Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: meta-analysis of efficacy and acceptability

Pharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological treatments are very common to be used for alleviating neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in dementia. However, decision on drug selection is still a matter of controversy.

AIMS

To summarise the comparative efficacy and acceptability of currently available monotherapy drug regimens for reducing NPS in dementia.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between inception and 26 December 2022 without language restrictions; and reference lists scanned from selected studies and systematic reviews. Double-blind randomised controlled trials were identified from electronic databases for reporting NPS outcomes in people with dementia. Primary outcomes were efficacy and acceptability. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA).

RESULTS

We included 59 trials (15,781 participants; mean age, 76.6 years) and 15 different drugs in quantitative syntheses. Risperidone (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0.20, 95% credible interval [CrI] -0.40 to -0.10) and galantamine (-0.20, -0.39 to -0.02) were more effective than placebo in short-term treatment (median duration: 12 weeks). Galantamine (odds ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% CrI 1.38-2.94) and rivastigmine (1.87, 1.24-2.99) were associated with more dropouts than placebo, and some active drugs. Most of the results were rated as low or very low according to CINeMA.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the scarcity of high-quality evidence, risperidone is probably the best pharmacological option to consider for alleviating NPS in people with dementia in short-term treatment when considering the risk-benefit profile of drugs.

Impact of Sertraline, Fluoxetine, and Escitalopram on Psychological Distress among United States Adult Outpatients with a Major Depressive Disorder

How impactful is the use of Sertraline, Fluoxetine, and Escitalopram monotherapy on psychological distress among adults with depression in the real world? Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the most commonly prescribed antidepressants. Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) longitudinal data files from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2019 (panel 17-23) were used to assess the effects of Sertraline, Fluoxetine and Escitalopram on psychological distress among adult outpatients diagnosed with a major depressive disorder. Participants aged 20-80 years without comorbidities, who initiated antidepressants only at rounds 2 and 3 of each panel, were included. The impact of the medicines on psychological distress was assessed using changes in Kessler Index (K6) scores, which were measured only in rounds 2 and 4 of each panel. Multinomial logistic regression was conducted using the changes in the K6 scores as a dependent variable. A total of 589 participants were included in the study. Overall, 90.79% of the study participants on monotherapy antidepressants reported improved levels of psychological distress. Fluoxetine had the highest improvement rate of 91.87%, followed by Escitalopram (90.38%) and Sertraline (90.27%). The findings on the comparative effectiveness of the three medications were statistically insignificant. Sertraline, Fluoxetine, and Escitalopram were shown to be effective among adult patients suffering from major depressive disorders without comorbid conditions.

Effects of ABCB1 gene polymorphism on the efficacy of antidepressant drugs: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant drugs are mainly used to treat depression clinically. ABCB1 affects the P-glycoprotein activity and changes the amount of drugs in the blood tissue barrier that can be squeezed back into the blood, thus affecting the efficacy of antidepressants. In this present study, Meta-analysis was performed to further investigate the influences of ABCB1 gene polymorphism on antidepressant response.

METHODS

Relevant literatures were searched from the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database, China Biology Medicine disc, and Wan Fang databases up to May 2021 without any language restrictions. STATA 16.0 software was applied for this meta-analysis. Odds ratio (OR) and its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

The results of this meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis will summarize the effects of ABCB1 gene polymorphism on antidepressant response.

Pharmacological treatments for generalised anxiety disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Generalised anxiety disorder is a disease that can be associated with substantial dysfunction. Pharmacological treatment is often the first choice for clinicians because of the cost and resource constraints of psychological alternatives, but there is a paucity of comparative information for the multiple available drug choices.

METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed on randomised trials in adult outpatients with generalised anxiety disorder identified from MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang data, Drugs@FDA and commercial pharmaceutical registries. Placebo and active control trials were included. Data were extracted from all manuscripts and reports. Primary outcomes were efficacy (mean difference [MD] in change in Hamilton Anxiety Scale Score) and acceptability (study discontinuations for any cause). We estimated summary mean treatment differences and odds ratios using network meta-analyses with random effects. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018087106.

FINDINGS

Studies were published between Jan 1, 1994 and Aug 1, 2017, in which 1992 potential studies were screened for inclusion. This analysis is based on 89 trials, which included 25 441 patients randomly assigned to 22 different active drugs or placebo. Duloxetine (MD -3·13, 95% credible interval [CrI] -4·13 to -2·13), pregabalin (MD -2·79, 95% CrI -3·69 to -1·91), venlafaxine (MD -2·69, 95% CrI -3·50 to -1·89), and escitalopram (MD -2·45, 95% CrI -3·27 to -1·63) were more efficacious than placebo with relatively good acceptability. Mirtazapine, sertraline, fluoxetine, buspirone, and agomelatine were also found to be efficacious and well tolerated but these findings were limited by small sample sizes. Quetiapine (MD -3·60 95% CrI -4·83 to -2·39) had the largest effect on HAM-A but it was poorly tolerated (odds ratio 1·44, 95% CrI 1·16-1·80) when compared with placebo. Likewise, paroxetine and benzodiazepines were effective but also poorly tolerated when compared with placebo. Risk of reporting bias was considered low, and when possible all completed studies were included to avoid publication bias.

INTERPRETATION

To our knowledge, this is the largest contemporary review of pharmacological agents for the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder by use of network analysis. There are several effective treatment choices for generalised anxiety disorder across classes of medication. The failure of initial pharmacological therapy might not be a reason to abandon a pharmacological treatment strategy.

FUNDING

No funding was received for this research.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Pediatric Motor Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically examine the safety and effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) interventions in pediatric motor disorders.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched from inception to August 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

tDCS randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, conference proceedings, and dissertations in pediatric motor disorders were included. Two authors independently screened articles based on predefined inclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data related to participant demographics, intervention, and outcomes were extracted by 2 authors. Quality assessment was independently performed by 2 authors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 23 studies involving a total of 391 participants were included. There was no difference in dropout rates between active (1 of 144) and sham (1 of 144) tDCS groups, risk difference 0.0, 95% confidence interval (-.05 to .04). Across studies, the most common adverse effects in the active group were tingling (17.2%), discomfort (8.02%), itching (6.79%), and skin redness (4%). Across 3 studies in children with cerebral palsy, tDCS significantly improved gait velocity (MD=.23; 95% confidence interval [0.13-0.34]; P<.0005), stride length (MD=0.10; 95% confidence interval [0.05-0.15]; P<.0005), and cadence (MD=15.7; 95% confidence interval [9.72-21.68]; P<.0005). Mixed effects were found on balance, upper extremity function, and overflow movements in dystonia.

