A systematic review of duloxetine and venlafaxine in major depression, including unpublished data

New insights into anti-depression effects of bioactive phytochemicals

Depression is one of the most common psychological disorders, and due to its high prevalence and mortality rates, it imposes a significant disease burden. Contemporary treatments for depression involve various synthetic drugs, which have limitations such as side effects, single targets, and slow onset of action. Unlike synthetic medications, phytochemicals offer the benefits of a multi-target and multi-pathway mode of treatment for depression. In this literature review, we describe the pharmacological actions, experimental models, and clinical trials of the antidepressant effects of various phytochemicals. Additionally, we summarize the potential mechanisms by which these phytochemicals prevent depression, including regulating neurotransmitters and their receptors, the HPA axis, inflammatory responses, managing oxidative stress, neuroplasticity, and the gut microbiome. Phytochemicals exert therapeutic effects through multiple pathways and targets, making traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) a promising adjunctive antidepressant for the prevention, alleviation, and treatment of depression. Therefore, this review aims to provide robust evidence for subsequent research into developing phytochemical resources as effective antidepressant agents.

The risks of adverse events with venlafaxine for adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

AIMS

Venlafaxine is used to treat depression worldwide. Previous reviews have demonstrated that venlafaxine lowers scores on depression rating scales, producing statistically significant results but the relevance to patients remains uncertain. Knowledge of the incidence of the adverse effects associated with venlafaxine has previously been based on the results of non-randomised studies. Our primary objective was to assess the risks of adverse events with venlafaxine in the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder in randomised trials.

METHODS

We searched relevant databases and other sources from inception to 7 March 2024 for randomised clinical trials comparing venlafaxine versus placebo or no intervention in adults with major depressive disorder. Data were synthesised using meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis. The primary outcomes were suicides or suicide attempts, serious adverse events and non-serious adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 28 trials randomising 6,253 participants to venlafaxine versus placebo. All results were at high risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence was very low. All trials assessed outcomes at a maximum of 12 weeks after randomisation. Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis showed insufficient information to assess the effects of venlafaxine on the risks of suicides or suicide attempts. Meta-analysis showed evidence of harm of venlafaxine versus placebo on serious adverse events (risk ratio: 2.66; 95% confidence interval: 1.67-4.25; p < 0.01; 22 trials), mainly due to a higher risk of sexual dysfunction and anorexia. Meta-analysis showed that venlafaxine also increased the risk of several non-serious adverse events: nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, sweating, somnolence, constipation, nervousness, insomnia, asthenia, tremor and decreased appetite.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term results show that venlafaxine has uncertain effects on the risks of suicides but increases the risks of serious adverse events (especially sexual dysfunction and anorexia) and many non-serious adverse events. The long-term effects of venlafaxine for major depressive disorder are unknown. It is a particular cause for concern that there are no data on the long-term adverse effects of venlafaxine given that so many people use these drugs for several years.

Effectiveness of primary care interventions in conjointly treating comorbid chronic pain and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain and depression are highly comorbid, but the lack of consensus on the best treatment strategies puts patients at high risk of suboptimal care-coordination as well as health and social complications. Therefore, this study aims to quantitatively assesses how effective different primary care interventions have been in treating the comorbid state of chronic pain and depression. In particular, this study evaluates both short-term outcomes-based specifically on measures of chronic pain and depression during an intervention itself-and long-term outcomes or measures of pain and depression in the months after conclusion of the formal study intervention.

METHODS

This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling patients with concurrent chronic pain and depression. Intensity and severity of pain and depression symptoms were the primary outcomes. The main inclusion criteria were RCTs that: (i) enrolled patients diagnosed with depression and chronic pain, (ii) occurred in primary care settings, (iii) reported baseline and post-intervention outcomes for chronic pain and depression, (iv) lasted at least 8 weeks, and (v) used clinically validated outcome measures. Risk of bias was appraised with the Risk of Bias 2 tool, and GRADE guidelines were used to evaluate the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Of 692 screened citations, 7 multicomponent primary care interventions tested across 891 patients were included. Meta-analyses revealed significant improvements in depression at post-intervention (SMD = 0.44, 95% CI [0.17, 0.71], P = 0.0014) and follow-up (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI [0.01, 0.81], P = 0.0448). Non-significant effects were observed for chronic pain at post-intervention (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI [-0.08, 0.61], P = 0.1287) and follow-up (SMD = 0.13, 95% CI [-0.3, 0.56], P = 0.5432).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the meta-analysis, primary care interventions largely yielded small to moderate positive effects for depressive symptoms and no significant effects on pain. In one study, stepped-care to be more effective in treatment of comorbid chronic pain and depression than other interventions both during the intervention and upon post-intervention follow-up. As such, depression appears more amenable to treatment than pain, but the number of published RCTs assessing both conditions is limited. More research is needed to further develop optimal treatment strategies.

Epigenetic regulation in major depression and other stress-related disorders: molecular mechanisms, clinical relevance and therapeutic potential

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a chronic, generally episodic and debilitating disease that affects an estimated 300 million people worldwide, but its pathogenesis is poorly understood. The heritability estimate of MDD is 30-40%, suggesting that genetics alone do not account for most of the risk of major depression. Another factor known to associate with MDD involves environmental stressors such as childhood adversity and recent life stress. Recent studies have emerged to show that the biological impact of environmental factors in MDD and other stress-related disorders is mediated by a variety of epigenetic modifications. These epigenetic modification alterations contribute to abnormal neuroendocrine responses, neuroplasticity impairment, neurotransmission and neuroglia dysfunction, which are involved in the pathophysiology of MDD. Furthermore, epigenetic marks have been associated with the diagnosis and treatment of MDD. The evaluation of epigenetic modifications holds promise for further understanding of the heterogeneous etiology and complex phenotypes of MDD, and may identify new therapeutic targets. Here, we review preclinical and clinical epigenetic findings, including DNA methylation, histone modification, noncoding RNA, RNA modification, and chromatin remodeling factor in MDD. In addition, we elaborate on the contribution of these epigenetic mechanisms to the pathological trait variability in depression and discuss how such mechanisms can be exploited for therapeutic purposes.

