Fluoxetine versus other types of pharmacotherapy for depression.
ABSTRACT Depression is common in primary care and it is associated with marked personal, social and economic morbidity, and creates significant demands on service providers in terms of workload. Treatment is predominantly pharmaceutical or psychological. Fluoxetine, the first of a group of antidepressant (AD) agents known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), has been studied in many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in comparison with tricyclic (TCA), heterocyclic and related ADs, and other SSRIs. These comparative studies provided contrasting findings. In addition, systematic reviews of RCTs have always considered the SSRIs as a group, and evidence applicable to this group of drugs might not be applicable to fluoxetine alone. The present systematic review assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of fluoxetine in comparison with TCAs, SSRIs and newer agents.
To determine the efficacy of fluoxetine, compared with other ADs, in alleviating the acute symptoms of depression, and to review its acceptability.
Relevant studies were located by searching the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline (1966-2004) and Embase (1974-2004). Non-English language articles were included.
Only RCTs were included. For trials which have a crossover design only results from the first randomisation period were considered.
Data were independently extracted by two reviewers using a standard form. Responders to treatment were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis: drop-outs were always included in this analysis. When data on drop-outs were carried forward and included in the efficacy evaluation, they were analysed according to the primary studies; when dropouts were excluded from any assessment in the primary studies, they were considered as treatment failures. Scores from continuous outcomes were analysed including patients with a final assessment or with the last observation carried forward. Tolerability data were analysed by calculating the proportion of patients who failed to complete the study and who experienced adverse reactions out of the total number of randomised patients. The primary analyses used a fixed effects approach, and presented Peto Odds Ratio (PetoOR) and Standardised Mean Difference (SMD).
On a dichotomous outcome fluoxetine was less effective than dothiepin (PetoOR: 2.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.05), sertraline (PetoOR: 1.40, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.76), mirtazapine (PetoOR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.65) and venlafaxine (Peto OR: 1.40, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.70). On a continuous outcome, fluoxetine was more effective than ABT-200 (Standardised Mean Difference (SMD) random effects: - 1.85, 95% CI - 2.25 to - 1.45) and milnacipran (SMD random effects: - 0.38, 95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.06); conversely, it was less effective than venlafaxine (SMD random effect: 0.11, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.23), however these figures were of borderline statistical significance. Fluoxetine was better tolerated than TCAs considered as a group (PetoOR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89), and was better tolerated in comparison with individual ADs, in particular than amitriptyline (PetoOR: 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.85) and imipramine (PetoOR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99), and among newer ADs than ABT-200 (PetoOR: 0.21, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.41), pramipexole (PetoOR: 0.20, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.47) and reboxetine (PetoOR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.94).
There are statistically significant differences in terms of efficacy and tolerability between fluoxetine and certain ADs, but the clinical meaning of these differences is uncertain, and no definitive implications for clinical practice can be drawn. From a clinical point of view the analysis of antidepressants' safety profile (adverse effect and suicide risk) remains of crucial importance and more reliable data about these outcomes are needed. Waiting for more robust evidence, treatment decisions should be based on considerations of clinical history, drug toxicity, patient acceptability, and cost. We need for large, pragmatic trials, enrolling heterogeneous populations of patients with depression to generate clinically relevant information on the benefits and harms of competitive pharmacological options. A meta-analysis of individual patient data from the randomised trials is clearly necessary.