CONCLUSION

Based on the studies reviewed, tDCS is a safe technique in pediatric motor disorders and may improve some gait measures and involuntary movements. Research to date in pediatric motor disorders shows limited effectiveness in improving balance and upper extremity function. tDCS may serve as a potential adjunct to pediatric rehabilitation; to better understand if tDCS is beneficial for pediatric motor disorders, more well-designed RCTs are needed.

Meta-analysis: Risk of dry mouth with second generation antidepressants

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this meta-analysis was to quantify the risk of dry mouth associated with commonly prescribed antidepressant agents and examine the potential implications of medication class, dose, and pharmacodynamics and dose on risk of treatment-induced dry mouth.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

A PubMed search was conducted to identify double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy and tolerability of second generation antidepressant medications for adults with depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, and OCD.

DATA EXTRACTION

A random-effects meta-analysis was used to quantify the pooled risk ratio of treatment-emergent dry mouth with second generation antidepressants compared to placebo. Stratified subgroup analysis and meta-regression was utilized to further examine the effects antidepressant agent, class, dosage, indication, and receptor affinity profile on the measured risk of dry mouth.

RESULTS

99 trials involving 20,868 adults. SNRIs (Relative Risk (RR)=2.24, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.95-2.58, z=11.2, p<0.001) were associated with a significantly greater risk of dry mouth (test for subgroup differences χ²=7.6, df=1; p=0.006) compared to placebo than SSRIs (RR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.39-1.95, z=5.8, p<0.001). There was a significant difference found in the risk of dry mouth between diagnostic indications within the SNRI class (test for subgroup differences χ²=9.63, df=1; p=0.002). Anxiety diagnoses (RR=2.78, 95% CI: 2.29-3.38, z=10.32, p<0.001) were associated with a greater risk of dry mouth compared to depression (RR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.48-2.18, z=5.85, p<0.001). Decreased affinity for Alpha-1 (PE=0.18, 95% CI: 0.07-0.28, z=3.26, p=0.001) and Alpha-2 (PE=0.49, 95% CI: 0.22-0.75, z=3.64, p<0.001) receptors and SERT (PE=0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.14, z=2.10, p<0.05) was significantly associated with increased risk of dry mouth.

CONCLUSIONS

The current meta-analysis suggests that SSRIs, SNRIs, and atypical antidepressants are all associated with varying degrees of increased risk of dry mouth. SNRIs were associated with a significantly greater risk of dry mouth compared to SSRIs.

Lessons to be learnt from meta-analyses of newer versus older antidepressants

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical techniques to analyse the findings of many individual analyses (Glass, 1977). It covers all aspects of the review process involving formulating relevant research questions, searching the literature, assessing the quality of studies and choosing relevant ones, extracting and combining the data (for review see Henry & Wilson, 1992; Wilson & Henry, 1992). Meta-analysis as part of a systematic review has advantages over a narrative review but there are problems in applying it in practice (Box 1).

Prescribing psychotropic drugs for the elderly

The pharmacological treatment of the elderly differs from that of younger patients, mainly because of altered pharmacokinetics and the higher proportion of patients with organic disorders. We deal here with dementia, delirium, affective disorder, late-life schizophrenia, sleep disturbance, and rapid tranquillisation.

Italian prescribing patterns in obsessive-compulsive disorder

The aim of the present study was to investigate psychopharmacological prescribing patterns in a large sample (n = 1815) of patients suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) recruited in 4 Italian centers specialized in OCD, in comparison to available national and international guidelines. The centers were asked to complete a specific data sheet questionnaire on patients' therapeutic status. Statistical analyses were carried out by SPSS. The results showed that almost all patients referred to the centers of Milan, Pisa and Rome received psychotropic medications, whereas only 59.9% (313) did so in Turin. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were the most used drugs ranging between 49.0% and 71.5%. Clomipramine was prescribed more often in Rome and Pisa than in Milan and Turin. The same was true for other tricyclic antidepressants. Second-generation antipsychotics were more often prescribed in Pisa and in Milan. Mood stabilizers were almost exclusively used in Pisa. Taken together, the overall findings would suggest that, although the main Italian centers specialized in OCD follow available guidelines, a certain degree of variability does exist. This may depend on the different educational background, availability of other specific therapeutic strategies, as well as varying levels of severity and comorbidity of the patients.

Safety and acceptability of transcranial direct current stimulation for the acute treatment of major depressive episodes: Analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation modality that has been increasingly used for major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment. Although studies in healthy volunteers showed that the technique is well-tolerated, tDCS safety and acceptability have not been sufficiently explored in patients with MDD.

METHODS

We collected individual patient data from 6 randomized clinical trials that had been previously identified in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Primary outcomes were safety (rate of adverse events) and acceptability (rate of dropouts). Secondary outcomes were clinical, demographic and treatment predictors of the primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Dropout rates between active (8.8%) and sham (12%) groups were not significantly different (OR= 0.7, p=0.38). Adverse event rates between active (73.5%) and sham (68.3%) groups were not significantly different (OR= 1.4, p= 0.23). Higher current densities were associated with lower adverse event rates.

LIMITATIONS

Dropout reasons were not systematically reported and adverse events were not collected using questionnaires standardized across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Active tDCS is as acceptable and safe as sham tDCS, as found in randomized clinical trials of MDD.

Direct comparison of tricyclic and serotonin-reuptake inhibitor antidepressants in randomized head-to-head trials in acute major depression: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A comparison across trials conducted over several decades suggested superior efficacy of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) over selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). However, this outcome may reflect a selective secular decline of responses after randomization to placebo. Remaining uncertainty encouraged direct comparison of the drug-types in trials involving randomized, head-to-head comparisons.

