Search

Background: Side effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), the most commonly used antidepressants, are usually underreported in clinical trials. Systematic evaluation of side effects associated with SSRIs with structured instruments in a naturalistic setting is an important design to fully understand the side effect profile of various SSRIs. We examined the frequencies of the side effects induced by 3 commonly used SSRIs, sertraline, escitalopram, and fluoxetine, by using a self-rating instrument designed to measure the subjective symptoms of patients in a naturalistic treatment setting., Methods: The subjects were outpatients recruited from the psychiatry department of a tertiary care hospital. The subjects were aged ≥ 18 years; were diagnosed with depression, anxiety spectrum disorders, adjustment disorder, hypochondriasis, or impulse control disorder according to ICD-10 criteria; and were on SSRI monotherapy. The assessment instrument included 42 items and was devised using drug package insert data on the most commonly observed side effects of antidepressants released by the US Food and Drug Administration., Results: A total of 100 patients participated in the study. Among them, 70% were women. The most common diagnosis was depression (49%). Of the patients, 53% were taking sertraline, 38% escitalopram, and 8% fluoxetine. The common side effects reported by patients were flatulence (64%), somnolence (59%), memory impairment (51%), decreased concentration (50%), yawning (47%), fatigue (45%), dry mouth (45%), weight gain (45%), light headedness (43%), and sweating (38%). Patients treated with escitalopram had significantly higher incidence of headache, pruritus, memory impairment, decreased concentration, and dizziness. Patients treated with sertraline had significantly decreased appetite., Conclusions: The study results highlight the prevalence and pattern of side effect profiles of 3 commonly used SSRIs and provide baseline data for comparison with other similar studies., (© Copyright 2021 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: There is a paucity of data on the effects of coprescribed benzodiazepines on treatment response variability and adherence to antidepressant pharmacotherapy for depression and anxiety in late life. The objective of this transdiagnostic analysis was to examine the effect of benzodiazepines on treatment outcomes in older patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) or major depressive disorder (MDD)., Methods: Secondary analyses of data from 2 clinical trials of antidepressant pharmacotherapy for GAD (escitalopram vs placebo, 2006-2009) or MDD (open treatment with venlafaxine, 2009-2014) were conducted. Participants included 640 adults aged 60+ years with DSM-IV-defined GAD (n = 177) or MDD (n = 463). Benzodiazepine data were collected at baseline. Adherence and treatment response were assessed over 12 weeks. The analysis addressed whether coprescribed benzodiazepines are associated with treatment response, antidepressant medication adherence, dropout, final dose of antidepressant medication, and report of antidepressant-related adverse effects., Results: Participants with GAD and coprescribed benzodiazepines were treated with a lower mean dosage of escitalopram and were less likely to complete the trial; there was no difference in adherence or treatment response. Participants with MDD and coprescribed benzodiazepines were less likely to tolerate a therapeutic dose of venlafaxine and reported more medication-related adverse effects; there was no difference in adherence, dropout, or treatment response., Conclusions: Coprescription of benzodiazepines was associated with increased dropout in older patients with GAD and more medication-related adverse effects in older patients with MDD. However, with the systematic clinical attention offered in a clinical trial, they do not impede treatment response. Clinicians should be aware that a coprescribed benzodiazepine may be a marker of a more challenging treatment course., Trial Registration: Data analyzed were from studies with ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT00892047 and NCT00105586., (© Copyright 2020 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: Suicidal ideation is a frequent and difficult-to-treat clinical challenge among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). However, little is known regarding the differential development during antidepressant treatment and whether some patients may suffer from persistent suicidal ideation., Methods: Among 811 patients with Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry (SCAN)-verified MDD from 2004-2007 assessed weekly for 12 weeks of escitalopram or nortriptyline antidepressant treatment, we applied item response theory to integrate a suicidality score based on 3 rating scales. We performed latent growth mixture modeling analysis to empirically identify trajectories. Multinomial logistic regression analyses estimated associations with potential predictors., Results: We identified 5 distinct classes of suicidal ideation. The Persistent-low class (53.7%) showed no suicidal ideation whereas the Persistent-high class (9.8%) had high suicidal ideation throughout 12 weeks. Two classes showed a fluctuating course: the Fluctuating class (5.2%) ended at a low level of suicidal ideation, whereas the Slow-response-relapse class (4.8%) initially responded slowly but then experienced a large increase to a high level of suicidal ideation after 12 weeks. The Fast-response class (26.5%) had a high baseline severity similar to the Persistent-high class but responded quickly within a few weeks and remained at a low level. Previous suicide attempts and higher mood symptom severity were associated with worse suicidal ideation trajectories, whereas living with a partner showed a trend toward