Designing multi-target drugs for the treatment of major depressive disorder

INTRODUCTION

Major depressive disorders (MDD) pose major health burdens globally. Currently available medications have their limitations due to serious adverse effects, long latency periods as well as resistance. Considering the highly complicated pathological nature of this disorder, it has been suggested that multitarget drugs or multi-target-directed ligands (MTDLs) may provide long-term therapeutic solutions for the treatment of MDD.

AREAS COVERED

In the current review, recent lead design and lead modification strategies have been covered. Important investigations reported in the last ten years (2013-2022) for the pre-clinical development of MTDLs (through synthetic medicinal chemistry and biological evaluation) for the treatment of MDD were discussed as case studies to focus on the recent design strategies. The discussions are categorized based on the pharmacological targets. On the basis of these important case studies, the challenges involved in different design strategies were discussed in detail.

EXPERT OPINION

Even though large variations were observed in the selection of pharmacological targets, some potential biological targets (NMDA, melatonin receptors) are required to be explored extensively for the design of MTDLs. Similarly, apart from structure activity relationship (SAR), in silico techniques such as multitasking cheminformatic modelling, molecular dynamics simulation and virtual screening should be exploited to a greater extent.

Current Opinions about the Use of Duloxetine: Results from a Survey Aimed at Psychiatrists

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a complex psychiatric disorder that, presented alone or with other comorbidities, requires different adjustments of antidepressant treatments. Some investigations have demonstrated that psychoactive drugs, such as serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), can exert more effective and faster antidepressant effects than other common medications used, such as serotonin selective reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), although these differences are still controversial. During the last five years, the SNRI duloxetine has shown favorable results in clinical practice for the treatment of MDD, anxiety, and fibromyalgia. Through an online self-completed survey, in the present article, we collected information from 163 psychiatrists regarding the use of duloxetine and its comparison with other psychiatric drugs, concerning psychiatrists' knowledge and experience, as well as patients' preferences, symptoms, and well-being. We discussed and contrasted physicians' reports and the scientific literature, finding satisfactory concordances, and finally concluded that there is agreement regarding the use of duloxetine, not only due to its tolerability and effectiveness but also due to the wide variety of situations in which it can be used (e.g., somatic symptoms in fibromyalgia, diabetes) as it relieves neuropathic pain as well.

Exposure to selective noradrenalin reuptake inhibitors during the first trimester of pregnancy and risk of congenital malformations: A meta-analysis of cohort studies

Selective serotonin-noradrenalin reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are used to treat depression and anxiety during pregnancy; however, information regarding their foetal safety is limited. Cohort studies concerning congenital malformations in infants born to mothers exposed to SNRIs during the first trimester of pregnancy were identified. Eight studies were included in the analysis. In general, the use of SNRIs was not associated with an increased risk of overall congenital malformations when compared with no exposure (rate ratio [RR] = 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.94-1.22; P = 0.31), exposure to SSRIs (RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.97-1.31; P = 0.12) and no exposure with clinical indication (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.9-1.2; P = 0.564). A significantly increased risk of cardiac malformations was observed (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.15-1.53; P < 0.001); however, this association was not statistically significant when the reference group comprised mothers exposed to SSRIs (RR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.85-1.43; P = 0.47) or no exposure with clinical indication (RR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.95-1.42; P = 0.13). The evidence shows no increased risk of congenital malformations and argues against a substantial cardiac teratogenic effect of SNRIs.

Psychopharmacological properties and therapeutic profile of the antidepressant venlafaxine

Major depression (MD) is one of the most common psychiatric disorders worldwide. Currently, the first-line treatment for MD targets the serotonin system but these drugs, notably the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, usually need 4 to 6 weeks before the benefit is felt and a significant proportion of patients shows an unsatisfactory response. Numerous treatments have been developed to circumvent these issues as venlafaxine, a mixed serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor that binds and blocks both the SERT and NET transporters. Despite this pharmacological profile, it is difficult to have a valuable insight into its ability to produce more robust efficacy than single-acting agents. In this review, we provide an in-depth characterization of the pharmacological properties of venlafaxine from in vitro data to preclinical and clinical efficacy in depressed patients and animal models of depression to propose an indirect comparison with the most common antidepressants. Preclinical studies show that the antidepressant effect of venlafaxine is often associated with an enhancement of serotonergic neurotransmission at low doses. High doses of venlafaxine, which elicit a concomitant increase in 5-HT and NE tone, is associated with changes in different forms of plasticity in discrete brain areas. In particular, the hippocampus appears to play a crucial role in venlafaxine-mediated antidepressant effects notably by regulating processes such as adult hippocampal neurogenesis or the excitatory/inhibitory balance. Overall, depending on the dose used, venlafaxine shows a high efficacy on depressive-like symptoms in relevant animal models but to the same extent as common antidepressants. However, these data are counterbalanced by a lower tolerance. In conclusion, venlafaxine appears to be one of the most effective treatments for treatment of major depression. Still, direct comparative studies are warranted to provide definitive conclusions about its superiority.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Vortioxetine for the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in Adults

Objective

We aimed to compare the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of vortioxetine in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) in adults.

Method

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), and www.ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials that examined vortioxetine vs. placebo or other antidepressants for the treatment of MDD from database inception to August 30, 2021, using keywords Vortioxetine, Brintellix, Trintellix, LuAA21004, major depressive disorder, mood disorder, affective disorder, and MDD. We identified 789 publications after removing duplicates. After screening, 20 eligible randomized controlled trials were identified, of which 19 were included in the final meta-analysis. We included adults (aged 18 years and older) with a primary diagnosis of MDD. Two review authors independently selected the studies and extracted data. We extracted data on study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability. Analyses were performed using random-effects models, and outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs).