METHODS

We systematically identified reports of randomized trials of TCAs versus SSRIs for major depression in several digital databases, and applied standard meta-analytic and multiple-factor regression methods to analyze and pool the findings.

RESULTS

In 89 head-to-head trials, there was no detectable overall difference in responder rates or percent-improvement between TCAs and SSRIs. In addition to non-difference between drug-types, outcomes were unrelated to reporting-year, trial-size or nominal duration, proportion of women participants, initial depression ratings, rating scales, subjects/arm, imipramine-equivalent mg/day drug dose, or dropout rate. Trial size and duration increased significantly over the years 1980-2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous evidence suggesting superior benefits of TCAs over SSRIs for the treatment of acute major depression is probably an artifact of a selective secular decline in responses to placebo, as no difference was found in a large series of direct comparisons of these antidepressant-types.

Treatment and Prevention of Depression

Depression is one of the most common and debilitating psychiatric disorders and is a leading cause of suicide. Most people who become depressed will have multiple episodes, and some depressions are chronic. Persons with bipolar disorder will also have manic or hypomanic episodes. Given the recurrent nature of the disorder, it is important not just to treat the acute episode, but also to protect against its return and the onset of subsequent episodes.

Several types of interventions have been shown to be efficacious in treating depression. The antidepressant medications are relatively safe and work for many patients, but there is no evidence that they reduce risk of recurrence once their use is terminated. The different medication classes are roughly comparable in efficacy, although some are easier to tolerate than are others. About half of all patients will respond to a given medication, and many of those who do not will respond to some other agent or to a combination of medications. Electro-convulsive therapy is particularly effective for the most severe and resistant depressions, but raises concerns about possible deleterious effects on memory and cognition. It is rarely used until a number of different medications have been tried.

Although it is still unclear whether traditional psychodynamic approaches are effective in treating depression, interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) has fared well in controlled comparisons with medications and other types of psychotherapies. It also appears to have a delayed effect that improves the quality of social relationships and interpersonal skills. It has been shown to reduce acute distress and to prevent relapse and recurrence so long as it is continued or maintained. Treatment combining IPT with medication retains the quick results of pharmacotherapy and the greater interpersonal breadth of IPT, as well as boosting response in patients who are otherwise more difficult to treat. The main problem is that IPT has only recently entered clinical practice and is not widely available to those in need.

Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) also appears to be efficacious in treating depression, and recent studies suggest that it can work for even severe depressions in the hands of experienced therapists. Not only can CBT relieve acute distress, but it also appears to reduce risk for the return of symptoms as long as it is continued or maintained. Moreover, it appears to have an enduring effect that reduces risk for relapse or recurrence long after treatment is over. Combined treatment with medication and CBT appears to be as efficacious as treatment with medication alone and to retain the enduring effects of CBT. There also are indications that the same strategies used to reduce risk in psychiatric patients following successful treatment can be used to prevent the initial onset of depression in persons at risk. More purely behavioral interventions have been studied less than the cognitive therapies, but have performed well in recent trials and exhibit many of the benefits of cognitive therapy.

Mood stabilizers like lithium or the anticonvulsants form the core treatment for bipolar disorder, but there is a growing recognition that the outcomes produced by modern pharmacology are not sufficient. Both IPT and CBT show promise as adjuncts to medication with such patients. The same is true for family-focused therapy, which is designed to reduce interpersonal conflict in the family. Clearly, more needs to be done with respect to treatment of the bipolar disorders.

Good medical management of depression can be hard to find, and the empirically supported psychotherapies are still not widely practiced. As a consequence, many patients do not have access to adequate treatment. Moreover, not everyone responds to the existing interventions, and not enough is known about what to do for people who are not helped by treatment. Although great strides have been made over the past few decades, much remains to be done with respect to the treatment of depression and the bipolar disorders.

Assessment of health-related quality of life, mental health status and psychological distress based on the type of pharmacotherapy used among patients with depression

PURPOSE

Effectiveness of antidepressants is generally comparable between and within classes. However, real-world studies on antidepressant treatment and its consequences on the overall quality of life and mental health of individuals are limited. The purpose of this study was to examine the association of specific class of antidepressants with the health-related quality of life, psychological distress and self-reported mental health of individuals suffering from depression who are on monotherapy.

METHODS

This retrospective, longitudinal study included individuals with depression who were on antidepressant monotherapy, using data from 2008 to 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Changes in health-related quality of life, self-reported mental health and psychological distress over a year's time were observed. A multinomial logistic regression model was built to examine the association between the class of antidepressant medications and the dependent variables.

RESULTS

A total of 688 adults met the study inclusion criteria. No significant difference was observed in the change in Physical Component Summary (PCS), self-reported mental health and psychological distress based on the class of antidepressants. However, individuals on serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) (OR 0.337, 95 % CI 0.155-0.730) were significantly less likely to show improvement on Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores as compared to those on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings suggest that practitioners should be aware of the differences in the health-related quality of life of those taking SSRIs versus other classes of antidepressants. Further research needs to be done to determine the reason for SSRIs to show greater improvement on mental health as compared to SNRIs.

Psychiatric Comorbidity in Migraine: A Review

Investigations of migraine comorbidity have confirmed its association with diverse psychiatric conditions. This association appears to be strongest for major depression and anxiety disorders (particularly panic and phobia), but increased comorbidity has also been reported with substance abuse and certain mood disorders. This literature also indicates that greater psychiatric comorbidity exists for migraine sufferers with aura than without. Some support is found for the notion that psychiatric comorbidity is higher in transformed migraine than in simple migraine (particularly in the case of chronic substance abuse). However, research into the possible mechanisms underlying these associations remains limited. Studies examining the order of onset and the cross-transmission of migraine and psychiatric disorders in families have been unable to distinguish fully between causal and common aetiological models of association. The conclusions are discussed in light of both methodological and conceptual issues relevant to understanding migraine comorbidity.

WITHDRAWN: Drugs versus placebo for dysthymia

This review has been withdrawn due to non‐compliance with Cochrane's Commercial Sponsorship Policy.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Why have early investigational therapies of obsessive-compulsive disorder failed to materialise?

