Higher serotonin transporter occupancy after multiple dose administration of escitalopram compared to citalopram: an [123I]ADAM SPECT study.
ABSTRACT Previous studies have investigated the occupancy of the serotonin reuptake transporter (SERT) after clinical doses of citalopram and other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. In the present study, the occupancies of SERT after multiple doses of escitalopram and citalopram were compared using the radioligand [(123)I]ADAM and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT).
Fifteen healthy subjects received escitalopram 10 mg/day (n = 6) or citalopram 20 mg/day (n = 9) for a total of 10 days. SERT occupancies in midbrain were determined with SPECT and [(123)I]ADAM at three different time points: at baseline (no medication) and at 6 and 54 h after last drug intake.
At 6 h after the last dose, mean SERT occupancies were 81.5 +/- 5.4% (mean+/-SD) for escitalopram and 64.0 +/- 12.7% for citalopram (p < 0.01). At 54 h after the last dose, mean SERT occupancies were 63.3 +/- 12.1% for escitalopram and 49.0 +/- 11.7% for citalopram (p < 0.05). The plasma concentrations of the S-enantiomer were of the same magnitude in both substances. For both drugs, the elimination rate of the S-enantiomer in plasma was markedly higher than the occupancy decline rate in the midbrain.
The significantly higher occupancy of SERT after multiple doses of escitalopram compared to citalopram indicates an increased inhibition of SERT by escitalopram. The results can also be explained by an attenuating effect of R-citalopram on the occupancy of S-citalopram at the SERT.
- SourceAvailable from: David M Taylor[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The majority of currently marketed drugs contain a mixture of enantiomers; however, recent evidence suggests that individual enantiomers can have pharmacological properties that differ importantly from enantiomer mixtures. Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of citalopram, displays markedly different pharmacological activity to the R-enantiomer. This review aims to evaluate whether these differences confer any significant clinical advantage for escitalopram over either citalopram or other frequently used antidepressants. Searches were conducted using PubMed and EMBASE (up to January 2009). Abstracts of the retrieved studies were reviewed independently by both authors for inclusion. Only those studies relating to depression or major depressive disorder were included. The search identified over 250 citations, of which 21 studies and 18 pooled or meta-analyses studies were deemed suitable for inclusion. These studies reveal that escitalopram has some efficacy advantage over citalopram and paroxetine, but no consistent advantage over other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Escitalopram has at least comparable efficacy to available serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, venlafaxine XR and duloxetine, and may offer some tolerability advantages over these agents. This review suggests that the mechanistic advantages of escitalopram over citalopram translate into clinical efficacy advantages. Escitalopram may have a favourable benefit-risk ratio compared with citalopram and possibly with several other antidepressant agents.Journal of Psychopharmacology 02/2010; 24(8):1143-52. DOI:10.1177/0269881109349835 · 2.81 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Escitalopram the S-enantiomer of the racemate citalopram, is clinically more effective than citalopram in the treatment of major depressive disorder. However, the precise mechanism by which escitalopram achieves superiority over citalopram is yet to be determined. It has been hypothesized that the therapeutically inactive R-enantiomer competes with the serotonin-enhancing S-enantiomer at a low-affinity allosteric site on serotonin reuptake transporters (SERTs), and reduces the effectiveness of the S-enantiomer at the primary, high-affinity serotonin-binding site. This study summarizes the results of two recent single-photon emission computerized tomography studies measuring SERT occupancy in citalopram-treated and escitalopram-treated healthy volunteers, after a single dose and multiple doses (i.e. under steady-state conditions). The single-dose study showed no attenuating effect of R-citalopram. After multiple dosing, however, SERT occupancy was significantly reduced in the presence of R-citalopram. Under steady-state conditions, R-enantiomer concentrations were greater than for the S-enantiomer because of slower clearance of R-citalopram. A pooled analysis suggests that build-up of the R-enantiomer after repeated citalopram dosing may lead to increased inhibition of S-enantiomer occupancy of SERT. This review adds to the growing body of evidence regarding differences in the dynamics of SERT occupancy, that is, molecular mechanisms underlying the often-observed superior clinical efficacy of escitalopram compared with citalopram in major depressive disorder.International clinical psychopharmacology 06/2009; 24(3):119-25. DOI:10.1097/YIC.0b013e32832a8ec8 · 3.10 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Several studies and meta-analyses have implicated a polymorphism in the promoter region of the serotonin transporter (5-HTT) gene, 5-HTTLPR in treatment outcomes of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors in patients with major depression. In this study we investigated the impact of 5-HTTLPR and a functional SNP rs25531 on the treatment outcomes to escitalopram in depressive patients. The study sample consisted of 135 outpatients with major depressive disorder (mean age 31.1+/-11.6 years, 68% females) treated with escitalopram 10-20 mg/day for 12 weeks. There were no significant associations between 5-HTT promoter region polymorphisms and response rate or mean change of depressive symptoms during escitalopram treatment. However we showed that patients carrying S allele of 5-HTTLPR may have increased risk for some side effects, including headache, induced by escitalopram medication.European neuropsychopharmacology: the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology 04/2009; 19(6):451-6. DOI:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2009.01.010 · 5.40 Impact Factor