Results

In total, 20 studies (8,547 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Vortioxetine outperformed the placebo in efficacy outcomes, including response (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.23-1.48; P < 0.001), remission (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.17-1.52; P < 0.001), and cognitive function (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.16-0.52; P = 0.0003). Compared with the serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), vortioxetine had better tolerability (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86-0.94; P < 0.001) but no significant difference in response (RR 0.91, 95%CI 0.82-1.00; P = 0.06) or remission (RR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.81-1.20, P = 0.88). Vortioxetine had no difference in response (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.88-1.32; P = 0.46), remission (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41-2.44; P = 1.00) comparing with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

Conclusions

Vortioxetine is more advantageous over placebo in treating MDD among adults, but no significant difference compared to SNRIs and SSRIs in general.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021278355, identifier: CRD42021278355.

Genotoxic and cytotoxic evaluation of venlafaxine in an acute and a subchronic assay in mouse

The present research was made to determine the micronuclei and cytotoxic capacity of the antidepressant venlafaxine in an in vivo acute and subchronic assays in mouse. In the first study, we administered once 5, 50, and 250 mg/kg of the drug, and included a negative and a daunorubicin treated group. Observations were daily made during four days. The subchronic assay lasted 5 weeks with daily administration of venlafaxine (1, 5, and 10 mg/kg) plus a negative and an imipramine administered groups. Observations were made each week. In the first assay results showed no micronucleated polychromatic erythrocytes (MNPE) increase, except with the high dose at 72 h. The strongest cytotoxic effect was found with 250 mg/kg at 72 h (a 51% cytotoxic effect in comparison with the mean control level). In the subchronic assay no MNPE increase was found; however, with the highest dose a significant increase of micronucleated normochromatic erythrocytes was observed in the last three weeks (a mean of 51% respect to the mean control value). A cytotoxic effect with the two high doses in the last two weeks was observed (a polychromatic erythrocyte mean decrease of 52% respect to the mean control value). Results suggest caution with venlafaxine.

Systematic evaluation of the 'efficacy-effectiveness gap' in the treatment of depression with venlafaxine and duloxetine

OBJECTIVE

Evidence of larger drug effects in highly standardized studies (efficacy) compared to clinical routine (effectiveness) is discussed as efficacy-effectiveness gap. This study aimed to quantify effect size differences of RCTs and non-RCTs in the treatment of depression with venlafaxine and duloxetine and to identify effect modifying predictors.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, including all prospective trials, which evaluated the treatment effects of duloxetine or venlafaxine in patients with depression. The primary outcome was the pre-post effect size after acute therapy, which were compared between RCTs and non-RCTs. Moreover, an exploratory analysis of predictors in a mixed meta-regression model within an information-theoretic approach was performed.

RESULTS

171 RCTs and 74 non-RCTs were included. The pre-post effect size differed significantly between RCTs and non-RCTs (-3.04 vs. -2.62, Δ = 0.41, p = 0.012, high heterogeneity). Study characteristics were very similar between RCTs and non-RCTs. Most important variables to predict effect sizes were 'depression severity', 'dose' and 'number of participants'.

CONCLUSION

Despite differences in effect sizes between RCTs and non-RCTs, study design is not clearly an important predictor for the effect sizes. Our results question the common assumption that non-RCTs are generally better suited to describe a drug's effectiveness in clinical practice than RCTs. Future studies and their reporting should put more emphasis on the description of external validity, in order to allow better assessments of clinical relevance.

Duloxetine versus 'active' placebo, placebo or no intervention for major depressive disorder; a protocol for a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Major depression significantly impairs quality of life, increases the risk of suicide, and poses tremendous economic burden on individuals and societies. Duloxetine, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, is a widely prescribed antidepressant. The effects of duloxetine have, however, not been sufficiently assessed in earlier systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

METHODS/DESIGN

A systematic review will be performed including randomised clinical trials comparing duloxetine with 'active' placebo, placebo or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. Bias domains will be assessed, an eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed. We will conduct meta-analyses. Trial sequential analysis will be conducted to control random errors, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed using GRADE. To identify relevant trials, we will search Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities. We will also search Chinese databases and Google Scholar. We will search all databases from their inception to the present. Two review authors will independently extract data and perform risk of bias assessment. Primary outcomes will be the difference in mean depression scores on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale between the intervention and control groups and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be suicide, suicide-attempts, suicidal ideation, quality of life and non-serious adverse events.

DISCUSSION

No former systematic review has systematically assessed the beneficial and harmful effects of duloxetine taking into account both the risks of random errors and the risks of systematic errors. Our review will help clinicians weigh the benefits of prescribing duloxetine against its adverse effects and make informed decisions.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016053931.

Antidepressant use in pregnancy and severe cardiac malformations: Danish register-based study

OBJECTIVE

Studies restricted to live births may underestimate severe teratogenic effects. We address the limitation by including data from both prenatal and postnatal diagnoses of cardiac malformations.

DESIGN

Register-based study.

SETTING

Denmark.

POPULATION

364 012 singleton pregnancies from 2007 to 2014.

