CGI-S) And Improvement Research Articles

A double-blind study of the efficacy of venlafaxine extended-release, paroxetine, and placebo in the treatment of panic disorder

To date, no large-scale, controlled trial comparing a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with placebo for the treatment of panic disorder has been reported. This double-blind study compares the efficacy of venlafaxine extended-release (ER) and paroxetine with placebo. A total of 664 nondepressed adult outpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia) were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of treatment with placebo or fixed-dose venlafaxine ER (75 mg/day or 150 mg/day), or paroxetine 40 mg/day. The primary measure was the percentage of patients free from full-symptom panic attacks, assessed with the Panic and Anticipatory Anxiety Scale (PAAS). Secondary measures included the Panic Disorder Severity Scale, Clinical Global Impressions--Severity (CGI-S) and--Improvement (CGI-I) scales; response (CGI-I rating of very much improved or much improved), remission (CGI-S rating of not at all ill or borderline ill and no PAAS full-symptom panic attacks); and measures of depression, anxiety, phobic fear and avoidance, anticipatory anxiety, functioning, and quality of life. Intent-to-treat, last observation carried forward analysis showed that mean improvement on most measures was greater with venlafaxine ER or paroxetine than with placebo. No significant differences were observed between active treatment groups. Panic-free rates at end point with active treatment ranged from 54% to 61%, compared with 35% for placebo. Approximately 75% of patients given active treatment were responders, and nearly 45% achieved remission. The placebo response rate was slightly above 55%, with remission near 25%. Adverse events were mild or moderate and similar between active treatment groups. Venlafaxine ER and paroxetine were effective and well tolerated in the treatment of panic disorder.

L’escitalopram dans le traitement des épisodes dépressifs majeurs de l’adulte

Escitalopram is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI); it is the therapeutically active S-enantiomer of the racemic mixture, citalopram. This review aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram versus citalopram and several other SSRIs (citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline), and a selective reuptake inhibitor of noradrenaline and serotonin, venlafaxine XR, for treatment of DSM IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders - fourth edition) major depressive disorder, based on the studies evaluated by the Commission de la Transparence de la R6publique Frangaise, and data from a pooled analysis presented in 2005 at the 158th annual congress of the American Psychiatric Association. Change from baseline to end-point on total MADRS (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale--10 items, score range: 0-60) was the primary efficacy parameter; changes on HAM-D17 (Hamilton rating scale for depression--17 items), CGI-S and CGI-I (Clinical global Impression-Severity and-Improvement), and response rates (> or = 50% MADRS score reduction) and remissions (< 12 MADRS score) were the secondary efficacy parameters. Tolerability assessment was based on the numbers and rates of adverse events observed with treatment, and the DESS (Discontinuation Emergent Signs and Symptoms-43 items) scale was used for assessment of adverse events observed with treatment withdrawal. Analyses were based on intention to treat using the LOCF (last observation carried forward) method. Efficacy of escitalopram appeared to be at least equivalent to that of the active comparators in all cases. The difference between active compounds was more marked when depressive symptoms were more severe. From the point of view of tolerability, frequency of adverse effects occurring on treatment and the frequency of treatment discontinuations due to adverse effects were comparable with both escitalopram and the active comparators; however, the comparisons were mostly favourable to escitalopram, though differences were generally not statistically significant. In both studies of escitalopram versus venlafaxine XR, treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were less frequent on escitalopram than on venlafaxine XR (7.5% vs 11.2%, and 4.1% vs 16.0% respectively). With regard to adverse events associated with the withdrawal period, the signs and symptoms occurring on treatment discontinuation assessed after 1 week using the DESS scale were less frequent on escitalopram than on venlafaxine XR at 8 weeks and paroxetine at 24 weeks. Concerning suicide risk, a review of clinical trials involving 2277 patients on escitalopram and 1814 patients on placebo showed that this risk was minimal, and similar in both groups; moreover, no evidence was found suggesting that escitalopram might promote suicidal behaviour compared with placebo. These results suggest that escitalopram is suitable to be considered as a first-line drug treatment for major depressive disorder.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Venlafaxine Extended Release in Generalized Social Anxiety Disorder

Generalized social anxiety disorder is a debilitating psychiatric illness characterized by maladaptive thoughts about social situations. This double-blind study evaluated the anxiolytic efficacy, safety, and tolerability of venlafaxine extended release (ER) in adult out-patients with generalized social anxiety disorder. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 12 weeks of treatment with a flexible dose of venlafaxine ER (75 to 225 mg/day) or placebo. The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score was the primary efficacy variable. Secondary efficacy variables included scores on the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and -Improvement (CGI-I) scales, Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN), and LSAS subscales. Response was defined as a CGI-I score of 1 or 2. Two definitions of remission were used: LSAS total score < or = 30 and CGI-I score of 1. Data from 271 patients (intent-to-treat population) were analyzed for efficacy; 279 patients were analyzed for safety. Overall, 173 patients completed the study. Improvement on the LSAS was significantly greater with venlafaxine ER treatment than with placebo at weeks 6 through 12 (p < .05, weeks 6 and 8; p < .01, week 10; and p < .001, week 12) and at weeks 8 through 12 based on CGI-S and SPIN scores. Week 12 response and remission (LSAS score < or = 30) rates were significantly greater in the venlafaxine ER group than in the placebo group (response: 44% vs. 30%, respectively, p = .018; remission: 20% vs. 7%, respectively, p < .01). Patients experienced no unexpected or serious adverse events. Venlafaxine ER is safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in the short-term treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder.