The mid-1980s brought about a revolution in the way in which clinicians approached the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) pharmacologically. Indeed, clinicians adopted the use of selective serotonin (5-HT) re-uptake inhibitors, as treatment options, when it was demonstrated that OCD patients responded specifically to drugs enhancing 5-HT functioning in approximately 60% of all cases. Evidence to suggest a role for serotonergic compounds in OCD was further elucidated by increasing evidence in the following years. Since then, a number of different compounds that more or less directly modulate the 5-HT system have been proposed, although other therapeutic targets have also been considered. Unfortunately, despite our advancement in the understanding of this disorder, several of the treatment proposals never reached the clinic, staying at mere suggestion or not receiving sufficient development. The aim of this paper is to reflect and comment on the possible reasons that might have led to neglect or discarding these drugs that might have been effective in treating OCD.

Amphotericin B versus fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Systemic fungal infection is considered to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, particularly those with neutropenia. Antifungal drugs are often given prophylactically, or empirically to patients with persistent fever.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of fluconazole and amphotericin B on morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer complicated by neutropenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed from 1966 to 7 July 2014 and the reference lists of identified articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing fluconazole with amphotericin B.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and abstracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen trials (3798 patients, 381 deaths) were included. In two large three-armed trials, results for amphotericin B were combined with results for nystatin in a 'polyene' group. Because nystatin is an ineffective drug in these circumstances, this approach creates a bias in favour of fluconazole. Furthermore, most patients were randomised to oral amphotericin B, which is poorly absorbed and poorly documented. There was overlap among the 'polyene' trials but we were unable to obtain any information from the trial authors or from Pfizer, the manufacturer of fluconazole, to clarify these issues. There were no significant differences in effect between fluconazole and amphotericin B, but the confidence intervals were wide. More patients dropped out of the study when they received amphotericin B, but as none of the trials were blinded decisions on premature interruption of therapy could have been biased. Furthermore, amphotericin B was not given under optimal circumstances, with premedication to reduce infusion-related toxicity, slow infusion, and with fluid, potassium and magnesium supplements to prevent nephrotoxicity. The major harms were hepatic impairment and gastrointestinal adverse effects with fluconazole and infusion-related toxicity, renal impairment and gastrointestinal adverse effects with amphotericin B. For the 2011 and 2014 updates no additional trials were identified for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Amphotericin B has been disfavoured in several of the trials through their design or analysis, or both. Since intravenous amphotericin B is the only antifungal agent for which an effect on mortality has been shown, and since it is considerably cheaper than fluconazole, it should be the preferred agent.

Efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants for sub-threshold depression and for mild major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

It is commonly assumed that robust evidence exists for the lack of efficacy of antidepressants at the milder end of the depression severity spectrum. In light of specific limitations of existing reviews, we assess if antidepressants are efficacious and tolerable for sub-threshold or mild major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHOD

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of adults with sub-threshold depression or mild MDD (initial baseline symptom severity of HRSD≤20) comparing an antidepressant with placebo or treatment as usual (TAU) however defined. A pre-specified protocol was published (Prospero reference: CRD42013004505).

RESULTS

8 trials were included: 5 trials (453 participants) of sub-threshold depression and 3 trials (502 participants) of mild MDD. Trials of sub-threshold depression exhibited low risk of bias whereas those of mild MDD exhibited high risk. Two trials of sub-threshold depression were pooled (n=102) to assess efficacy and favoured antidepressants over placebo statistically but the difference was small and unlikely to be clinically meaningful: mean difference -1.39 (-2.41, -0.36). Due to heterogeneity, no trials of mild MDD could be pooled for efficacy. There was no difference between antidepressant treatment and placebo for drop out due to adverse events. The maximum proportion in those receiving antidepressants dropping out due to adverse events was 17%, with indication of a dose effect.

LIMITATIONS

Not all data from identified trials could be included in the meta-analyses due to a lack of availability of relevant data.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient evidence to support or contest the efficacy of antidepressant medication for sub-threshold depression or mild MDD. More trials, with adequate follow up, are required to address this question.

A systematic review of Chinese randomized clinical trials of SSRI treatment of depression

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have become the most frequently used antidepressants in China in recent decades. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs in Chinese studies and the quality of Chinese randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Major Western and Chinese electronic databases were searched for double-blind, parallel group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SSRIs (fluoxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, or sertraline) with other antidepressants such as SSRI, Selective Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitor (SNRI), tricyclic antidepressant (TCA), Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and/or placebo. Response, remission, and dropout rates due to side effects were defined as primary outcomes. Mean total Hamilton Rating Scale of Depression (HAMD) scores at endpoint, overall dropout rates and total Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale (TESS) scores were defined as secondary outcomes. Data were combined with random effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane evaluation tool. Quality of reports was assessed by the fulfilment of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial (CONSORT) items.

RESULTS

A total of 71 studies were included. Only one study was listed in both Chinese and Western databases. SSRIs were found to be more effective than TCAs. No significant differences were observed regarding dropout rates due to side effects. Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, adequate methods of sequence generation were described in 16 (23%) studies. All authors failed to report trial registration. Informed consent, sources of funding, email address, protocol, and limitations were also not mentioned in most studies. However, reporting quality improved steadily between 1996 and 2013.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of the low trial quality, the findings of a significant advantage of SSRI over TCA in terms of response rate and remission rate should be replicated by large high-quality Chinese studies.

La valutazione dei costi del trattamento farmacologico nella depressione. Una revisione critica della letteratura

Aims -. To review the factors which are relevant for a correct evaluation of the costs of antidepressant drug treatment and to report the results of the studies on the efficacy, tollerability and costs of the most utilized antidepressants (tricyclics and SSRI). Methods - We reviewed the international literature concerning both with comparative studies on efficacy, tollerability and safety of tricyclics and SSRI and with studies of pharmacoeconomics that have focused on the costs of depression and of different antidepressant treatments. Results - Depression involves high costs, especially if indirect costs are considered. Comparative studies indicate a substantial equivalence of efficacy between tricyclics and SSRI, but a better tolerability of the latters. The few studies of pharmacoeconomics that have evaluated different antidepressant drugs indicate that a treatment with SSRI involves lower costs as compared with tricyclics. These results are due to the higher indirect costs (compliance, drop-out for side-effects, work loss, etc.) of tricyclics. Conclusions - A correct economic evaluation of an antidepressant drug treatment should consider both direct and indirect costs. Available studies indicate that SSRI involves lower costs as compared with tricyclics; however in order to confirm these results more studies of pharmacoeconomics are needed with experimental designes (longitudinal studies) taking into account the outcome of patients treated in routine clinical practice.