METHODS

We used data from five nationwide registries. Exposure to antidepressants was measured using redeemed prescriptions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pregnancies with cardiac malformations that end in miscarriage, termination, stillbirth, postnatal death or cardiac surgery <1 year of birth were classified as severe cardiac malformations (SCM). Propensity scores with adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

SCM were reported in 972 of 364 012 pregnancies overall and in 16 of 4105 exposed. For venlafaxine, the PR for SCM was 2.13 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89-5.13), 1.73 (95% CI 1.08-2.77) for other cardiac malformations, and there was a cluster of hypoplastic left heart syndromes (HLHS) (crude PR 17.4 [95% CI 6.41-47.2]), none of which ended in a live birth. For HLHS, the absolute risk increase was 4.4/1000 and the number needed to harm was 225. For selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the PRs were 1.09 (95% CI 0.52-2.30) and 1.38 (95% CI 1.00-1.92) for SCM and other cardiac malformations, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnancy exposure to venlafaxine is associated with an increased risk of severe cardiac malformations but with a low absolute risk. Potential mechanisms include direct effects or confounding by indication. Venlafaxine exposure is a marker for risk pregnancies for which fetal echocardiography may be considered.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Exposure to venlafaxine is associated with an increased risk of cardiac malformations but with a low absolute risk. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT.

MicroRNA-Based Biomarkers in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Therapeutic Response in Patients with Depression

Depression is a debilitating mental illness that affects up to 120 million people worldwide; it is currently determined based on subjective diagnostic schemes that are limited by high uncertainty. Hence, there is an urgent need to identify effective and reliable biomarkers to increase diagnostic accuracy. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) constitute a recently discovered class of non-coding RNAs that play a key role in the regulation of gene expression by modulating translation, messenger RNA (mRNA) degradation, or stability of mRNA targets. Dysregulated expression of miRNAs is being investigated as a clinical biomarker for a variety of diseases, including depression. Accumulating evidence has shown that miRNAs participate in many aspects of neural plasticity, neurogenesis, and the stress response. This is supported by more direct studies based on human postmortem brain tissue that strongly indicate that miRNAs not only play a key role in the pathogenesis of major depressive disorder, but also present potential for the development of therapeutic targets. miRNAs in the peripheral and central nervous system are being considered as potential biomarkers in the diagnosis of depression and in monitoring the therapeutic response to antidepressants, owing to their stability, tissue-specificity, and disease-specific expression. In this review, we focus on various miRNAs in tissues and fluids that could be employed as diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers in patients with depression.

Escitalopram vs duloxetine in acute treatment of major depressive disorder: meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Previous evidence indicated that efficacy of escitalopram (Esc) and duloxetine (Dul) was comparable in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). Since such studies had small sample sizes, this study purposefully applied a systematic review to determine the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability those antidepressants in treatment of MDD.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

The following primary databases were searched in July 2017: Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Esc comparison with Dul in the treatment of MDD were included in this review. The primary efficacy of outcome was the pooled mean-changed scores of the rating scales for the standardized rating scales for depression.

RESULTS

A total of 1,120 randomized subjects from 3 RCTs were collected for synthesis in the present meta-analysis. The mean-changed scores of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Clinical Global Impression - Severity, overall response rate by the HAMD, and remission rate by the HAMD and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in the Esc- and Dul-treated groups showed no significant differences. However, the mean-changed score of the MARDS, mean-end scores of Clinical Global Impression - Improvement, and overall response by the MADRS in the Esc-treated group were greater than that of the Dul-treated group. Although the overall discontinuation rate had no significant differences between the 2 groups, the discontinuation rate due to adverse events in the Esc-treated group was greater than that of the Dul-treated group.

LIMITATIONS

This review had limited eligible studies.

CONCLUSION

This review indicated the efficacy in the acute treatment of Esc vs Dul varied relying on measurements across the studies. However, the tolerability of Esc was superior to Dul in acute MDD treatment. Therefore, selection between the 2 antidepressants may depend on the tolerability of MDD patients. Due to limited included studies in this review, more large-scale and well-defined RCTs in such patients should be carried out to determine these outcomes.

Functional Recovery in Major Depressive Disorder: Providing Early Optimal Treatment for the Individual Patient

Major depressive disorder is an often chronic and recurring illness. Left untreated, major depressive disorder may result in progressive alterations in brain morphometry and circuit function. Recent findings, however, suggest that pharmacotherapy may halt and possibly reverse those effects. These findings, together with evidence that a delay in treatment is associated with poorer clinical outcomes, underscore the urgency of rapidly treating depression to full recovery. Early optimized treatment, using measurement-based care and customizing treatment to the individual patient, may afford the best possible outcomes for each patient. The aim of this article is to present recommendations for using a patient-centered approach to rapidly provide optimal pharmacological treatment to patients with major depressive disorder. Offering major depressive disorder treatment determined by individual patient characteristics (e.g., predominant symptoms, medical history, comorbidities), patient preferences and expectations, and, critically, their own definition of wellness provides the best opportunity for full functional recovery.