Long-Term Sertraline Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of sertraline in the long-term treatment of pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Children (6-12 years; n= 72) and adolescents (13-18 years; n = 65) with DSM-III-R-defined OCD who had completed a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled sertraline study were given open-label sertraline 50 to 200 mg/day in this 52-week extension study. Concomitant psychotherapy was allowed during the extension study Outcome was evaluated by the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS), National Institute of Mental Health Global Obsessive-Compulsive Scale, and Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) and Improvement (CGI-I) scores. Significant improvement (p < .0001) was demonstrated on all four outcome parameters on an intent-to-treat analysis for the overall study population (n = 132), as well as the child and the adolescent samples. At endpoint, 72% of children and 61% of adolescents met response criteria (>25% decrease in CY-BOCS and a CGI-I score of 1 or 2). Significant (p < .05) improvements were also demonstrated from the extension study baseline to endpoint on all outcome parameters in those patients who received sertraline during the 12-week, double-blind acute study. Long-term sertraline treatment was well tolerated, and there were no discontinuations due to changes in vital signs, laboratory values, or electrocardiograms. Sertraline (50-200 mg/day) was effective and generally well tolerated in the treatment of childhood and adolescent OCD for up to 52 weeks. Improvement was seen with continued treatment.

Treatment of Dysthymia With Sertraline

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor sertraline has been shown to be efficacious and well tolerated for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Relatively few trials, however, have examined the role of pharmacotherapy in dysthymia without concurrent major depression. The current investigation focuses on the use of sertraline for the treatment of dysthymia. In this 12-week, multicenter, double-blind study, 310 patients with a DSM-III-R diagnosis of dysthymic disorder without concurrent major depression were randomly assigned to receive either sertraline (N = 158) or placebo (N = 152). Sertraline was initiated at a dose of 50 mg daily, with titration permitted to a maximum of 200 mg daily. The primary evaluation criteria were the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Seasonal Affective Disorder Version (SIGH-SAD), the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and -Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Mean percentage reductions for the intent-to-treat population in SIGH-SAD scores were 44.6% for the sertraline-treated group and 33.2% for the placebo-treated group (p = .03); MADRS scores, 43.6% and 33.0% (p = .02); and CGI-S scores, 32.8% and 22.8% (p = .02). A significantly greater proportion of the sertraline-treated group was classified as responders (defined for HAM-D and MADRS scores as a 50% score reduction and for CGI-I as a score of 1 or 2 by the final visit) and remitters (SIGH-SAD score < or = 8) relative to the placebo-treated group by the final visit. In addition, sertraline-treated patients experienced greater improvements in all 9 domains of the Battelle Quality of Life Questionnaire than placebo-treated patients did, with a significant difference observed in favor of sertraline in 8 of the 9 domains. The life satisfaction and social interaction quality of life domains showed significantly greater response in sertraline responders compared with placebo SIGH-SAD responders. Sertraline was well tolerated. Thirteen percent of the sertraline-treated group versus 8% of the placebo-treated group withdrew from therapy owing to adverse events (p = .14). Sertraline is efficacious and well tolerated in the short-term treatment of dysthymia without concurrent major depression.

A Naturalistic Assessment of Protriptyline for Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

To evaluate the potential benefit of the tricyclic antidepressant, protriptyline, in the treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). All clinic patients in an outpatient pediatric psychopharmacology unit treated with protriptyline for ADHD were monitored for response to treatment. Thirteen subjects (11 male, 2 female) were treated naturalistically with protriptyline for ADHD and were administered the ADHD Symptom Rating Scale and Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) and improvement (CGI-I) at baseline and while taking medication. All patients had failed to respond to at least one previous medication trial, and 46% had psychiatric comorbidity. Patients received an average protriptyline dose of 17 mg (range 5 to 30 mg) for 11.5 +/- 6.8 weeks. Of the 11 patients who continued to take protriptyline for at least 4 weeks, there was a modest reduction in the ADHD symptom checklist (p < .004) and the CGI-S (p = .032). However, using a predefined criteria of response, only 45% of patients were considered positive responders. Adverse effects were prominent, with 46% of patients reporting clinically significant problems and 38% of patients discontinuing treatment because of intolerable side effects. These findings do not support the clinical utility of protriptyline in the routine management of complex cases of ADHD in children and adolescents. However, the usefulness in noncomorbid, medication-naive ADHD individuals remains unclear.