Jun J Mao1, Sharon X Xie2, Jarcy Zee2, Irene Soeller3, Qing S Li3, Kenneth Rockwell4, Jay D Amsterdam5. 1. Department of Family Medicine & Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: jun.mao@uphs.upenn.edu. 2. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 3. Department of Family Medicine & Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Depression Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 4. Investigational Drug Service, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 5. Depression Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We performed a proof of concept trial to evaluate relative safety and efficacy of Rhodiola rosea (R. rosea) versus sertraline for mild to moderate major depressive disorder. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that R. rosea would have similar therapeutic effects as sertraline but with less adverse events. STUDY DESIGN: Phase II randomized placebo controlled clinical trial. METHODS:57 subjects were randomized to 12 weeks of standardized R. rosea extract, sertraline, or placebo. Changes over time in Hamilton Depression Rating (HAM-D), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Clinical Global Impression Change (CGI/C) scores among groups were examined using mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Modest, albeit statistically non-significant, reductions were observed for HAM-D, BDI, and CGI/C scores for all treatment conditions with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.79, p = 0.28, and p = 0.17, respectively). The decline in HAM-D scores was greater for sertraline (-8.2, 95% confidence interval [CI], -12.7 to -3.6) versus R. rosea (-5.1, 95% CI: -8.8 to -1.3) and placebo (-4.6, 95% CI: -8.6 to -0.6). While the odds of improving (versus placebo) were greater for sertraline (1.90 [0.44-8.20]; odds ratio [95% CI]) than R. rosea (1.39 [0.38-5.04]), more subjects on sertraline reported adverse events (63.2%) than R. rosea (30.0%) or placebo (16.7%) (p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Although R. rosea produced less antidepressant effect versus sertraline, it also resulted in significantly fewer adverse events and was better tolerated. These findings suggest that R. rosea, although less effective than sertraline, may possess a more favorable risk to benefit ratio for individuals with mild to moderate depression.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We performed a proof of concept trial to evaluate relative safety and efficacy of Rhodiola rosea (R. rosea) versus sertraline for mild to moderate major depressive disorder. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that R. rosea would have similar therapeutic effects as sertraline but with less adverse events. STUDY DESIGN: Phase II randomized placebo controlled clinical trial. METHODS: 57 subjects were randomized to 12 weeks of standardized R. rosea extract, sertraline, or placebo. Changes over time in Hamilton Depression Rating (HAM-D), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Clinical Global Impression Change (CGI/C) scores among groups were examined using mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Modest, albeit statistically non-significant, reductions were observed for HAM-D, BDI, and CGI/C scores for all treatment conditions with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.79, p = 0.28, and p = 0.17, respectively). The decline in HAM-D scores was greater for sertraline (-8.2, 95% confidence interval [CI], -12.7 to -3.6) versus R. rosea (-5.1, 95% CI: -8.8 to -1.3) and placebo (-4.6, 95% CI: -8.6 to -0.6). While the odds of improving (versus placebo) were greater for sertraline (1.90 [0.44-8.20]; odds ratio [95% CI]) than R. rosea (1.39 [0.38-5.04]), more subjects on sertraline reported adverse events (63.2%) than R. rosea (30.0%) or placebo (16.7%) (p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Although R. rosea produced less antidepressant effect versus sertraline, it also resulted in significantly fewer adverse events and was better tolerated. These findings suggest that R. rosea, although less effective than sertraline, may possess a more favorable risk to benefit ratio for individuals with mild to moderate depression.
Authors: V A Shevtsov; B I Zholus; V I Shervarly; V B Vol'skij; Y P Korovin; M P Khristich; N A Roslyakova; G Wikman Journal: Phytomedicine Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.340
Authors: Jay C Fournier; Robert J DeRubeis; Steven D Hollon; Sona Dimidjian; Jay D Amsterdam; Richard C Shelton; Jan Fawcett Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-01-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ronald C Kessler; Patricia Berglund; Olga Demler; Robert Jin; Doreen Koretz; Kathleen R Merikangas; A John Rush; Ellen E Walters; Philip S Wang Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Arun V Ravindran; Lynda G Balneaves; Guy Faulkner; Abigail Ortiz; Diane McIntosh; Rachel L Morehouse; Lakshmi Ravindran; Lakshmi N Yatham; Sidney H Kennedy; Raymond W Lam; Glenda M MacQueen; Roumen V Milev; Sagar V Parikh Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Alexander G Panossian; Thomas Efferth; Alexander N Shikov; Olga N Pozharitskaya; Kenny Kuchta; Pulok K Mukherjee; Subhadip Banerjee; Michael Heinrich; Wanying Wu; De-An Guo; Hildebert Wagner Journal: Med Res Rev Date: 2020-10-25 Impact factor: 12.944
Authors: Thomas Efferth; Mohamed E M Saeed; Elhaj Mirghani; Awadh Alim; Zahir Yassin; Elfatih Saeed; Hassan E Khalid; Salah Daak Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-07-25
Authors: Khachik E Labachyan; Dara Kiani; Evgueni A Sevrioukov; Samuel E Schriner; Mahtab Jafari Journal: Gut Pathog Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 4.181