Vortioxetine for depression in adults

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder is a common mental disorder affecting a person's mind, behaviour and body. It is expressed as a variety of symptoms and is associated with substantial impairment. Despite a range of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options, there is still room for improvement of the pharmacological treatment of depression in terms of efficacy and tolerability. The latest available antidepressant is vortioxetine. It is assumed that vortioxetine's antidepressant action is related to a direct modulation of serotonergic receptor activity and inhibition of the serotonin transporter. The mechanism of action is not fully understood, but it is claimed to be novel. Vortioxetine was placed in the category of "Other" antidepressants and may therefore provide an alternative to existing antidepressant drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and acceptability of vortioxetine compared with placebo and other antidepressant drugs in the treatment of acute depression in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane's Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register to May 2016 without applying any restrictions to date, language or publication status. We checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, regulatory agency reports and trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy, tolerability, or both of vortioxetine versus placebo or any other antidepressant agent in the treatment of acute depression in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies and extracted data. We extracted data on study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability. We analysed intention-to-treat (ITT) data only and used risk ratios (RR) as effect sizes for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analyses used random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (7746 participants) in this review. Seven studies were placebo controlled; eight studies compared vortioxetine to serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). We were unable to identify any study that compared vortioxetine to antidepressant drugs from other classes, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).Vortioxetine may be more effective than placebo across the three efficacy outcomes: response (Mantel-Haenszel RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.49; 14 studies, 6220 participants), remission (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.53; 14 studies, 6220 participants) and depressive symptoms measured using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Scale (MADRS) (score range: 0 to 34; higher score means worse outcome: MD -2.94, 95% CI -4.07 to -1.80; 14 studies, 5566 participants). The quality of the evidence was low for response and remission and very low for depressive symptoms. We found no evidence of a difference in total dropout rates (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.19; 14 studies, 6220 participants). More participants discontinued vortioxetine than placebo because of adverse effects (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81; 14 studies, 6220 participants) but fewer discontinued due to inefficacy (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.90, P = 0.02; 14 studies, 6220 participants). The quality of the evidence for dropouts was moderate.The subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not reveal factors that significantly influenced the results.In comparison with other antidepressants, very low-quality evidence from eight studies showed no clinically significant difference between vortioxetine and SNRIs as a class for response (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 3159 participants) or remission (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 3155 participants). There was a small difference favouring SNRIs for depressive symptom scores on the MADRS (MD 1.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.53; 8 studies, 2807 participants). Very low quality evidence from eight studies (3159 participants) showed no significant differences between vortioxetine and the SNRIs as a class for total dropout rates (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.08), dropouts due to adverse events (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.08) and dropouts due to inefficacy (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.30).Against individual antidepressants, analyses suggested that vortioxetine may be less effective than duloxetine in terms of response rates (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94; 6 studies, 2392 participants) and depressive symptoms scores on the MADRS scale (MD 1.99, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.83; 6 studies; 2106 participants). Against venlafaxine, meta-analysis of two studies found no statistically significant differences (response: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.25; 767 participants; depressive symptom scores: MD 0.02, 95% CI -2.49 to 2.54; 701 participants). In terms of number of participants reporting at least one adverse effect (tolerability), vortioxetine was better than the SNRIs as a class (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.94; 8 studies, 3134 participants) and duloxetine (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.95; 6 studies; 2376 participants). However, the sensitivity analysis casts some doubts on this result, as only two studies used comparable dosing.We judged none of the studies to have a high risk of bias for any domain, but we rated all studies to have an unclear risk of bias of selective reporting and other biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The place of vortioxetine in the treatment of acute depression is unclear. Our analyses showed vortioxetine may be more effective than placebo in terms of response, remission and depressive symptoms, but the clinical relevance of these effects is uncertain. Furthermore, the quality of evidence to support these findings was generally low. In comparison to SNRIs, we found no advantage for vortioxetine. Vortioxetine was less effective than duloxetine, but fewer people reported adverse effects when treated with vortioxetine compared to duloxetine. However, these findings are uncertain and not well supported by evidence. A major limitation of the current evidence is the lack of comparisons with the SSRIs, which are usually recommended as first-line treatments for acute depression. Studies with direct comparisons to SSRIs are needed to address this gap and may be supplemented by network meta-analyses to define the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of depression.

Efficacy of Desvenlafaxine Compared With Placebo in Major Depressive Disorder Patients by Age Group and Severity of Depression at Baseline

PURPOSE

This post hoc meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg versus placebo across age groups and severity of depression at baseline in patients with major depressive disorder.

METHODS

Data from placebo and desvenlafaxine 50-mg and 100-mg dose arms were pooled from 9 short-term, placebo-controlled, major depressive disorder studies (N = 4279). Effects of age (18-40 years, >40 to <55 years, 55-<65 years, and ≥65 years) and baseline depression severity (mild, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score [HAM-D17] ≤18; moderate, HAM-D17 >18 to <25; severe, HAM-D17 ≥25) on desvenlafaxine efficacy were assessed using analysis of covariance for continuous end points and logistic regression for categorical end points.

FINDINGS

Desvenlafaxine-treated (50 or 100 mg/d) patients had significantly (P < 0.05, 2-sided) greater improvement in most measures of depression and function compared with placebo for patients 18 to 40 years, older than 40 to younger than 55 years, and 55 to younger than 65 years, with no significant evidence of an effect of age. Desvenlafaxine significantly improved most measures of depression and function in moderately and severely depressed patients. There was a significant baseline severity by treatment interaction for HAM-D17 total score only (P = 0.027), with a larger treatment effect for the severely depressed group.

IMPLICATIONS

Desvenlafaxine significantly improved depressive symptoms in patients younger than 65 years and in patients with moderate or severe baseline depression. Sample sizes were not adequate to assess desvenlafaxine efficacy in patients 65 years or older or with mild baseline depression.

A meta-analysis of the efficacy of venlafaxine extended release 75-225 mg/day for the treatment of major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the short-term efficacy of venlafaxine extended release (ER) 75-225 mg/day compared with placebo for treating major depressive disorder (MDD) and to examine associations between baseline characteristics and efficacy outcomes in MDD patients treated with venlafaxine ER 75-225 mg/day.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This meta-analysis included published and unpublished short-term, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Wyeth/Pfizer sponsored studies of venlafaxine ER at doses up to 225 mg/day in adults with MDD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

All trials were conducted before trial registration became mandatory.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change from baseline in the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D₁₇) total score was analyzed over time using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures with terms for study, treatment group, visit, interaction between treatment group and visit, and baseline score as a covariate. Associations between baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and the probability of HAM-D₁₇ response and remission at week 8 were evaluated using logistic regression models, with terms for study, treatment group, and baseline characteristics in the models. Safety and tolerability was assessed based on adverse events (AEs) and discontinuations due to AEs.

