Article

Escitalopram in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis.

University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Current Medical Research and Opinion (Impact Factor: 2.37). 01/2009; 25(1):161-75. DOI: 10.1185/03007990802622726
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess the relative antidepressant efficacy of escitalopram and comparator antidepressants.
A meta-analysis was performed using studies in major depressive disorder (MDD) comparing escitalopram with active controls, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs] (citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline) and serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs] (venlafaxine, duloxetine). Adult patients had to meet DSM-IV criteria for MDD.
The primary outcome measure was the treatment difference in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 8. Secondary outcome measures were response and remission (MADRS total score < or = 12) rates.
Individual patient data (N = 4549) from 16 randomized controlled trials were included in the analyses (escitalopram n = 2272, SSRIs n = 1750, SNRIs n = 527). Escitalopram was significantly more effective than comparators in overall treatment effect, with an estimated mean treatment difference of 1.1 points on the MADRS (p < 0.0001), and in responder (63.7 vs. 58.3%, p < 0.0001) and remitter (53.1 vs. 49.4%, p < 0.0059) analyses. Escitalopram was significantly superior to SSRIs, with an estimated difference in response of 62.1 vs. 58.4% and remission of 51.6 vs. 49.0%. In comparison to SNRIs, the estimated difference in response was 68.3 vs. 59.0% (p = 0.0007) and for remission the difference was 57.8 vs. 50.5% (p = 0.0088). These results were similar for severely depressed patients (baseline MADRS > or = 30). Sensitivity analyses were performed with data from articles reporting Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) scores. The 8-week withdrawal rate due to adverse events was 5.4% for escitalopram and 7.9% for the comparators (p < 0.01). This difference was accounted for by statistically significant higher attrition rates in the SNRI comparisons. This work may be limited by the clinical methodology underlying meta-analytic studies, in particular, the exclusion of trials that fail to meet predetermined criteria for inclusion.
In this meta-analysis, superior efficacy of escitalopram compared to SSRIs and SNRIs was confirmed, although the superiority over SSRIs was largely explained by differences between escitalopram and citalopram.

0 Followers
 · 
98 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The acute efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is well established; however their role in longer-term prevention of recurrence remains unconfirmed. This study aims at examining: the prophylactic efficacy of four commonly used SSRIs in MDD in a naturalistic setting with long-term follow-up, the effect of concomitant cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and the predictors of outcome. In a prospective cohort study, 387 patients who either remitted or responded following treatment with four different SSRIs-fluoxetine, escitalopram, sertraline and paroxetine-were followed up over several years. During an average follow-up period of 34.5 months, 76.5% of patients experienced MDD recurrence. Escitalopram and fluoxetine showed a numerically higher prophylactic efficacy than paroxetine and sertraline but the difference was statistically insignificant. The prophylactic efficacy for SSRI-only treatment was limited, with a recurrence rate of 82.0%, compared to 59.0% of patient recurrence rate in concomitant Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). The relatively small size of the CBT group and the lack of randomization may undermine the extrapolation of its findings to clinical practice. Nevertheless, the study preliminary data may help in defining the clinical utility of antidepressants and CBT in the prophylaxis from MDD recurrence. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Psychiatry Research 11/2014; 225(3). DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.022 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We aimed to characterize a large international cohort of outpatients with MDD within a practical trial design, in order to identify clinically useful predictors of outcomes with three common antidepressant medications in acute-phase treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). The international Study to Predict Optimized Treatment in Depression has presently enrolled 1008 treatment-seeking outpatients (18-65 years old) at 17 sites (five countries). At pre-treatment, we characterized participants by symptoms, clinical history, functional status and comorbidity. Participants were randomized to receive escitalopram, sertraline or venlafaxine-extended release and managed by their physician following usual treatment practices. Symptoms, function, quality of life, and side-effect outcomes were assessed 8 weeks later. The relationship of anxiety to response and remission was assessed by comorbid Axis I diagnosis, presence/absence of anxiety symptoms, and dimensionally by anxiety symptom severity. The sample had moderate-to-severe symptoms, but substantial comorbidity and functional impairment. Of completers at week 8, 62.2% responded and 45.4% reached remission on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; 53.3% and 37.6%, respectively on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms. Functional improvements were seen across all domains. Most participants had side effects that occurred with a frequency of 25% or less and were reported as being in the “none” to minimal/mild range for intensity and burden.
    Journal of Psychiatric Research 02/2015; 61:1-12. DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.12.018 · 4.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives. Only few studies investigated treatment strategies for treatment resistant depression (TRD). The objective of this multicentre study was to evaluate TRD patients who did not respond to at least two antidepressants. Methods. A total of 417 patients, who failed to respond to a previous retrospectively assessed antidepressant (AD1), were firstly included in a 6-week venlafaxine treatment (AD2); secondly, those who failed to respond were treated for further 6 weeks with escitalopram (AD3). Results. Out of 417 patients who had failed to respond to previous treatment (AD1), 334 completed treatment with venlafaxine to prospectively define TRD. In the intent to treat (ITT) population in the first phase of the trial (AD2), responders to venlafaxine were 151 (36.21%) out of which remitters were 83 (19.90%). After phase one, 170 non-responders, defined as TRD, were included in the second phase and 157 completed the course. Of the 170 ITT entering the second phase (AD3), responders to escitalopram were 71 (41.76%) out of which remitters were 39 (22.94%). After the third treatment, patients showed a dropout rate of 7.65% and a rate of presence of at least one serious adverse event of 19.18%. Conclusions. Relevant rates of response and remission may be observed after a third line treatment in patients resistant to two previous treatments. A relevant limitation of this study was represented by the design: naturalistic, non-randomized, open-label, without a control sample and with unblinded raters.
    The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry 12/2014; DOI:10.3109/15622975.2014.987814 · 4.23 Impact Factor