Effects of Trazodone on Sleep: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sleep problems and insomnia are common, challenging to treat, and transcend specific diagnoses. Although trazodone is a popular choice, robust meta-analytic evidence is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and safety of trazodone for sleep disturbances, reflecting recent updates in insomnia diagnosis and treatment.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) up to 1 May 2024, for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing trazodone with placebo and reporting sleep-related outcomes. The minimum pharmacotherapy duration was 5 days. Included were all RCTs regardless of blinding (open-label or single- or double-blind), while quasi-randomized studies were excluded. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials assessed bias. Analyses used a random-effects model on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. Risk ratio (RR) was used for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes. When different units or scales were used, Hedge's adjusted g standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated. Subgroup and preplanned sensitivity analyses explored heterogeneity and evaluated findings' strength and consistency.

RESULTS

In total, 44 RCTs with 3935 participants were included. Trazodone did not significantly impact subjective total sleep time (TST) [WMD = 0.73 min, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 24.62; 26.07, p = 0.96] but improved sleep quality (SQ) (SMD = - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.87; - 0.28, p < 0.01) and secondary outcomes. These included the number of nocturnal awakenings (SMD = - 0.57, 95% CI - 0.85; - 0.30], p < 0.01), nocturnal time awake after sleep onset (WMD = - 13.47 min, 95% CI - 23.09; - 3.86], p < 0.01), objective TST by polysomnography (WMD = 27.98 min, 95% CI 4.02; 51.95, p = 0.02), and sleep efficiency (WMD = 3.32, 95% CI 0.53; 1.57, p = 0.02). Tolerability issues included more dropouts owing to adverse effects (RR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.45; 3.64, p < 0.01), any sleep-related adverse effects (RR = 3.67, 95% CI 1.07; 12.47, p = 0.04), more adverse effects in general (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.03; 1.33, p = 0.02), and more sleep-related adverse effects (RR = 4.31, 95% CI 2.29; 8.13, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Trazodone extends total sleep time but does not affect perceived sleep duration. It may improve sleep quality and continuity but has minor effects on sleep latency, efficiency, and daytime impairment. Trazodone is associated with adverse effects, necessitating a careful risk-benefit assessment. Limited data restrict generalizability, underscoring the need for more research.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number,CRD42022383121.

Trazodone in the Management of Major Depression Among Elderly Patients with Dementia: A Narrative Review and Clinical Insights

Objective

Major depressive disorder (MDD) often co-occurs with dementia and other neurological disorders, and treatment with antidepressants can improve symptoms, quality of life, and survival in these patients. This narrative review provides an expert opinion about the role and effectiveness of trazodone in the treatment of older adults with MDD and cognitive impairment due to physical illnesses, such as dementia.

Results

Because of its mechanism of action, trazodone can treat several depression symptoms often seen in people with dementia, including insomnia, agitation, anxiety, cognitive impairment, and irritability.

Conclusion

Trazodone may be beneficial for patients with dementia or other neurological disorders comorbid with MDD, especially when the clinical picture of depression includes or is comorbid to symptoms of insomnia, irritability, inner tension, anxiety, or psychomotor agitation.

Role of trazodone in treatment of major depressive disorder: an update

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the most common mood disorder and a leading cause of disability worldwide. Trazodone, a triazolopyridine serotonin receptor antagonist and reuptake inhibitor (SARI) antidepressant approved for major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults, has established efficacy that is comparable to other available antidepressants, and is effective for a range of depression symptoms, including insomnia, which is one of the most common and bothersome symptoms of depression. Also, trazodone's pharmacodynamic properties allow it to avoid the side effects of insomnia, anxiety and sexual dysfunction often associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants. In this narrative review, we have summarized recent clinical trials and real-world data on trazodone, including the recently introduced once-daily formulation, which has single dose pharmacokinetic properties that maintain effective blood trazodone levels for 24 h, while avoiding concentration peaks associated with side effects. This, combined with a low incidence of weight gain, and sexual dysfunction, may improve adherence to treatment. The most common adverse effects of trazodone are somnolence, headache, dizziness and xerostomia. It has minimal anticholinergic activity but may be associated infrequently with orthostatic hypotension (especially in patients with cardiovascular disease or older adults), QT interval prolongation, cardiac arrhythmias, and rare episodes of priapism. The low liability for activating side effects, the efficacy on symptoms such as insomnia and psychomotor agitation and the rapid onset of action make it useful for many depressed patients, both in monotherapy at nominal dosages of 150-300 mg/day, and in combination with other antidepressants at lower dosages.

