Article

Comparative effectiveness of second-generation antidepressants for accompanying anxiety, insomnia, and pain in depressed patients: a systematic review.

Danube University Krems, Krems, Austria.
Depression and Anxiety (Impact Factor: 4.29). 05/2012; 29(6):495-505. DOI: 10.1002/da.21951
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often suffer from accompanying symptoms that influence the choice of pharmacotherapy with second-generation antidepressants (SGAs). We conducted a systematic review to determine the comparative effectiveness of citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, venlafaxine, bupropion, mirtazapine, nefazodone, and trazodone, for accompanying anxiety, insomnia, and pain in patients with MDD.
We conducted searches in multiple databases including MEDLINE®, Embase, the Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and PsycINFO, from 1980 through August 2011 and reviewed reference lists of pertinent articles. We dually reviewed abstracts, full-text articles, and abstracted data. We included randomized, head-to-head trials of SGAs of at least 6 weeks' duration. We grouped SGAs into three classes for the analysis: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and others. We graded the strength of the evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group (GRADE) approach.
We located 19 head-to-head trials in total: 11 on anxiety, six on insomnia, and four on pain. For the majority of comparisons, the strength of the evidence was moderate or low: evidence is weakened by inconsistency and imprecision. For treating anxiety, insomnia, and pain moderate evidence suggests that the SSRIs do not differ.
Evidence guiding the selection of an SGA based on accompanying symptoms of depression is limited. Very few trials were designed and adequately powered to answer questions about accompanying symptoms; analyses were generally of subgroups in larger MDD trials.

1 Bookmark
 · 
105 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The review summarises the evidence supporting the choice of an antidepressant in primary care. We report current guidance on the choice of antidepressants and the current use of antidepressants in Germany. Evidence for the comparative efficacy of modern antidepressants, such as venlafaxine, duloxetine or agomelatine will be summarized with respect to depressive and accompanying symptoms. Furthermore, differences in adverse events between antidepressants will be reviewed.
    Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946). 08/2014; 139(34-35):1727-30.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) are effective in treating anxiety disorders associated with major depressive disorder (MDD). This randomized, controlled, parallel-group, open-label, phase 4 trial (CTRI/2012/08/002895) was undertaken to compare the effectiveness and safety of desvenlafaxine versus escitalopram, a standard antidepressant.
    Indian Journal of Pharmacology 07/2014; 46(4):433-7. · 0.68 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Depression and headache are highly prevalent in clinical settings. The co-occurrence of headache may impact choice of antidepressants, healthcare utilisation, and outcomes in patients with depression. The current study aims to examine the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of different antidepressants for treating patients with depression and comorbid headache disorders. Methods Adult patients prescribed with antidepressants for depression (n=96,501) were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis was conducted comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), and by the presence of comorbid headache disorders and other pain conditions. Results In this study, SSRIs dominated SNRIs in both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. As revealed in the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, TCAs were likely to have a cost-utility advantage compared to SSRIs and SNRIs in improving quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for patients with comorbid headache; SSRIs remained as the most cost-effective option for patients with other pain conditions. Limitations Limitations include the use of proxy definition of remission as effectiveness measure and the adoption of utility values from previous studies. Conclusions Given a pre-determined willingness-to-pay level, TCAs can be considered as a cost-effective option to improve QALYs for depressed patients with headache disorders. Future research is needed to further clarify factors influencing the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of pharmacological treatments in depressed patients with specific pain conditions.
    Journal of Affective Disorders 01/2015; 170:255–265. · 3.71 Impact Factor