RESULTS

The full analysis set included 1087 patients from five studies that fulfilled selection criteria. Statistically significant separation between venlafaxine ER and placebo groups for HAM-D₁₇ total score was seen at week 2 and all subsequent assessments (p-values <.0001). There was no significant interaction between treatment and baseline HAM-D₁₇ total score. Probability of HAM-D₁₇ remission at week 8 decreased with increasing baseline HAM-D₁₇ total score (p = .0012; OR: 0.94); however, baseline HAM-D₁₇ total score did not predict response. Discontinuations due to AEs were reported for 9.4% of venlafaxine-ER-treated patients compared with 3.6% of placebo-treated patients. Key limitations: Five studies met the criteria for inclusion. Several differences in design between included studies limited the analysis: one study did not include a week 3 assessment (the week 3 time point was therefore dropped from the analysis), one study had two venlafaxine ER dose arms, which were combined into one group for the meta-analysis, and mixed- and flexible-dose studies were pooled.

CONCLUSIONS

Venlafaxine ER 75-225 mg/day effectively reduced symptoms of depression in patients with MDD overall and in patients with either lower (≤23) or higher (>23) HAM-D₁₇ total score at baseline.

Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines

A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants was undertaken in order to incorporate new evidence and to update the recommendations where appropriate. A consensus meeting involving experts in depressive disorders and their management was held in September 2012. Key areas in treating depression were reviewed and the strength of evidence and clinical implications were considered. The guidelines were then revised after extensive feedback from participants and interested parties. A literature review is provided which identifies the quality of evidence upon which the recommendations are made. These guidelines cover the nature and detection of depressive disorders, acute treatment with antidepressant drugs, choice of drug versus alternative treatment, practical issues in prescribing and management, next-step treatment, relapse prevention, treatment of relapse and stopping treatment. Significant changes since the last guidelines were published in 2008 include the availability of new antidepressant treatment options, improved evidence supporting certain augmentation strategies (drug and non-drug), management of potential long-term side effects, updated guidance for prescribing in elderly and adolescent populations and updated guidance for optimal prescribing. Suggestions for future research priorities are also made.

The safety of serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) in pregnancy and breastfeeding: a comprehensive review

OBJECTIVE

The present study provides a comprehensive review of the existing literature on the safety of serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) in pregnancy and lactation.

METHODS

Studies published in English, reporting the use of SNRIs in pregnant and/or breastfeeding women, were identified by searching MEDLINE/Pubmed, PsycINFO, and EMBASE.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included in the review. Altogether, the initial evidence coming from the reviewed studies suggests a lack of association between SNRIs and an increased risk of major congenital malformations. Conversely, exposure to SNRIs seems to be significantly associated with an increased risk of some perinatal complications. No neonatal adverse events emerged, so far, in the few studies concerning the safety of SNRIs during breastfeeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Available data suggest that venlafaxine is relatively safe during pregnancy, in particular as far as major malformations are concerned, whereas considering the small number of studies published, no definitive conclusions can be drawn on its safety during breastfeeding. Because of the few studies so far published, the safety of duloxetine during pregnancy and breastfeeding remains to be well established.

A systematic approach to pharmacotherapy for geriatric major depression

The broadening use of antidepressants among older Americans has not been associated with a notable decrease in the burden of geriatric depression. This article, based on a selective review of the literature, explores several explanations for this paradox. The authors propose that the effectiveness of antidepressants depends in large part on the way they are used. Evidence supports that antidepressant pharmacotherapy leads to better outcomes when guided by a treatment algorithm as opposed to attempting to individualize treatment. Several published guidelines and pharmacotherapy algorithms developed for the treatment of geriatric depression are reviewed, and an updated algorithm proposed.

Evidence-based pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder: a revision of the 2005 guidelines from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

This revision of the 2005 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines for the evidence-based pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders provides an update on key steps in diagnosis and clinical management, including recognition, acute treatment, longer-term treatment, combination treatment, and further approaches for patients who have not responded to first-line interventions. A consensus meeting involving international experts in anxiety disorders reviewed the main subject areas and considered the strength of supporting evidence and its clinical implications. The guidelines are based on available evidence, were constructed after extensive feedback from participants, and are presented as recommendations to aid clinical decision-making in primary, secondary and tertiary medical care. They may also serve as a source of information for patients, their carers, and medicines management and formulary committees.

Side effects of antidepressants during long-term use in a naturalistic setting

Side effects of antidepressants are usually underreported in clinical trials and large scale naturalistic studies are restricted to six months of use. We examined the prevalence and nature of patient-perceived side effects and their determinants during long-term antidepressant use in a naturalistic setting. Subjects, aged 19 to 67 years, in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety were recruited from primary care and specialized mental health care covered 927 cases of single antidepressant use. In 64% of cases, on average, 2.9 side effects were reported. The number of side effects was higher when subjects had higher depression severity (OR=1.28; p=0.002), three or more psychiatric diagnoses (OR=1.97; p=0.02), higher dose (OR=1.44; p=0.006) and was lower when subjects were older (OR=0.83; p=0.02) and had longer duration of use (OR=0.94; p=0.04). Tricyclic antidepressants were associated with more side effects (OR=2.52; p=0.003) and, particularly, more anticholinergic effects, like dry mouth and constipation, as compared to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Venlafaxine showed more profuse sweating (OR=1.79; p=0.007), whereas mirtazapine showed more weight gain and less sexual dysfunction (OR=0.36; p=0.03), as compared to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Weight gain was associated with female gender (OR=1.76; p=0.004) and duration of use (OR=1.06; p=0.03). We show that antidepressant side effect, known from short-term studies, persist during long-term use and are associated with depression severity and antidepressant dose. A novel finding was that venlafaxine is associated with more profuse sweating and that weight gain appeared more specific in female users. Clinicians should be aware that, during long-term antidepressant use, side effects are common and persistent.

Pharmacological management of unipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

To be used in conjunction with 'Psychological management of unipolar depression' [Lampe et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013;127(Suppl. 443):24-37] and 'Lifestyle management of unipolar depression' [Berk et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2013;127(Suppl. 443):38-54]. To provide clinically relevant recommendations for the use of pharmacological treatments in depression derived from a literature review.