Cannabinoids for epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Marijuana appears to have anti-epileptic effects in animals. It is not currently known if it is effective in patients with epilepsy. Some states in the United States of America have explicitly approved its use for epilepsy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids when used as monotherapy or add-on treatment for people with epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (9 September 2013), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (Ovid) (9 September 2013), ISI Web of Knowledge (9 September 2013), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) (9 September 2013), and ClinicalTrials.gov (9 September 2013). In addition, we included studies we personally knew about that were not found by the searches, as well as searched the references in the identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) whether blinded or not.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the data. The primary outcome investigated was seizure freedom at one year or more, or three times the longest interseizure interval. Secondary outcomes included responder rate at six months or more, objective quality of life data, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four randomized trial reports that included a total of 48 patients, each of which used cannabidiol as the treatment agent. One report was an abstract and another was a letter to the editor. Anti-epileptic drugs were continued in all studies. Details of randomisation were not included in any study report. There was no investigation of whether the control and treatment participant groups were the same or different. All the reports were low quality.The four reports only answered the secondary outcome about adverse effects. None of the patients in the treatment groups suffered adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No reliable conclusions can be drawn at present regarding the efficacy of cannabinoids as a treatment for epilepsy. The dose of 200 to 300 mg daily of cannabidiol was safely administered to small numbers of patients generally for short periods of time, and so the safety of long term cannabidiol treatment cannot be reliably assessed.

A critical review of the mechanism of action for the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: do these drugs possess anti-inflammatory properties and how relevant is this in the treatment of depression?

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the most widely prescribed pharmacological treatment for depression. Since their introduction many have considered the primary mechanism by which the SSRIs produced therapeutic improvement in depression is their effect on monoaminergic signalling. In recent years, however, the credibility of the monoamine theory and the therapeutic efficacy of these compounds in the treatment of depression has been extensively criticized. In the current review the legitimacy of these criticisms is critically examined, in many instances the evidence base used to support these criticisms is found to be weak. Nevertheless, the apparent 'failure' of the monoamine theory has been of benefit in motivating research into alternative mechanisms through which the SSRIs may act. Given research demonstrating that depressive symptoms are intimately linked with disturbances in pro-inflammatory signalling, perhaps the most promising discovery has been the realisation that SSRIs posses significant anti-inflammatory properties. These recent findings are discussed and contextualised with respect to the neurogenic, neurotrophic and gluatamatergic effects that these drugs also possess.

Anti-depressants in primary care: analysis of treatment discontinuations

It is well known that adherence to anti-depressant therapy is often poor, but the literature describes little in the way of systematic analyses to determine co-relation between treatment discontinuation and possible contributing factors. We used a community dispensing database to review anti-depressant prescribing patterns and continuity of therapy over a period of 10 months among a population of community-based general practice patients. Some 109,228 anti-depressant prescriptions were dispensed to 24,073 patients, of whom 37.5% collected a single prescription only. Tricyclic anti-depressant prescribing declined significantly during the observation period (from 70% of prescriptions in month 1 to 66% in month 10) while that of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) increased (23% in month 1, 28% in month 10) ( p < 0.0001). Some 27% of those on tricyclics were prescribed <50% of the defined daily dose (DDD) compared with 2% of those on SSRIs. Among patients new to therapy who collected >1 prescription, adherence was poor and declined over time. The factors that influenced the extent to which patients failed to adhere to therapy included dosage level (% DDD) and age ( p <0.0001 for both), but not drug class or sex. The findings suggest that low dosage is a contributory factor in treatment discontinuation, and that contrary to common perception, SSRIs are not necessarily associated with better adherence to therapy than tricyclics. Copyright (c) 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor use in primary care: a 5-year naturalistic study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate prescribing trends of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) during the course of the Defeat Depression Campaign (1992 to 1996).

METHODS

This study utilised cross-sectional data on the prescribing of SSRIs for the treatment of depression from a large primary care database for the 5 consecutive years of the Defeat Depression Campaign, producing the largest study of SSRI use to date.

RESULTS

A total of 93 600 prescriptions were issued for fluoxetine, paroxetine and sertraline, in 27 210 treatment episodes. Over the 5-year period, there was a five-fold increase in the number of prescriptions issued, and a four-fold increase in the number of patients treated, reflecting a trend for longer periods of treatment. Patients initiating treatment with fluoxetine were most likely and those initiating treatment with sertraline were least likely to complete 60, 90 and 120 consecutive days of treatment. Differences in dose patterns also emerged and were consistent throughout the study. Fluoxetine-treated patients were most likely to remain on the starting dose of 20mg daily, while large numbers of sertraline-treated patients received doses above the recommended dose of 50mg daily. These differences were not apparent from clinical trials, and this may be an artefact of trial design.

CONCLUSION

Differences in the doses prescribed may explain why sertraline-treated patients are less likely to complete an adequate course of antidepressant therapy. Longitudinal studies are required to evaluate fully the clinical significance of these findings.

A comparative survey of antidepressant drug prescribing habits of general practitioners and psychiatrists

OBJECTIVE

Clinical experience suggests important differences in prescriptions from general practitioners and specialists. This study investigated these differences and their determinants for antidepressant drug prescribing intentions by general practitioners and psychiatrists in France.

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

In May 1995, a mail questionnaire was sent to a representative panel of 300 general practitioners and 100 psychiatrists from the Midi-Pyrenees area (South West France). Two types of questions were asked: the first concerned the type of antidepressants prescribed according to the characteristics of depression ('severe', with insomnia, anxiety, etc.) and the second, the factors influencing prescriptions (personal experience, adverse effects, clinical trials, cost, etc.).