better response., Conclusion: Approximately 1 of 5 patients with MDD showed high or fluctuating suicidal ideation despite antidepressant treatment. Studies should investigate whether suicidal ideation may persist for longer periods and more targeted treatment possibilities., Trial Registration: ISRCTN​​ identifier: ISRCTN03693000​​​​., (© Copyright 2019 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: The present placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 8 weeks of treatment with tianeptine 25-50 mg/d in elderly patients suffering from major depressive disorder (MDD) according to DSM-IV-TR. Escitalopram 5-10 mg/d was used as an active comparator., Methods: Elderly outpatients aged at least 65 years with a primary diagnosis of moderate to severe episode of recurrent MDD were recruited by psychiatrists in 44 clinical centers in 10 countries from October 2013 to January 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tianeptine (n = 105), placebo (n = 107), or escitalopram (n = 99) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS₁₇) total score., Results: Tianeptine improved depressive symptoms, as evaluated by the HDRS₁₇ total score in terms of absolute change from baseline (week 0) to week 8 (placebo-tianeptine difference [SE] of 3.84 [0.85] points, P < .001, using a last-observation-carried-forward approach) and response to treatment (tianeptine: 46.7%; placebo: 34.0%, estimate [SE] = 12.70% [6.70], P = .06). A sensitivity analysis using a mixed model for repeated measures confirmed the main results on HDRS total s​core. The placebo-tianeptine difference (SE) was 0.66 (0.15) for Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.96; P < .001) and 0.57 (0.14) for Clinical Global Impressions- Improvement (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.83; P < .001). Positive results were also obtained with the active control escitalopram (HDRS₁₇ total score placebo-escitalopram difference of 4.09 ± 0.86 points, P < .001), therefore validating the sensitivity of the studied population. Tianeptine was well tolerated, with only minimal differences in tolerability from placebo., Conclusions: The present study provides robust evidence that an 8-week treatment period with tianeptine 25-50 mg is efficacious and well tolerated in depressed patients aged 65 years or older., Trial Registration: EudraCT identifier: 2012-005612-26​., (© Copyright 2018 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Prospective studies have not identified a viable pharmacologic strategy for secondary prevention of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The authors examined whether preventive intervention via early and short-term administration of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), within 1 month of exposure to a traumatic event (before diagnosis of PTSD could be made), may reduce the severity of PTSD symptoms according to DSM-IV at 13 months' follow-up., Methods: Over 25,000 screening calls to patients referred to an emergency department for a traumatic event performed between June 2006 and December 2008 yielded 353 participants who were recruited within the month following a traumatic event . Participants were randomly assigned in a double-blind design to escitalopram (n = 176) or placebo (n = 177). The per-protocol analysis comprised 198 participants (escitalopram, n = 102; placebo, n = 96) who received treatment for 12 to 24 weeks and were available for follow-up at week 56., Results: The primary outcome measure, the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), revealed no prevention effect. However, a secondary outcome, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI), showed better results for the SSRI group than for the placebo group. For a subset of participants who experienced intentional trauma (missile attacks, rape, or physical assault; n = 50), the prevention effect was found on both primary and secondary measures (CAPS, PSQI and measures of depression and global illness severity)., Conclusions: Early and short-term administration of escitalopram was not shown to prevent PTSD, although it did improve sleep quality. In a subgroup of participants who experienced intentional trauma, however, this early-treatment approach may be effective as secondary prevention. This large study is the first to investigate the preventive effect of early administration of escitalopram on PTSD. It highlights the relevance of the type of trauma (intentional vs unintentional) to the outcome., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00300313​​., (© Copyright 2018 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Studies demonstrating that higher doses of citalopram (> 40 mg) and escitalopram (> 20 mg) prolong the corrected QT interval prompted regulatory agency warnings, which are controversial, given the absence of confirmatory clinical outcome studies. We compared the risk of potential arrhythmia-related deaths for high doses of these selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to that for equivalent doses of fluoxetine, paroxetine, and sertraline., Methods: The Tennessee Medicaid retrospective cohort study included 54,220 persons 30-74 years of age without cancer or other life-threatening illness who were prescribed high-dose SSRIs from 1998 through 2011. The mean age was 47 years, and 76% were female. Demographic characteristics and comorbidity for individual SSRIs were comparable. Because arrhythmia-related deaths are typically sudden and occur outside the hospital, we analyzed out-of-hospital sudden unexpected death as well as sudden cardiac deaths, a more specific indicator of proarrhythmic effects., Results: The adjusted risk of sudden unexpected death for citalopram did not differ significantly from that for the other SSRIs. The respective hazard ratios (HRs) for citalopram versus escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, and sertraline were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.40-1.75), 1.24 (95% CI, 0.75-2.05), 0.75 (95% CI, 0.45-1.24), and 1.53 (95% CI, 0.91-2.55). There were no significant differences for sudden cardiac death or all study deaths, nor were there significant differences among high-risk patients (≥ 60 years of age, upper quartile baseline cardiovascular risk). Escitalopram users had no significantly increased risk for any study end point., Conclusions: We found no evidence that risk of sudden unexpected death, sudden cardiac death, or total mortality for high-dose citalopram and escitalopram differed significantly from that for comparable doses of fluoxetine, paroxetine, and sertraline., (© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are first-line treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), but their impact on suicidal ideation is equivocal. Our goal is to examine the time course and clinical predictors of citalopram-induced suicidal ideation during phase 1 of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial., Methods: Of the 4,041 subjects with DSM-IV nonpsychotic MDD in the STAR*D trial phase 1 (2001-2006), we included in our analysis 3,577 subjects who reported side-effect data and had received citalopram (20-60 mg/d) for 8-14 weeks. Suicidal ideation was reported on item 12 of the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Self-Report. Survival analysis and receiver operating characteristic analysis were used to assess baseline characteristics associated with emergence and worsening of suicidal ideation., Results: Suicidal ideation was more likely to occur early in citalopram treatment, with few subjects showing emergence or worsening occurring after 6 weeks of treatment. Clinical variables explained very little of the variance in worsening or emergence of suicidal ideation with citalopram treatment (generalized R² ≤ 2% in survival analysis). Being Hispanic, taking sedative medications, increased depression severity, absence of hypersomnia, and cardiac comorbidity were significantly (P ≤ .04) associated with greater likelihood of emergence of suicidal ideation in patients without suicidal ideation at baseline. Being widowed, better work performance, weight loss at baseline, and the presence of vascular or neurologic comorbidities were associated with a greater likelihood of worsening of suicidal ideation., Conclusions: Baseline clinical variables were poor predictors of emergence or worsening of suicidal ideation. As such, increased research focusing on clinical correlates rather than clinical predictors of suicidal ideation may be useful, as intervening events may be crucial in bringing about increased suicidality., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00021528., (© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: Failing to prevent posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has major clinical and public health consequences. This work evaluates the 3-year outcome of offering early interventions to survivors with acute PTSD., Methods: Adults admitted consecutively to the hospital with acute DSM-IV PTSD were randomized, between June 2003 and October 2007, to 12 weeks of prolonged exposure (n = 63) or cognitive therapy (n = 40) or concealed SSRI (escitalopram; n = 23) versus placebo (n = 23). Eighty-two participants who declined treatment were followed as well. Treatment started 1 month after the traumatic event, and participants were reassessed 5 and 36 months later. Assessors were blinded to treatment allocation and acceptance. The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) evaluated PTSD and PTSD symptoms. Self-reported symptoms, general functioning, and employment status were secondary outcomes. Participants lost to follow-up were missing completely at random., Results: Prolonged exposure and cognitive therapy significantly reduced PTSD and PTSD symptoms between 1 and 5 months (mean CAPS total scores [95% CI] at 1 month: prolonged exposure = 73.59 [68.21-78.96] and cognitive therapy = 71.78 [66.92-78.93]; mean CAPS total scores [95% CI] at 5 months: prolonged exposure = 28.59 [21.89-35.29] and cognitive therapy = 29.48 [21.32-37.95], P < .001), and their results remained stable. At 3 years, however, the study groups had similar levels of PTSD symptoms (mean CAPS total scores [95% CI]: prolonged exposure = 31.51 [20.25-42.78]; cognitive therapy = 32.08 [20.74-43.42]; SSRI = 34.31 [16.54-52.07]; placebo = 32.13 [20.15-44.12]; and no intervention = 30.59 [19.40-41.78]), similar prevalence of PTSD (28.6%-46.2%), and similar secondary outcomes., Conclusion: Early prolonged exposure and cognitive therapy accelerated the recovery from acute PTSD. Their effect remained stable, however, without reducing the 3-year prevalence of the disorder. The lingering prevalence of PTSD, despite efficient interventions, illustrates a nonremitting, treatment-refractory subset of survivors and outlines a major clinical and public health challenge., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00146900., (© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Over 50% of outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder (MDD) do not achieve remission with any single antidepressant medication (ADM). There are currently no clinically useful pretreatment measures that inform the decision to prescribe or select ADMs. This report examines whether a biomarker based on diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) measures of brain connectivity can identify a subset of nonremitting patients with a sufficiently high degree of specificity that use of a medication that is likely to fail could be avoided., Methods: MDD outpatients recruited from community and primary-care settings underwent pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging as part of