METHOD

Using our previous Clinical Practice Guidelines [Malhi et al. Clinical practice recommendations for bipolar disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2009;119(Suppl. 439):27-46] as a foundation, these clinician guidelines target key practical considerations when prescribing pharmacotherapy. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted using electronic database searches (PubMed, MEDLINE), and the findings have been synthesized and integrated alongside clinical experience.

RESULTS

The pharmacotherapy of depression is an iterative process that often results in partial and non-response. Beyond the initiation of antidepressants, the options within widely used strategies, such as combining agents and switching between agents, are difficult to prescribe because of the paucity of pertinent research. However, there is some evidence for second-line strategies, and a non-prescriptive algorithm can be derived that is based broadly on principles rather than specific steps.

CONCLUSION

Depression is by its very nature a heterogeneous illness that is consequently difficult to treat. Invariably, situation-specific factors often play a significant role and must be considered, especially in the case of partial and non-response. Consulting with colleagues and trialling alternate treatment paradigms are essential strategies in the management of depression.

Efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of bupropion for major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials comparison with venlafaxine

Background

Bupropion and venlafaxine are effective antidepressants with unique pharmacological profiles.

Objectives

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of bupropion and venlafaxine therapies for adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). The authors searched clinical trials with low risk of bias, performed from January 1985 to February 2013.

Data sources

The searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were conducted in February 2013. Included populations consisted of adult patients with MDD or major depression.

Study eligible criteria, participants, and interventions

Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bupropion and venlafaxine in adult patients with MDD and offering endpoint results relevant to: (1) severity of depression; (2) response rate; (3) remission rate; (4) overall discontinuation rate; or (5) discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Limitation of language was not utilized.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

The abstracts located from the electronic databases were reviewed. The completed reports from pertinent studies were examined, and essential data were extracted. Based on the Cochrane’s bias assessment, risks of bias were assessed. Any study with two risks or more was excluded. Efficacious outcomes included the mean changed scores of rating scales for depression, overall response rates, and overall remission rates. Acceptability was determined by the overall discontinuation rates. The discontinuation rates due to adverse events were the measurement of tolerability. Relative risks (RR) and weighted mean differences or standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using a random effect model.

Results

A total of 1,117 participants in three RCTs were included. Depression rating scales used in one and two studies were the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale, respectively. The pooled mean changed scores of the bupropion-treated group were comparable to those of the venlafaxine-treated group with standardized mean differences (95% CI) of 0.05 (−0.16 to 0.26). The overall response and remission rates were similar with the RRs (95% CI) of 0.92 (0.79–1.08) and 0.97 (0.75–1.24), respectively. The pooled overall discontinuation rate and discontinuation rate due to adverse events were not different between groups with the RRs (95% CI) of 1.00 (0.80–1.26) and 0.69 (0.44–1.10), respectively.

Limitations

The small number of RCTs included in the meta-analysis.

Conclusion

According to the limited data obtained from three RCTs, bupropion XL is as effective and tolerable as venlafaxine XR for adult patients with MDD. Further studies in this area should be conducted to confirm these findings.

Does adding noradrenaline reuptake inhibition to selective serotonin reuptake inhibition improve efficacy in patients with depression? A systematic review of meta-analyses and large randomised pragmatic trials

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are recommended as first-line pharmacological treatment for depression and are the most commonly prescribed class of antidepressants. However, there is substantial evidence that noradrenaline has a role in the pathogenesis and treatment of depression. This review aims to examine the evidence of including noradrenaline reuptake inhibition with serotonin reuptake inhibition with respect to increasing efficacy in the treatment of depression. Evidence from meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and randomised pragmatic trials was found in support of greater efficacy of the serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), venlafaxine and duloxetine, in moderate to severe depression compared to SSRIs but no evidence was found for superiority of milnacipran. There is sufficient current evidence that demonstrates an increase in efficacy, when noradrenaline reuptake is added to serotonin (5-HT) reuptake, to suggest that patients with severe depression or those who have failed to reach remission with a SSRI may benefit from treatment with a SNRI. However, as these conclusions are drawn from the evidence derived from meta-analyses and pragmatic trials, large adequately powered RCTs using optimal dosing regimens and clinically relevant outcome measures in severe depression and SSRI treatment failures are still required to confirm these findings.

Economic evaluation of St. John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) for the treatment of mild to moderate depression

BACKGROUND

The burden of rising health care expenditures has created a demand for information regarding the clinical and economic outcomes associated with Complementary and Alternative Medicines. Clinical controlled trials have found St. John's wort to be as effective as antidepressants in the treatment of mild to moderate depression. The objective of this study was to develop a model to assess the cost-effectiveness of St. John's wort based on this evidence.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to estimate health and economic impacts of St. John's wort versus antidepressants. Outcomes were treatment costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and Net Monetary Benefits (NMB). Probabilistic analyses were conducted on key model parameters.

RESULTS

The average NMB across 5000 simulations identified St. John's wort as the strategy with the highest net benefit. The total cost savings for SJW were $359.66 and $202.56 per individual for venlafaxine and sertraline respectively, with a gain of 0.08 to 0.12 QALYs over the 72 weeks of the model.

LIMITATIONS

A lack of direct comparative clinical trial data comparing SJW to venlafaxine and limited data with sertraline as a comparator was a major limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

In this model, St. John's wort was shown to be a cost-effective alternative to generic antidepressants. Patients are more likely to receive treatment for a duration consistent with professional guidelines for treatment of major depression due to reduced incidence of adverse effects, improving outcomes. This represents an important option in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder.

Association between reported venlafaxine use in early pregnancy and birth defects, national birth defects prevention study, 1997-2007

BACKGROUND

Few epidemiologic studies have investigated the use of venlafaxine (Effexor XR capsules, Product Monograph, Wyeth, Montreal, Canada), an antidepressant used to treat major depression and anxiety disorders in adults, during pregnancy. Our objective was to determine whether use of venlafaxine during pregnancy is associated with specific birth defects.

