A double-blind study of the efficacy and safety of sertraline and clomipramine in outpatients with severe major depression

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments for the treatment of acute bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted by searching eight registries for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for the acute treatment of bipolar depression.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess data quality. Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were efficacy (response and remission rate) and acceptability (completion of treatment and dropouts due to adverse events). Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Identified citations (4,404) included 50 trials comprising 11,448 participants. Escitalopram, phenelzine, moclobemide, carbamazepine, sertraline, lithium, paroxetine, aripiprazole, gabapentin and ziprasidone appear to be ineffective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression. Divalproex, olanzapine/fluoxetine, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, and lamotrigine, appear to be effective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression according to the network meta-analysis. Aripiprazole showed higher discontinuation rates versus placebo due to the appearance of any adverse event. Quetiapine was better than placebo at reducing treatment-emergent affective switches. For Bipolar I Disorder, cariprazine, fluoxetine, imipramine, lamotrigine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at response, while fluoxetine, imipramine, cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at remission.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These results could serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the relative benefits of the different antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizing agents for the treatment of bipolar depression.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42019122172).

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.

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.

An evidence-based review of the clinical use of sertraline in mood and anxiety disorders

Sertraline is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor that has been used and studied extensively throughout the world and found to be safe and well tolerated in numerous patient populations, including those with either psychiatric and/or medical comorbidities. Randomized clinical trials have shown that it is an effective treatment for depressive and anxiety disorders and its efficacy is unaffected by psychiatric comorbidity. In non-comorbid patients, sertraline is effective for the acute treatment of major depressive disorders and prevention of relapse or recurrence. It is effective for acute treatment and longer-term management of social anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder,panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. In adults and in pediatric patients, it is an effective short-term and long-term treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder.Sertraline has a good tolerability profile and has low fatal toxicity. In summary, sertraline is as effective as other antidepressants over a wide range of indications but may offer tolerability benefits as well as efficacy in patients with psychiatric and/or medical comorbidities and certain subtypes of depression.

The burden of severe depression: a review of diagnostic challenges and treatment alternatives

Among the factors making recognition of severe depression problematic for clinicians are the heterogeneous nature of the condition, lack of standardized definitions, and concomitant comorbidities that confound differential diagnosis of symptoms. The spectrum of severity in depressive disorders is extraordinarily broad, and severity assessment is comprised of several metrics including symptom intensity, diagnostic subtypes, suicidality risk, and hospitalization status. The overall diagnosis is achieved through consideration of symptom types and severities together with the degree of functional impairment as assessed by the psychiatric interview. It is likely that no single fundamental neurobiological defect underlies severe depression. The chronicity and heterogeneity of this disorder lead to frequent clinic visits and a longer course of treatment; therefore, successful approaches may require an arsenal of treatments with numerous mechanisms of action. The categories of drugs used to treat severe depression are detailed herein, as are several non-pharmacologic options including a number of experimental treatments. Pharmacotherapies include tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, atypical antidepressants such as serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and combination and augmentation therapies. Drugs within each class are not equivalent, and efficacy may vary with symptom severity. Patient adherence makes tolerability another critical consideration in antidepressant choice. The role of non-pharmacological treatments such as electroconvulsive therapy, vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and deep brain stimulation remain active avenues of investigation. Improved knowledge and treatment approaches for severe depression are necessary to facilitate remission, the ideal treatment goal.

Efficacy and tolerability of controlled-release paroxetine in the treatment of severe depression: Post hoc analysis of pooled data from a subset of subjects in four double-blind clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this work were to assess the efficacy and tolerability of controlled-release paroxetine (paroxetine CR) in the treatment of outpatients with severe major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of pooled data from 4 previously published, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, 8- to 12-week outpatient studies of paroxetine CR (12.5-62.5 mg) in MDD. However, the studies were designed to assess the efficacy of paroxetine CR overall, rather than specifically in those with severe MDD. Subjects were categorized according to their baseline mean 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) total score as having severe (> or =25) or nonsevere (<25) depression. Changes in depressive symptomatology were assessed, based on the mean change from baseline in HAMD-17 total scores and the proportion of responders (> or =50% reduction from baseline in HAMD-17 total scores or Clinical Global Impression [CGI] of Improvement scores of 1 or 2), for each study and pooled across the studies. The pooled analysis of data also assessed the proportion of patients achieving remission (HAMD-17 total score < or =7 or CGI-Improvement score of 1) at last-observation-carried-forward end point.

RESULTS

A total of 1083 subjects participated in the 4 studies; 303 had severe MDD (paroxetine CR, n = 174; placebo, n = 129). Among the patients with severe MDD, most were women, had a mean HAMD-17 score between 26.3 and 27.7, and had a mean CGI of Severity score between 4.5 and 4.9. In 3 studies, the mean age of such participants was between 35 and 43 years. However, the fourth study was an evaluation in late-life depression in which the mean age was 71.3 years in the paroxetine CR group and 70.0 years in the placebo group. In the overall pooled sample, significantly greater improvements in depressive symptoms were observed among those with severe MDD who were treated with paroxetine CR compared with those who received placebo (HAMD-17 total treatment difference, -4.37 [95% CI, -6.31 to -2.42; P < 0.001]). The odds of CGI-Improvement response were also significantly higher for patients receiving paroxetine CR than those receiving placebo, regardless of baseline depressive symptomatology (severe MDD: odds ratio [OR], 2.42 [95% CI, 1.50-3.91; P < 0.001]; nonsevere MDD: OR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.21-2.19; P < 0.002] ). Withdrawal rates due to adverse events were 9.8% versus 5.4% (severe) and 5.2% versus 4.5% (nonsevere), paroxetine CR versus placebo, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis of pooled data suggests that paroxetine CR was effective and well tolerated in these outpatients with severe MDD.

