OBJECTIVE: To characterize response profiles of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination therapy in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and to investigate predictive relationships of early improvement with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination for subsequent response/remission during the acute phase of treatment. METHOD: Results were pooled from 5 outpatient studies comparing oral olanzapine/fluoxetine combination, fluoxetine, or olanzapine for a maximum of 8 weeks in patients with TRD who had at least 1 historical antidepressant treatment failure during the current episode and who failed a prospective antidepressant therapy during the study lead-in period. Mean Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total and core mood items scores from the 8-week evaluation period were compared across treatment groups. Positive and negative predictive values (PPVs, NPVs) were computed from olanzapine/fluoxetine combination-treated patients demonstrating response and remission based on whether they demonstrated early improvement. RESULTS: Mean olanzapine/fluoxetine combination MADRS score reductions were significantly greater than fluoxetine by week 0.5 and olanzapine by week 1. Significantly more olanzapine/fluoxetine combination patients demonstrated MADRS onset of response compared with fluoxetine and olanzapine patients (P < .001 for both MADRS total and core mood items). In olanzapine/fluoxetine combination patients, 38.1% exhibited MADRS total score response versus 26.9% of fluoxetine patients (P < .001) and 22.2% of olanzapine patients (P < .001). NPVs for MADRS total and core mood items response and remission ranged from 85.7% to 92.1%; PPVs ranged from 29.9% to 45.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine/fluoxetine combination is superior to fluoxetine and olanzapine in producing early improvement in patients with TRD. The absence of early improvement is highly predictive for overall response failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00035321. Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize response profiles of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination therapy in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and to investigate predictive relationships of early improvement with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination for subsequent response/remission during the acute phase of treatment. METHOD: Results were pooled from 5 outpatient studies comparing oral olanzapine/fluoxetine combination, fluoxetine, or olanzapine for a maximum of 8 weeks in patients with TRD who had at least 1 historical antidepressant treatment failure during the current episode and who failed a prospective antidepressant therapy during the study lead-in period. Mean Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total and core mood items scores from the 8-week evaluation period were compared across treatment groups. Positive and negative predictive values (PPVs, NPVs) were computed from olanzapine/fluoxetine combination-treated patients demonstrating response and remission based on whether they demonstrated early improvement. RESULTS: Mean olanzapine/fluoxetine combination MADRS score reductions were significantly greater than fluoxetine by week 0.5 and olanzapine by week 1. Significantly more olanzapine/fluoxetine combination patients demonstrated MADRS onset of response compared with fluoxetine and olanzapinepatients (P < .001 for both MADRS total and core mood items). In olanzapine/fluoxetine combination patients, 38.1% exhibited MADRS total score response versus 26.9% of fluoxetinepatients (P < .001) and 22.2% of olanzapinepatients (P < .001). NPVs for MADRS total and core mood items response and remission ranged from 85.7% to 92.1%; PPVs ranged from 29.9% to 45.1%. CONCLUSIONS:Olanzapine/fluoxetine combination is superior to fluoxetine and olanzapine in producing early improvement in patients with TRD. The absence of early improvement is highly predictive for overall response failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00035321. Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
Authors: Robert E Davis; Kimberly E Vanover; Yun Zhou; James R Brašić; Maria Guevara; Blanca Bisuna; Weiguo Ye; Vanessa Raymont; William Willis; Anil Kumar; Lorena Gapasin; D Ronald Goldwater; Sharon Mates; Dean F Wong Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Maurizio Fava; Marlene P Freeman; Martina Flynn; Bettina B Hoeppner; Richard Shelton; Dan V Iosifescu; James W Murrough; David Mischoulon; Cristina Cusin; Mark Rapaport; Boadie W Dunlop; Madhukar H Trivedi; Manish Jha; Gerard Sanacora; Gretchen Hermes; George I Papakostas Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2017-09-23 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Rodrigo Machado-Vieira; David A Luckenbaugh; Marcio G Soeiro-de-Souza; Getulio Marca; Ioline D Henter; Joao V Busnello; Wagner F Gattaz; Carlos A Zarate Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2012-08-17 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Daniel E Casey; Kimberly K Laubmeier; Sabrina Vogel Marler; Robert A Forbes; Ross A Baker Journal: Prim Care Companion CNS Disord Date: 2012-05-31
Authors: Carl Björkholm; Olivia Frånberg; Anna Malmerfelt; Monica M Marcus; Åsa Konradsson-Geuken; Björn Schilström; Kent Jardemark; Torgny H Svensson Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 5.176