Literature DB >> 10529069

Predictors of an acute antidepressant response to fluoxetine and sertraline.

M F Flament1, R M Lane, R Zhu, Z Ying.   

Abstract

Sertraline and fluoxetine have different pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic profiles which may be of clinical relevance in the determination of response in different subtypes of depression. A randomized, double-blind, 6-week study comparing sertraline (50-100 mg/day) with fluoxetine (20-40 mg/day) in 286 outpatients with major depression, who had demonstrated comparable efficacy and tolerability for the two drugs, was analysed by subgroups of patients at baseline with melancholia, severe depression, single depressive episode, multiple depressive episodes, high anxiety, low anxiety, psychomotor retardation and psychomotor agitation. Multiple logistic regression with regressors including treatment-by-subgroup variables revealed that, within certain subgroups, the efficacy might differ substantially from that of the whole treatment group. However, the only treatment-by-subgroup interaction term that was significant was anxiety (P < 0.05). There was no evidence of interaction in single or recurrent episode subgroups, and these were not included in subsequent analyses. Subsequent two-sample statistical comparison tests of response (i.e. Hamilton Depression Scale reduction > or = 50%) rates at study endpoint between treatment groups demonstrated that patients with melancholic depression and those with symptoms of psychomotor agitation yielded a significantly greater proportion of responders with sertraline compared to fluoxetine (P < 0.05). Response rates in sertraline- and fluoxetine-treated patients, respectively, were: overall study 59%, 51%; melancholia 59%, 44%; severe depression 59%, 41%; low anxiety 71%, 55%; high anxiety 47%, 48%; psychomotor retardation, 48%, 46%; and psychomotor agitation 62%, 39%. Multiple logistic regression adjusting for possible confounding factors, that included a treatment by anxiety interaction term, also led to similar findings. In particular, the analysis showed that significant differences existed in favour of sertraline in patients with low anxiety in the melancholia and severe depression subgroups (P < 0.05), indicating that these characteristics predicted a superior response to 6 weeks of treatment with sertraline relative to fluoxetine. Sertraline also demonstrated advantages over fluoxetine on parameters such as sleep and weight disturbance in severely depressed patients, and sleep disturbance, weight, cognitive disturbance and retardation in melancholic patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10529069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Clin Psychopharmacol        ISSN: 0268-1315            Impact factor:   1.659


  8 in total

Review 1.  Psychomotor retardation in depression: biological underpinnings, measurement, and treatment.

Authors:  Jeylan S Buyukdura; Shawn M McClintock; Paul E Croarkin
Journal:  Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2010-10-31       Impact factor: 5.067

2.  The negative effects of social bond disruption are partially ameliorated by sertraline administration in prairie voles.

Authors:  Neal McNeal; W Tang Watanasriyakul; Marigny C Normann; Oreoluwa I Akinbo; Ashley Dagner; Elliott Ihm; Joshua Wardwell; Angela J Grippo
Journal:  Auton Neurosci       Date:  2019-03-15       Impact factor: 3.145

Review 3.  The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor sertraline: its profile and use in psychiatric disorders.

Authors:  G MacQueen; L Born; M Steiner
Journal:  CNS Drug Rev       Date:  2001

Review 4.  Fluoxetine versus other types of pharmacotherapy for depression.

Authors:  A Cipriani; P Brambilla; T Furukawa; J Geddes; M Gregis; M Hotopf; L Malvini; C Barbui
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2005-10-19

5.  Neuropsychological characteristics as predictors of SSRI treatment response in depressed subjects.

Authors:  Marianne Gorlyn; John G Keilp; Michael F Grunebaum; Bonnie P Taylor; Maria A Oquendo; Gerard E Bruder; Jonathan W Stewart; Gil Zalsman; J John Mann
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 3.575

6.  Establishing moderators and biosignatures of antidepressant response in clinical care (EMBARC): Rationale and design.

Authors:  Madhukar H Trivedi; Patrick J McGrath; Maurizio Fava; Ramin V Parsey; Benji T Kurian; Mary L Phillips; Maria A Oquendo; Gerard Bruder; Diego Pizzagalli; Marisa Toups; Crystal Cooper; Phil Adams; Sarah Weyandt; David W Morris; Bruce D Grannemann; R Todd Ogden; Randy Buckner; Melvin McInnis; Helena C Kraemer; Eva Petkova; Thomas J Carmody; Myrna M Weissman
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 4.791

Review 7.  Psychomotor retardation in depression: a systematic review of diagnostic, pathophysiologic, and therapeutic implications.

Authors:  Djamila Bennabi; Pierre Vandel; Charalambos Papaxanthis; Thierry Pozzo; Emmanuel Haffen
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 8.  Management of the psychological comorbidities of dermatological conditions: practitioners' guidelines.

Authors:  Cody J Connor
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol       Date:  2017-04-20
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.