RESULTS

151 general practitioners (51%) and 63 psychiatrists (63%) answered the questionnaire. The analysis showed large differences between the two groups of physicians. Serotoninergic antidepressants were reported to be the most common first-line drugs of choice in both groups of practitioners. General practitioners claimed to prescribe serotoninergic antidepressants more frequently than psychiatrists (74 vs 59%, p < 0.05). Psychiatrists were reported to prescribe higher dosages of antidepressants than general practitioners in 'severe' depression (109.7 vs 85.6mg daily, p < 0.001). General practitioners were reported to prescribe anxiolytic agents more frequently than psychiatrists (73 vs 54%, p < 0.05), and neuroleptic agents less frequently (1 vs 11%, p < 0.001). The factors reported to influence antidepressant prescription differed in the two groups of physicians. Postuniversity teaching, hospital specialist information and registered indication were considered more important by general practitioners than psychiatrists, who reported to be more influenced by patients' and colleagues' opinions.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrated that the differences in intention in prescribing between psychiatrists and general practitioners can be explained by a different approach to prescription since psychiatrists place more importance on human and clinical factors (patients' and colleagues' opinions) than general practitioners, who referred more to 'official' data (university, hospital and registered indications).

Cannabinoids for epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Marijuana appears to have anti-epileptic effects in animals. It is not currently known if it is effective in patients with epilepsy. Some states in the United States of America have explicitly approved its use for epilepsy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of marijuana, or one of marijuana's constituents in the treatment of people with epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (May 15, 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL issue 4 of 12, The Cochrane Library 2012),MEDLINE (PubMed, searched on May 15, 2012), ISI Web of Knowledge (May 15, 2012), CINAHL (EBSCOhost, May 15, 2012), and ClinicalTrials.gov (May 15, 2012). In addition, we included studies we personally knew about that were not found by the searches, as well as references in the identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whether blinded or not.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. The primary outcome investigated was seizure freedom at one year or more, or three times the longest interseizure interval. Secondary outcomes included: responder rate at six months or more, objective quality of life data, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four randomized reports which included a total of 48 patients, each of which used cannabidiol as the treatment agent. One report was an abstract, and another was a letter to the editor. Anti-epileptic drugs were continued in all. Details of randomisation were not included in any study. There was no investigation of whether control and treatment groups were the same or different. All the reports were low quality.The four reports only answered the secondary outcome about adverse effects. None of the patients in the treatment groups suffered adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No reliable conclusions can be drawn at present regarding the efficacy of cannabinoids as a treatment for epilepsy. The dose of 200 to 300 mg daily of cannabidiol was safely administered to small numbers of patients, for generally short periods of time, and so the safety of long term cannabidiol treatment cannot be reliably assessed.

Nortriptyline versus fluoxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a six-month, double-blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Depression is a common psychiatric disorder worldwide, including in Iran, and is estimated to affect 10%-15% of the population. Antidepressant drugs can have multiple side effects, so a good choice of drug is important for successful treatment. This study compared the efficacy of nortriptyline with that of fluoxetine in the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder and assessed related factors, including age, gender, and level of education.

METHODS

The study was a double-blind, randomized clinical trial with a six-month follow-up period. Participants were 120 patients aged 15-60 years with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder based on a psychiatry interview and the Beck depression rating scale, which were performed at the beginning, middle, and end of the study. The patients were treated with nortriptyline or fluoxetine. The paired t-test, independent t-test, and the k chi-square test were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients dropped out and 97 remained in the trial. Before intervention, the mean depression score was 32.85 ± 6.23 in the nortriptyline group and 33.12 ± 6.50 in the fluoxetine group. The results of the independent t-test showed a significant difference between depression score means before and after treatment in both groups. Changes at the end of the trial compared with baseline scores were 13.4 ± 4.68 and 16.96 ± 4.96 for nortriptyline and fluoxetine, respectively. Paired t-testing showed a significant difference in the mean depression score for both the nortriptyline and fluoxetine groups. Age, gender, and level of education had no significant effects on the outcome of treatment in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that both nortriptyline and fluoxetine were effective in the treatment of depression, but that fluoxetine was more effective than nortriptyline after 3 and 6 months of treatment.

Bioimpedance in monitoring of effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment

Background

Bioimpedance has been shown to be a safe technique when used in a number of biomedical applications. In this study, we used the Electro Interstitial Scan (EIS) to perform bioimpedance measurements to follow up the efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) treatment in subjects diagnosed to have major depressive disorder.

Methods

We recruited 59 subjects (38 women, 21 men) aged 17–76 (mean 47) years diagnosed with major depressive disorder by psychiatric assessment at the Botkin Hospital according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV). Baseline Clinical Global Impression scores and EIS (electrical conductivity and dispersion α parameter) measurements were done before starting SSRI therapy. Treatment follow-up was undertaken using EIS bioimpedance measurements and by treatment response based on the Hamilton Depression Scale and Clinical Global Impression, every 15 days for 60 days. At day 45, we classified the patients into two groups, ie, Group 1, including treatment responders, and Group 2, including nonresponders. At day 60, patients were classified into two further groups, ie, Group 3, comprising treatment responders, and Group 4, comprising nonresponders.

Results

Comparing Group 1 and Group 2, electrical conductivity measurement of the pathway between the two forehead electrodes had a specificity of 72% and a sensitivity of 85.3% (P < 0.0001), with a cutoff >4.32. Comparing Group 3 and Group 4, electrical conductivity measurements in the same pathway had a specificity of 47.6% and a sensitivity of 76.3% (P < 0.16), with a cutoff >5.92. Comparing Group 1 and Group 2, the electrical dispersion α parameter of the pathway between the two disposable forehead electrodes had a specificity of 80% and a sensitivity of 85.2% (P < 0.0001) with a cutoff >0.678. Comparing Group 3 and Group 4, the electrical dispersion α parameter of the same pathway had a specificity of 100%, a sensitivity of 89.5% (P < 0.0001), and a cutoff >0.692.