Treating depression in clinical practice: new insights on the multidisciplinary use of trazodone

Depression is estimated to be a leading contributor to the global mental health-related burden. The determinants of this huge prevalence lie in the fact that depressive symptoms may be comorbid in a wide variety of disorders, thus complicating and exacerbating their clinical framework. This makes the treatment of depressive symptoms difficult, since many pharmacological interactions should be considered by physicians planning therapy. Hence, depression still represents a challenge for both psychiatrists and other clinicians, in terms of its high rates of relapse and resistance despite well-established protocols. It is also complicated by the well-known latency in its complete response to current antidepressant treatments. In this context, the search for new strategies regarding antidepressant treatment is mandatory. Revising the use of "old" pharmacotherapies by considering their specific features may help to perfecting the treatment of depression, both in its standalone psychiatric manifestation and in the framework of other clinical conditions. Using a nominal group technique approach, the results of a consensus of expert physicians regarding the possible use of trazodone as a valuable strategy for addressing the "real world" unmet needs of depression treatment in different fields (psychiatry, primary care, neurology and geriatrics) is herein provided. This idea is based on the unique characteristics of this drug which delivers a more rapid antidepressant action as compared to other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. It also has pharmacodynamic malleability (i.e., the possibility of exerting different effects on depressive symptoms at different dosages) and pharmacokinetic tolerability (i.e., the possibility of being used as an add-on to other antidepressants with scarce interaction and achieving complimentary effects) when used in the milieu of other drugs in treating comorbid depressive symptoms. Moreover, the large number of formulations available permits finite dosage adjustments, and the use of trazodone for specific pathologies, such as dysphagia. Therefore, although additional studies exploring the real-world conditions of antidepressant treatment are warranted, experts agree on the idea that depressive disorder, in both its standalone and its comorbid manifestations, may surely take advantage of the particular characteristics of trazodone, thus attempting to reach the greatest effectiveness in different contexts.

Antimalarial Activity of Solvent Fractions of the Stem Bark of Periploca linearifolia Quart.-Dill. & A.Rich. (Asclepiadaceae) Against Plasmodium berghei in Mice

Background

Currently, malaria elimination is intimidated by the emergence of antimalarial drug and insecticide resistance. This scenario urges scientists to develop new antimalarial drugs, where plant-based compounds are the major candidates.

Objective

The objective of this experiment was to examine the antimalarial activities of the solvent fractions of the stem bark of P. linearifolia in mice.

Methods

The dried hydromethanolic extract was treated with n-hexane, chloroform, and ethyl acetate solvents based on increasing order of polarity. For the suppressive test, after three hours post-inoculation of P. berghei, the first group was administered the vehicle 2 mL/100 g. The second group was given chloroquine 25 mg/kg, whereas the remaining nine groups were administered 100, 200, and 400 mg/kg of each of the chloroform, ethyl acetate and aqueous fractions. Furthermore, the aqueous fraction was evaluated using Rane's model for the curative test. The result was statistically analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The results were considered significant at P < 0.05.

Results

In the suppressive test, the solvent fractions suppressed parasitemia level significantly (P < 0.01 for 100 mg/kg, P < 0.001 for 200 and 400 mg/kg of the aqueous and P < 0.01 for 200 mg/kg, P < 0.001 for 400 mg/kg of chloroform fractions) as compared to vehicle-treated mice, whereas in the curative model 400 mg/kg of the aqueous fraction (P < 0.01) showed a significant parasitemia level reduction.

Conclusion

The results of this study indicated that the solvent fractions have promising antiplasmodial activity against Plasmodium berghei, which is consistent with the earlier in vivo study of the hydromethanolic extract.

Early response to trazodone once-a-day in major depressive disorder: review of the clinical data and putative mechanism for faster onset of action

BACKGROUND

Most antidepressants have a delayed onset of action and must be administered for several weeks to generate therapeutic effects. Trazodone is a serotonin antagonist and reuptake inhibitor approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder. The once-a-day (OAD) formulation of trazodone has an improved tolerability profile compared to its conventional formulations. In this study, we systematically reviewed the evidence available for the antidepressant efficacy and early improvement in depressive symptoms with trazodone OAD treatment.

METHOD

We conducted a PubMed database search for randomized controlled trials published from 2005 to 2020.

RESULTS

Two studies, a placebo-controlled and an active-comparator (venlafaxine extended-release or XR) study were found. Both the studies demonstrated that trazodone exhibits antidepressant activity at a starting dose of 150 mg/day and results in statistically significant greater reduction in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) scores within 1 week of starting treatment compared to placebo or venlafaxine XR (P < .05). Trazodone also resulted in significant early improvement in the HAM-D17 sleep disturbance factor compared to placebo or venlafaxine XR at day 7 (P < .05). This clinical effect is supported by in vitro proprietary data for the affinity of trazodone for different target receptors. Activity at these receptors may underlie trazodone's fast antidepressant action.