METHODS

We used data from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (NBDPS), a population-based, case-control study in the United States. Our analysis included mothers with pregnancies affected by one of 30 selected birth defects (cases) and babies without birth defects (controls) with estimated dates of delivery between 1997 and 2007. Exposure was any reported use of venlafaxine from 1 month preconception through the third month of pregnancy. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% Fisher Exact confidence intervals (CIs) for 24 birth defect groups for which at least 400 case mothers were interviewed. Our adjusted analyses controlled for maternal age and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Among the 27,045 NBDPS participants who met inclusion criteria, 0.17% (14/8002) of control mothers and 0.40% (77/19,043) of case mothers reported any use of venlafaxine from 1 month preconception through the third month of pregnancy. Statistically significant associations were found for anencephaly, atrial septal defect (ASD) secundum, or ASD not otherwise specified, coarctation of the aorta, cleft palate, and gastroschisis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest associations between periconceptional use of venlafaxine and some birth defects. However, sample sizes were small, CIs were wide, and additional studies are needed to confirm these results.

Unsolved issues of mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis: network size and inconsistency

Indirect comparisons and mixed treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analyses are increasingly used in medical research. These methods allow a simultaneous analysis of all relevant interventions in a connected network even if direct evidence regarding two interventions is missing. The framework of MTC meta-analysis provides a flexible approach for complex networks. However, this method has yet some unsolved problems, in particular the choice of the network size and the assessment of inconsistency. In this paper, we describe the practical application of MTC meta-analysis by using a data set on antidepressants. We focus on the impact of the size of the chosen network and the assumption of consistency. A larger network is based on more evidence but may show inconsistencies, whereas a smaller network contains less evidence but may show no clear inconsistencies. A choice is required which network should be used in practice. In summary, MTC meta-analysis represents a promising approach; however, clear application standards are still lacking. Especially, standards for the identification of inconsistency and the way to deal with potential inconsistency are required. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Inappropriate prescriptions of antidepressant drugs in patients with subthreshold to mild depression: time for the evidence to become practice

Recent studies indicate that antidepressant drugs are largely ineffective in patients with subthreshold to mild depression when compared to placebo. In spite of this evidence, researchers continue to judge the prescription of antidepressant drugs to patients with subthreshold to mild depression as an adequate treatment, which in turn serves to further reinforce the undifferentiated treatment strategy adopted by clinicians. The present narrative review critically reflects on current research practice and highlights the need for a more differentiated, evidence-based clinical and research practice.

Evidence-based somatic treatment of depression in adults

The efficacy of antidepressants has become a contentious topic over the last decade, and yet a review of the literature shows that they are consistently more effective than placebo. Although the average magnitude of this effect is unclear, many individual patients respond well to a course of antidepressants, and relapse when the medication is discontinued. Choosing the right antidepressant for a given patient remains more art than science, but the studies reviewed here provide some helpful guidance. Table 4 lists the second-generation antidepressants along with potential reasons for choosing one over the other (based on side effects, costs, or possible therapeutic advantages.) Based on these data, the following conclusions can be drawn: • For an all-around first-line antidepressant, sertraline is hard to beat, given its combination of efficacy, tolerability, and low expense. Once escitalopram becomes generic, it will join sertraline in this category. • Bupropion is often a first-line alternative to sertraline, because of its lack of sexual side effects; although it has less efficacy for anxiety disorders, it is helpful for other comorbidities, such as tobacco dependence and attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. • Both paroxetine and mirtazepine are often maligned because of side effects of sedation and weight gain; however, these side effects may be advantageous for those whose depressive symptoms include insomnia and excessive weight loss. • Although not specifically reviewed in this article, certain antidepressants are liable to cause more drug–drug interactions than others; the most prominent of these are fluoxetine, paroxetine, and fluvoxamine.

Comparative effectiveness in pain-related outcomes and health care utilizations between veterans with major depressive disorder treated with duloxetine and other antidepressants: a retrospective propensity score-matched comparison

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare pain-related outcomes and health care utilization among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with duloxetine versus other antidepressants in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

METHODS

Patients initiating duloxetine or other antidepressants between October 1, 2005, and October 1, 2008 were extracted from the Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 16 data warehouse. All patients included had at least 1 MDD diagnosis (ICD-9-CM: 296.2 or 296.3) and continuous eligibility in the 12 months prior to the initiation. Patients with prior diabetes (ICD-9-CM: 250.xx), schizophrenia (295.xx), or bipolar disorder (ICD-9-CM: 296.4x-296.8x) diagnosis were excluded. Duloxetine and nonduloxetine patients were matched via propensity scoring (1:1 ratio). Opioid use patterns, diagnosed substance abuse, self-reported pain score, and health care utilization over the 12-month postindex period were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Compared with duloxetine-treated patients (N = 439), nonduloxetine-treated patients (N = 439) during the postindex period had more opioid scripts (4.8 vs. 3.6, P = 0.002), longer use of opioid (133 vs. 100 days, P = 0.004), and a higher prevalence of substance abuse (41.00% vs. 23.69%, P < 0.001). Nonduloxetine-treated group had 12.0 more outpatient visits (41.8 vs. 29.8, P < 0.0001), 0.16 more hospital admissions (0.32 vs. 0.16, P = 0.001), and 2.36 more hospital days (3.37 vs. 1.01, P= 0.005). Additionally, nonduloxetine-treated patients were more likely to be hospitalized (17.8% vs. 10.9%, P = 0.004) over the postindex period.

CONCLUSION

Controlling for cross-cohort differences, veterans with MDD treated with duloxetine were associated with lower risks of opioid use and substance abuse and lower health care utilization than those treated with other antidepressants. ▪