Conclusion

Electrical conductivity measurement of the forehead pathway using EIS has a high specificity and sensitivity at day 45 when comparing treatment responders and nonresponders, but decreases at day 60. The EIS electrical dispersion α parameter of the forehead pathway has a high specificity and sensitivity at day 45 when comparing treatment responders and nonresponders, and increases at day 60. The EIS system may be a noninvasive, easily administered, low-cost technique that could be used as an adjunct to DSM-IV and Clinical Global Impression scores for monitoring of efficacy of treatment in patients with major depressive disorder.

Improving adherence to sertraline treatment: the effectiveness of a patient education intervention

BACKGROUND

Previous attempts to improve anti-depressant adherence have achieved mixed results. The current study evaluated the effectiveness of a patient education intervention designed to increase adherence to sertraline treatment.

METHOD

Data from a national pharmacy claims database were used to retrospectively match (along key demographic and clinical variables) consecutive patients prescribed sertraline (N = 1462) who received an educational intervention (Knowing More) between May 1, 2003, and April 30, 2004, with a control group of concurrent sertraline-treated patients who did not receive the intervention (N = 1462). The intervention consisted of 10 newsletters distributed over a 9-month period by mail and e-mail. The intervention and control groups were compared over a 7-month follow-up period on 3 adherence measures: time to discontinuation, days on therapy, and percentage of days on therapy.

RESULTS

Cox regression analysis revealed that the time to discontinuation of sertraline (median = 100 days) was significantly greater (p < .0001) for the intervention group compared with the control group (median = 60 days). By the end of the follow-up period, 27% of patients remained on therapy with Knowing More versus 15% of those not enrolled in the compliance program. The mean number of days on therapy was 24.8 days (25.5%) longer for the intervention group compared with the control group (122.5 days for the intervention group versus 97.7 days for the control group). The percentage of days on therapy was 88.2% for the intervention group versus 77.7% for the control group among patients with at least 1 refill prescription (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The educational compliance intervention, Knowing More, was associated with a significant increase in adherence to antidepressant treatment.

Where has all the money gone? Therapeutic areas making major contributions to general practitioner prescribing costs

A “top down” analysis was used to identify the therapeutic areas making major contributions to the greater than £22m increase in general practitioner prescription costs in the former South Western regional health authority (RHA) between the years ending August, 1992, and August, 1993. The analysis used PACTLINE and level 3 PACT to identify the British National Formulary (BNF) chapters and sections most responsible for cost increases. In support of this analysis, a “bottom up” analysis was also carried out. This involved empirically selecting therapeutic areas that might have made significant contributions, then calculating, using levels 2 and 3 PACT, the extent of the contribution.

Despite the different approaches, several classes of agents were identified by both methods. The top down analysis indicated that just six therapeutic areas had contributed almost £11m to the total increase of £22m+: they accounted for over 100 per cent of the “excess” growth in the four high growth rate BNF chapters (1, 3, 4 and 6). As various authoritative guidelines have recently been published concerning the use of many of the drugs in these therapeutic areas, the bases exist for a detailed evaluation of whether or not the large increases in their use can be justified.

Analysis of prescriptions dispensed for medicines in chapter 2, which served as a control because of a large increase in prescription numbers but a below average increase in costs, supported the contention that the increased use of generic products and/or some sort of price control (eg, their inclusion in the Drug Tariff) can release considerable resources to be exploited, allowing the introduction of newer and more expensive drugs even in situations of tightly-controlled budgets.

Psychopharmacology: a house divided

BACKGROUND

Psychopharmacology and psychiatry during the past 50 years have focused on the specificity model in which it is assumed that psychiatric disorders are specific entities which should respond to drugs with specific mechanisms of action. However, the validity of this model has been challenged by the approval of multiple drugs for the same disorder, as well as the approval of single agents for a variety of disorders which have little in common. As an example of this unacknowledged paradigm shift, I will examine the foundation for using antipsychotics in the treatment of depression.

METHODS

An extensive literature search of studies investigating various mechanisms of actions of antipsychotics and antidepressants with the goal of identifying neurochemical processes common to both.

RESULTS

The neurochemical differences in these classes of drugs appear to be profound, although several processes are common in both, including some degree of neuroprotection and changes in the epigenome. Whether these common features have any effect on clinical outcome remains in doubt.

CONCLUSIONS

While psychopharmacology and psychiatry remain largely committed to the specificity model, it appears that clinicians are prescribing on a dimensional model wherein symptoms are being treated with a variety of drugs, regardless of the diagnosis.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for premenstrual dysphoric disorder

BACKGROUND

Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is reported to affect between 13% and 31% of women. Between 3% and 8% of women are reported to meet criteria for the more severe form of PMS, premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). Although PMDD has received increased attention in recent years, the cost effectiveness of treatments for PMDD remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost effectiveness of the four medications with a US FDA-approved indication for PMDD: fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine and drospirenone plus ethinyl estradiol (DRSP/EE).

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was used to evaluate both direct costs (medication and physician visits) and clinical outcomes (treatment success, failure and discontinuation). Medication costs were based on average wholesale prices of branded products; physician visit costs were obtained from a claims database study of PMDD patients and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Clinical outcome probabilities were derived from published clinical trials in PMDD. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated using the difference in costs and percentage of successfully treated patients at 6 months. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess the impact of uncertainty in parameter estimates. Threshold values where a change in the cost-effective strategy occurred were identified using a net benefit framework.

RESULTS

Starting therapy with DRSP/EE dominated both sertraline and paroxetine, but not fluoxetine. The estimated ICER of initiating treatment with fluoxetine relative to DRSP/EE was $US4385 per treatment success (year 2007 values). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves revealed that for ceiling ratios>or=$US3450 per treatment success, fluoxetine had the highest probability (>or=0.37) of being the most cost-effective treatment, relative to the other options. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier further indicated that DRSP/EE remained the option with the highest expected net monetary benefit for ceiling values <or=$US3900 per treatment success.

CONCLUSION

These analyses suggest that initiating therapy with DRSP/EE may be a cost-effective option in the treatment of PMDD.

Sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial design of neurobehavioral treatment for patients with metastatic malignant melanoma undergoing high-dose interferon-alpha therapy

BACKGROUND

Interferon-alpha therapy, which is used to treat metastatic malignant melanoma, can cause patients to develop two distinct neurobehavioral symptom complexes: a mood syndrome and a neurovegetative syndrome. Interferon-alpha effects on serotonin metabolism appear to contribute to the mood and anxiety syndrome, while the neurovegetative syndrome appears to be related to interferon-alpha effects on dopamine.

