Literature DB >> 8227488

Fluoxetine and desipramine in major depressive disorder.

C L Bowden1, A F Schatzberg, A Rosenbaum, S A Contreras, J A Samson, E Dessain, M Sayler.   

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of fluoxetine and desipramine were compared in a 6-week double-blind, parallel group study of patients with major depression. Twenty-five were studied while hospitalized for treatment, and 33 were studied as outpatients. Improvement on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was significant for both treatments from week 1 through the end of the study and did not differ between the two treatments at any week. Overall, 64% of fluoxetine-treated patients and 68% of desipramine-treated patients had at least a 50% reduction in Hamilton Depression score. We assessed whether improvement relatively early in treatment was predictive of categorical response at 6 weeks. Among fluoxetine-treated patients, but not desipramine-treated patients, the week 3 change in the Hamilton Depression mood item was significantly predictive of the response at 6 weeks. Patients treated with fluoxetine had significantly fewer side effects than those treated with desipramine. Desipramine, but not fluoxetine, caused a persistent increase in heart rate. The results suggest that early signs of response to fluoxetine are not dependent on achieving steady-state levels of the drug.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8227488

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol        ISSN: 0271-0749            Impact factor:   3.153


  8 in total

1.  Synthesis and positron emission tomography evaluation of three norepinephrine transporter radioligands: [C-11]desipramine, [C-11]talopram and [C-11]talsupram.

Authors:  Magnus Schou; Judit Sóvágó; Victor W Pike; Balázs Gulyás; Klaus P Bøgesø; Lars Farde; Christer Halldin
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2006 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Adverse effects associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  E Trindade; D Menon; L A Topfer; C Coloma
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-11-17       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Prospects for the development of new treatments with a rapid onset of action in affective disorders.

Authors:  J C Soares; S Gershon
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Early improvement as a predictor of eventual antidepressant treatment response in severely depressed inpatients.

Authors:  Marlijn Vermeiden; Astrid M Kamperman; Monique E Vulink; Walter W van den Broek; Tom K Birkenhäger
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2014-10-23       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 5.  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

6.  Inhibition of rat brain monoamine oxidase enzymes by fluoxetine and norfluoxetine.

Authors:  A Holt; G B Baker
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.000

7.  Neurodevelopmental liabilities in alcohol dependence: central serotonin and dopamine dysfunction.

Authors:  Claudio A Naranjo; Alan Y Chu; Lescia K Tremblay
Journal:  Neurotox Res       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.911

8.  alpha(1A)- and alpha(1B)-adrenergic receptors differentially modulate antidepressant-like behavior in the mouse.

Authors:  Van A Doze; Evelyn M Handel; Kelly A Jensen; Belle Darsie; Elizabeth J Luger; James R Haselton; Jeffery N Talbot; Boyd R Rorabaugh
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 3.252

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.