovascular risks in patients with conditions for which the drug has been approved or studied.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for depressive disorders in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are common in young people and are associated with significant negative impacts. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are often used, however, evidence of their effectiveness in children and adolescents is not clear. Furthermore, there have been warnings against their use in this population due to concerns about increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and adverse outcomes, including definitive suicidal behaviour and suicidal ideation, of SSRIs compared to placebo in the treatment of depressive disorders in children and adolescents.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the CCDAN Trials Register, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO and CENTRAL. Reference lists were checked, letters were sent to key researchers and internet databases searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or three review authors selected the trials, assessed the quality and extracted trial and outcome data. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis. The relative risk was used to summarise dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference to summarise continuous measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials were eligible for inclusion, with ten providing usable data. At 8-12 weeks, there was evidence that children and adolescents 'responded' to treatment with SSRIs (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41). There was also evidence of an increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour for those prescribed SSRIs (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.72). Fluoxetine was the only SSRI where there was consistent evidence from three trials that it was effective in reducing depression symptoms in both children and adolescents (CDRS-R treatment effect -5.63, 95% CI -7.38 to -3.88), and 'response' to treatment (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.32). Where rates of adverse events were reported, this was higher for those prescribed SSRIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Caution is required to interpret the results. First, there were methodological issues, including high attrition, issues regarding measurement instruments and clinical usefulness of outcomes, often variously defined across trials. Second, patients seen in clinical practice are likely to be more unwell, and at greater risk of suicide, compared to those in the trials, and it is unclear how this group would respond to SSRIs. This needs to be considered, along with the evidence of an increased risk of suicide related outcomes in those treated with SSRIs. It is unclear what the effect of SSRIs is on suicide completion. While untreated depression is associated with the risk of completed suicide and impacts on functioning, it is unclear whether SSRIs would modify this risk in a clinically meaningful way.

Desipramine Activated Bcl-2 Expression and Inhibited Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Apoptosis in Hippocampus-Derived Adult Neural Stem Cells

Desipramine (DP) is a tricyclic antidepressant used for treating depression and numerous other psychiatric disorders. Recent studies have shown that DP can promote neurogenesis and improve the survival rate of hippocampal neurons. However, whether DP induces neuroprotection or promotes the differentiation of neural stem cells (NSCs) needs to be elucidated. In this study, we cultured NSCs derived from the hippocampal tissues of adult rats as an in vitro model to evaluate the modulation effect of DP on NSCs. First, we demonstrated that the expression of Bcl-2 mRNA and nestin in 2 microM DP-treated NSCs were up-regulated and detected by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The results of Western blotting and immunofluorescent study confirmed that Bcl-2 protein expression was significantly increased in Day 3 DP-treated NSCs. Using the Bcl-2 small interfering RNA (siRNA) method, our results further showed that DP protects the lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced apoptosis in NSCs, in part by activating the expression of Bcl-2. Furthermore, DP treatment significantly inhibited the induction of proinflammatory factor interleukin (IL)-1beta, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha in the culture medium of LPS-treated NSCs mediated by Bcl-2 modulation. The results of high performance liquid chromatography coupled to electrochemical detection further confirmed that DP significantly increased the functional production of serotonin (26+/-3.5 microM, DP-treated 96 h) and noradrenaline (50+/-8.9 microM, DP-treated 96 h) in NSCs through activation of the MAPK/ERK pathway and partially mediated by Bcl-2. In conclusion, the present results indicate that DP can increase neuroprotection ability by inhibiting the LPS-induced inflammatory process in NSCs via the modulation of Bcl-2 expression, as confirmed by the siRNA method.

Venlafaxine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To determine the efficacy of venlafaxine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents in alleviating the acute symptoms of major depressive disorder.To review acceptability of treatment with venlafaxine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.To investigate the adverse effects of venlafaxine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.

Paroxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To determine the efficacy of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents in alleviating the acute symptoms of major depressive disorder.To review acceptability of treatment with paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.To investigate the adverse effects of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.