PURPOSE

Our goal is to propose a design for utilizing a sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial design for patients with malignant melanoma to test the relative efficacy of drugs that target serotonin versus dopamine metabolism during 4 weeks of intravenous, then 8 weeks of subcutaneous, interferon-alpha therapy.

METHODS

Patients will be offered participation in a double-blinded, randomized, controlled, 14-week trial involving two treatment phases. During the first month of intravenous interferon-alpha therapy, we will test the hypotheses that escitalopram will be more effective in reducing depressed mood, anxiety, and irritability, whereas methylphenidate will be more effective in diminishing interferon-alpha-induced neurovegetative symptoms, such as fatigue and psychomotor slowing. During the next 8 weeks of subcutaneous interferon therapy, participants whose symptoms do not improve significantly will be randomized to the alternate agent alone versus escitalopram and methylphenidate together.

RESULTS

We present a prototype for a single-center, sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial, which seeks to determine the efficacy of sequenced and targeted treatment for the two distinct symptom complexes suffered by patients treated with interferon-alpha.

LIMITATIONS

Because we cannot completely control for external factors, a relevant question is whether or not 'short-term' neuropsychiatric interventions can increase the number of interferon-alpha doses tolerated and improve long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial proposes a framework for developing optimal treatment strategies; however, additional studies are needed to determine the best strategy for treating or preventing neurobehavioral symptoms induced by the immunotherapy interferon-alpha.

A systematic review of conflicting meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery

Meta-analyses are important evaluations in orthopaedic surgery, not only to create clinical guidelines, but also because their findings are included in public health and health policy decision making. However, with increasing numbers of meta-analyses, discordant and frankly conflicting conclusions have been reported. We searched for conflicting meta-analyses, ie, those arriving at different conclusions despite following the same research question, identified potential reasons for these differences, and assessed the statistical significance and clinical importance of differences. We identified conflicting meta-analyses on graft choice in ACL reconstruction and the use of hyaluronic acid. We found significant differences in individual results only for meta-analyses on hyaluronic acid, but the 95% confidence intervals of the magnitude of differences included values as much as 40% for ACL meta-analyses. However, our findings suggest most conflicts derive from differences in the interpretation of pooled results rather than in the actual results. Thus conclusions and interpretations from meta-analyses should be scrutinized as critically as those from any other type of study and subjected to reassessment if deemed necessary.

Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care

BACKGROUND

Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

All searches were conducted in September 2007.The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63% to 26% respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48% to 42% respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care.

[Review of the guidelines of the Brazilian Medical Association for the treatment of depression (Complete version)]

OBJECTIVE

Depression is a frequent, recurrent and chronic condition with high levels of functional disability. The Brazilian Medical Association Guidelines project proposed guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of the most common medical disorders. The objective of this paper is to present a review of the Guidelines Published in 2003 incorporating new evidence and recommendations.

METHOD

This review was based on guidelines developed in other countries and systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials and when absent, observational studies and recommendations from experts. The Brazilian Medical Association proposed this methodology for the whole project. The review was developed from new international guidelines published since 2003.

RESULTS

The following aspects are presented: prevalence, demographics, disability, diagnostics and sub-diagnosis, efficacy of pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment, costs and side-effects of different classes of available drugs in Brazil. Strategies for different phases of treatment are also discussed.

CONCLUSION

The Guidelines are an important tool for clinical decisions and a reference for orientation based on the available evidence in the literature.

Fluoxetine and imipramine: are there differences in cost-utility for depression in primary care?

RATIONALE

Depressive disorders generate severe personal burden and high economic costs. Cost-utility analyses of the different therapeutical options are crucial to policy-makers and clinicians. Previous cost-utility studies, comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants, have used modelling techniques or have not included indirect costs in the economic analyses.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-utility of fluoxetine compared with imipramine for treating depressive disorders in primary care.

METHODS

A 6-month randomized prospective naturalistic study comparing fluoxetine with imipramine was conducted in three primary care centres in Spain. One hundred and three patients requiring antidepressant treatment for a DSM-IV depressive disorder were included in the study. Patients were randomized either to fluoxetine (53 patients) or to imipramine (50 patients) treatment. Patients were treated with antidepressants according to their general practitioner's usual clinical practice. Outcome measures were the quality of life tariff of the European Quality of Life Questionnaire: EuroQoL-5D (five domains), direct costs, indirect costs and total costs. Subjects were evaluated at the beginning of treatment and after 1, 3 and 6 months. Incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) were obtained. To address uncertainty in the ICUR's sampling distribution, non-parametric bootstrapping was carried out.

RESULTS

Taking into account adjusted total costs and incremental quality of life gained, imipramine dominated fluoxetine with 81.5% of the bootstrap replications in the dominance quadrant.

CONCLUSION

Imipramine seems to be a better cost-utility antidepressant option for treating depressive disorders in primary care.

Paroxetine: safety and tolerability issues

Paroxetine is a selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor (SSRI) available in immediate release and controlled release (CR) formulations. Paroxetine is the most potent inhibitor of serotonin re-uptake among the now available SSRIs. Paroxetine has been approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder (PD), generalised anxiety disorder, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and social anxiety disorder (SAD) in adults, whereas paroxetine CR is approved for the treatment of MDD, SAD, PD and premenstrual dysphoric disorder in adults. The overall efficacy of paroxetine seems to be comparable to other SSRIs in the treatment of approved indications, although paroxetine treatment induces more sedation, constipation, sexual dysfunction, discontinuation syndrome and weight gain than other SSRIs. Recent data suggest that paroxetine treatment leads to increased rates of congenital malformations, although this evidence is not conclusive. Paroxetine and paroxetine CR are not indicated for use in the paediatric population and are categorised as Pregnancy Class D. In conclusion, whether the tolerability profile of paroxetine differs substantially from other new antidepressants (including other SSRIs) needs to be determined in adequately powered well-designed randomised controlled comparative clinical trials.