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Fluoxetine is a widely used antidepressant drug which inhibits the reuptake of serotonin in the central nervous system (CNS). Recent studies have shown that fluoxetine can promote neurogenesis and improve the survival rate of neurons. However, whether fluoxetine modulates the neuroprotection of neural stem cells (NSCs) needs to be elucidated. In this study, we demonstrated that 50 μM fluoxetine significantly upregulated expression of the phosphorylated-AKT and ERK1/2 proteins in NSCs derived from rats. Besides, expression of phosphorylated-AKT and phosphorylated-ERK1/2 in fluoxetine-treated NSCs was effectively blocked (P < 0.05) by both PI3-K inhibitor (LY294002) and MEK inhibitor (PD98059). It was, therefore, concluded that the crosstalk between PI3K/AKT and MAPK/ERK pathways involved AKT and ERK1/2 phosphorylation by fluoxetine treatment. This study points to a novel role of fluoxetine in neuroprotection as an antidepressant drug and also unravels the crosstalk mechanism between the two signaling pathways.Journal of Molecular Neuroscience 06/2012; · 2.89 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There are some reports on the effects of antidepressants on metabolic syndrome. However, our search in the previously published literature showed a lack of information on the comparison of the effects of different classes of antidepressants on lipid profile. Therefore, this study was aimed to compare the effects of fluoxetine and imipramine on serum total cholesterol (TC) and triglyceride (TG) as well as body weight (BW) in patients with major depressive disorder. Fifty one patients, 18 to 70 years of age, with major depressive disorder complied with the criteria of this preliminary, open-label clinical trial. Subjects received either imipramine (75-200 mg/day) or fluoxetine (20-40 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Total cholesterol and TG levels, as well as BW were compared at baseline with those at weeks 4 and 8. Data was analyzed by SPSS software version 16.0. In the fluoxetine group, TC levels decreased from 165.71 mg/dL to 156.71 mg/dL at week 4 (P = 0.07), and to 143.94 mg/dL at week 8 (P = 0.16); TG levels decreased from 129.35 mg/dL to 115.88 mg/dL at week 4 (P <0.001), and to 110.41 mg/dL at week 8 (P = 0.56). In the imipramine group, TC levels increased from 169.10 mg/dL to 178.69 mg/dL at week 4 (P = 0.07), and to 208.69 mg/dL at week 8 (P < 0.001) while TG levels increased from 111.73 mg/dL to 128.83 mg/dL at week 4 (P = 0.005), and to 160.90 mg/dL at week 8 (P < 0.001). BW was significantly increased in the imipramine group at weeks 4 and 8. In the fluoxetine group, BW was non-significantly decreased from 75.69 ± 7.97 Kg (baseline) to 75.67 ± 8.01 Kg at week 4 (P = 0.88), and to 75.22 ± 8.67 Kg at week 8 (P = 0.20), while in the imipramine group, BW had significant increases from 72.53 ± 8.55 Kg (baseline) to 73.95 ± 8.61 mg/dL at week 4 (P < 0.001), and to 75.13 ± 8.34 mg/dL at week 8 (P < 0.001).Repeated measures ANOVA showed significant effects on both TC and TG levels as well as on BW in all patients receiving imipramine. However, in patients on fluoxetine, repeated measures ANOVA showed significant effects of this medication only on TC levels in males. Monitoring TC and TG and BW is recommended before starting imipramine in depressed patients with increased risk for cardiovascular disease. Fluoxetine may be the preferred agent in those with high or borderline high lipid levels.DARU-JOURNAL OF FACULTY OF PHARMACY 01/2013; 21(1):4. · 0.62 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Serotonin is imperative for the normal operations in the central nervous system. The serotonergic circuitry is implicated in many neuronal processes, and, especially so in mechanisms of emotional regulation and reward. Although function in the serotonergic circuitry has been shown to be abnormal in many pathological states like depression, anxiety, and addiction, its ubiquitous nature complicates efforts to pinpoint the exact loci of pathology. This becomes especially relevant when these conditions occur together, which they do frequently. In this review, we examine the literature on the role of serotonin in depression, anxiety, and addiction, identifying commonalities between these disorders to elucidate the mechanisms at work when they are comorbid. Specifically, we examine the role of serotonergic receptors, transporters, and networks in incidences of alcohol dependence that is comorbid with depression to facilitate a deeper understanding of these mechanisms necessary for the development of more effective and personalized treatments.Journal of Addiction & Prevention. 10/2013; 1(2).