CONCLUSIONS

Trazodone, if properly dosed, can be an effective antidepressant with early onset of action and good tolerability. Future studies designed to specifically evaluate onset and timing of improvement of depressive symptoms remain necessary to confirm and extend these results.

Individual Differences in Response to Antidepressants: A Meta-analysis of Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE

Antidepressants are commonly used worldwide to treat major depressive disorder. Symptomatic response to antidepressants can vary depending on differences between individuals; however, this variability may reflect nonspecific or random factors.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the assumption of systematic variability in symptomatic response to antidepressants and to assess whether this variability is associated with severity of major depressive disorder, antidepressant class, or year of study publication.

DATA SOURCES

Data used were from a recent network meta-analysis of acute treatment with licensed antidepressants in adults with major depressive disorder. The following databases were searched from inception to January 8, 2016: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS database, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and PsycINFO. Additional sources were international trial registries, drug approval agency websites, and key scientific journals.

STUDY SELECTION

Analysis was restricted to double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials with available data at the study's end point.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Baseline and end point means, SDs, number of participants in each group, antidepressant class, and publication year were extracted. The data were analyzed between August 14 and November 18, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

With the use of validated methods, coefficients of variation were derived for antidepressants and placebo, and their ratios were calculated to compare outcome variability between antidepressant and placebo. Ratios were entered into a random-effects model, with the expectation that response to antidepressants would be more variable than response to placebo. Analysis was repeated after stratifying by baseline severity of depression, antidepressant class (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, and vilazodone; serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors: desvenlafaxine and venlafaxine; norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitor: bupropion; noradrenergic agents: amitriptyline and reboxetine; and other antidepressants: agomelatine, mirtazapine, and trazodone), and publication year.

RESULTS

In the 87 eligible randomized placebo-controlled trials (17 540 unique participants), there was significantly more variability in response to antidepressants than to placebo (coefficients of variation ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.11-1.17; P < .001). Baseline severity of depression did not moderate variability in response to antidepressants. Variability in response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors was lower than variability in response to noradrenergic agents (coefficients of variation ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.97; P = .01), as was the variability in response to other antidepressants compared with noradrenergic agents (coefficients of variation ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97; P = .001). Variability also tended to be lower in studies that were published more recently, with coefficients of variation changing by a value of 0.005 (95% CI, 0.002-0.008; P = .003) for every year a study is more recent.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Individual differences may be systematically associated with responses to antidepressants in major depressive disorder beyond placebo effects or statistical factors. This study provides empirical support for identifying moderators and personalizing antidepressant treatment.

Meta-analysis: Second generation antidepressants and headache

BACKGROUND

To assess the risk of headache associated with commonly prescribed antidepressant medications and to examine the impact of medication class, pharmacodynamics and dosage on risk of headache.

METHODS

We searched PubMed to identify all randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials examining the efficacy of second generation antidepressant medications in the treatment of adults with depression, anxiety or obsessive-compulsive disorders. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis to examine the pooled risk ratio of headache reported as a side-effect in adults treated with second generation antidepressants compared to placebo. We used stratified subgroup analysis and meta-regression to examine the effects of medication type, class, dosage, indication, and receptor affinity profile on the measured risk of headache.

RESULTS

SSRIs were associated with a significantly increased risk of headache (RR = 1.06, 95%CI = 1.00-1.13, z = 2.0, p = 0.045) when compared to placebo. There was no significant difference (test for subgroup differences χ² = 2.2, df = 1, p = 0.14) in the risk of headache between SSRIs and SNRIs (RR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.88-1.06, p = 0.63). There was no significant difference in the relative risk of headache with second generation antidepressants based on diagnostic indication, pharmacological properties and dosage of medications. The only antidepressants that were found to be significantly associated with increased risk of headache compared to placebo were bupropion (RR = 1.22, 95%CI = 1.06-1.41, z = 2.73, p = 0.006) and escitalopram (RR = 1.18, 95%CI = 1.01-1.37, z = 2.11, p = 0.04).

LIMITATIONS

The small number of studies that examined side effects within fixed-dose trials may have limited the power to examine the association between medication dosing and risk of headache. Additionally, reporting bias could potentially occur non-randomly across agents and therefore effect meta-analysis results.

CONCLUSIONS

Headaches reported after the initiation of second generation antidepressant medications are more likely to be coincidental than a treatment-emergent side effect of these medications.

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.