Antidepressants and their effect on sleep

Given the relationship between sleep and depression, there is inevitably going to be an effect of antidepressants on sleep. Current evidence suggests that this effect depends on the class of antidepressant used and the dosage. The extent of variation between the effects of antidepressants and sleep may relate to their mechanism of action. This systematic review examines randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) that have reported the effect that antidepressants appear to have on sleep. RCTs are not restricted to depressed populations, since several studies provide useful information about the effects on sleep in other groups. Nevertheless, the distinction is made between those studies because the participant's health may influence the baseline sleep profiles and the effect of the antidepressant. Insomnia is often seen with monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), with all tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) except amitriptyline, and all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) with venlafaxine and moclobemide as well. Sedation has been reported with all TCAs except desipramine, with mirtazapine and nefazodone, the TCA-related maprotiline, trazodone and mianserin, and with all MAOIs. REM sleep suppression has been observed with all TCAs except trimipramine, but especially clomipramine, with all MAOIs and SSRIs and with venlafaxine, trazodone and bupropion. However, the effect on sleep varies between compounds within antidepressant classes, differences relating to the amount of sedative or alerting (insomnia) effects, changes to baseline sleep parameters, differences relating to REM sleep, and the degree of sleep-related side effects.

Antidepressant-like effect of tramadol and its enantiomers in reserpinized mice: comparative study with desipramine, fluvoxamine, venlafaxine and opiates

Tramadol is a centrally acting analgesic that demonstrates opioid and monoaminergic properties. Several studies have suggested that tramadol could play a role in mood improvement. Moreover, it has previously been shown that tramadol is effective in the forced swimming test in mice and the learned helplessness model in rats, two behavioural models predictive of antidepressant activity. The aim of the present study was to test tramadol and its enantiomers in the reserpine test in mice, a classical observational test widely used in the screening of antidepressant drugs. This test is a non-behavioural method where only objective parameters such as rectal temperature and palprebral ptosis are considered. Moreover, we compared the effects of tramadol and its enantiomers with those of antidepressants (desipramine, fluvoxamine and venlafaxine) and opiates [morphine (-)-methadone and levorphanol]. Racemic tramadol, (-)-tramadol, desipramine and venlafaxine reversed the reserpine syndrome (rectal temperature and ptosis), whereas(+)-tramadol and fluvoxamine only antagonized the reserpine-induced ptosis, without any effect on temperature. Opiates did not reverse reserpine-induced hypothermia. (-)-Methadone showed slight effects regarding reserpine-induced ptosis, morphine and levorphanol had no effect. These results show that tramadol has an effect comparable to clinically effective antidepressants in a test predictive of antidepressant activity, without behavioural implications. Together with other clinical and experimental data, this suggests that tramadol has an inherent antidepressant-like (mood improving) activity, and that this effect could have clinical repercussions on the affective component of pain.

Australian and New Zealand clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of depression

BACKGROUND

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) is co-ordinating the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in psychiatry, funded under the National Mental Health Strategy (Australia) and the New Zealand Ministry of Health.

METHOD

The CPG team reviewed the treatment outcome literature, consulted with practitioners and patients and conducted meta-analyses of outcome research.

TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Establish an effective therapeutic relationship; provide the patient with information about the condition, the rationale for treatment, the likelihood of a positive response and the expected timeframe; consider the patient's strengths, life stresses and supports. Treatment choice depends on the clinician's skills and the patient's circumstances and preferences, and should be guided but not determined by these guidelines. In moderately severe depression, all recognized antidepressants, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) are equally effective; clinicians should consider treatment burdens as well as benefits, including side-effects and toxicity. In severe depression, antidepressant treatment should precede psychological therapy. For depression with psychosis, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) or a tricyclic combined with an antipsychotic are equally helpful. Treatments for other subtypes are discussed. Caution is necessary in people on other medication or with medical conditions. If response to an adequate trial of a first-line treatment is poor, another evidence-based treatment should be used. Second opinions are useful. Depression has a high rate of recurrence and efforts to reduce this are crucial.

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor sertraline: its profile and use in psychiatric disorders

The naphthylamine derivative sertraline is a potent and selective inhibitor of serotonin reuptake into presynaptic terminals. Sertraline has a linear pharmacokinetic profile and a half-life of about 26 h. Its major metabolite, desmethylsertraline does not appear to inhibit serotonin reuptake. Sertraline mildly inhibits the CYP2D6 isoform of the cytochrome P450 system but has little effect on CYP1A2, CYP3A3/4, CYP2C9, or CYP2C19. It is, however, highly protein bound and may alter blood levels of other highly protein bound agents. Sertraline is a widely used serotonin reuptake inhibitor that has been shown to have both antidepressant and antianxiety effects. Many clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy in depression compared with both placebo and other antidepressant drugs. Its efficacy has also been demonstrated in randomized, controlled trials of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, social phobia, and premenstrual dysphoric disorder. In short-term, open-label studies it has appeared efficacious and tolerable in children and adolescents and in the elderly, and data are positive for its use in pregnant or lactating women. Typical side effects include gastrointestinal and central nervous system effects as well as treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction; withdrawal reactions may be associated with abrupt discontinuation of the agent. The safety profile of sertraline in overdose is very favorable. Sertraline's efficacy for both mood and anxiety disorders, relatively weak effect on the cytochrome P450 system, and tolerability profile and safety in overdose are factors that contribute to make it a first-line agent for treatment in both primary and tertiary care settings.