the international Study to Predict Optimized Treatment in Depression (conducted December 2008-June 2014). DSM-IV criteria and a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) score ≥ 16 confirmed the primary diagnosis of nonpsychotic MDD. Data from the first cohort of MDD patients (n = 74) were used to calculate fractional anisotropy measures of the stria terminalis and cingulate portion of the cingulate bundle (CgC). On the basis of our previous data, we hypothesized that nonremission might be predicted using a ratio of these 2 values. Remission was defined as an HDRS17 score of ≤ 7 following 8 weeks of open-label treatment with escitalopram, sertraline, or venlafaxine extended-release, randomized across participants. The second study cohort (n = 83) was used for replication., Results: Thirty-four percent of all participants achieved remission. A value > 1.0 for the ratio of the fractional anisotropy of the stria terminalis over the CgC identified 38% of the nonremitting participants with an accuracy of 88% (test cohort; odds ratio [OR] = 9.6; 95% CI, 2.0-45.9); 24% with an accuracy of 83% (replication cohort; OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 0.5-6.9) and 29% with an accuracy of 86% (pooled data; OR = 4.0; 95% CI, 1.5-11.1). Treatment moderation analysis showed greater specificity for escitalopram and sertraline (χ(2) = 8.07; P = .003)., Conclusions: To our knowledge, this simple DTI-derived metric represents the first brain biomarker to reliably identify nonremitting patients in MDD. The test identifies a meaningful proportion of nonremitters, has high specificity, and may assist in managing the antidepressant treatment of depression., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00693849., (© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Depression is common after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and has adverse effects on prognosis. There are few evidence-based interventions for treating depression in ACS. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of escitalopram in treating depressive disorders identified 2-14 weeks after a confirmed ACS episode., Method: A total of 217 patients with DSM-IV depressive disorders (121 major and 96 minor) and ACS were randomly assigned to receive escitalopram in flexible doses of 5-20 mg/d (n = 108) or placebo (n = 109) for 24 weeks. The study was conducted from 2007 to 2013. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Secondary outcome measures included the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S), Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS), and World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-12. Cardiovascular safety outcomes included echocardiography, electrocardiography, laboratory test, body weight, and blood pressure results., Results: Escitalopram was superior to placebo in reducing HDRS scores (mean difference = 2.3, P = .016, effect size = 0.38). Escitalopram was also superior to placebo in decreasing depressive symptoms evaluated by the MADRS, BDI, and CGI-S and in improving SOFAS functioning level. Escitalopram was not associated with any harmful changes in cardiovascular safety measures. Dizziness was significantly more frequently reported in the escitalopram group (P = .018), but there were no significant differences in any other adverse events., Conclusions: These results indicate that escitalopram has clinically meaningful antidepressant effects with no evidence of reduced cardiovascular safety in depressive disorder following ACS., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00419471., (© Copyright 2015 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Few data exist to help clinicians predict likelihood of treatment response in individual patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Our aim was to identify subgroups of MDD patients with differential treatment outcomes based on presenting clinical characteristics. We also sought to quantify the likelihood of treatment success based on the degree of improvement and side effects after 2 and 4 weeks of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) pharmacotherapy., Method: We analyzed data from the first treatment phase of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial, in which subjects with a DSM-IV diagnosis of MDD were treated for 8-14 weeks with open-label citalopram. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was conducted to determine homogenous subgroups with different rates of response and remission in depressive symptoms. Included predictor variables were initial clinical characteristics, initial improvement, and side effects after 2 and 4 weeks of SSRI treatment. The primary outcome measures were treatment response (defined as a greater than 50% reduction in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS-17] score from baseline) and remission (defined as an HDRS-17 score ≤ 17)., Results: Baseline clinical characteristics were able to identify subgroups from a low likelihood of response of 18% (income < $10,000, comorbid generalized anxiety disorder, < 16 years of education; P < .01) to a high likelihood of response of 68% (income ≥ $40,000, no comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder; P < .01). Among baseline clinical characteristics, employment status (N = 2,477; χ²₁ = 78.1; P < .001) and income level (N = 2,512; χ²₁ = 77.7; P < .001) were the most informative in predicting treatment outcome. For the models at weeks 2 and 4, treatment success was best predicted by early symptom improvement., Conclusions: Socioeconomic data such as low income, education, and unemployment were most discriminative in predicting a poor response to citalopram, even with disparities in access to care accounted for. This finding implies that socioeconomic factors may be more useful predictors of medication response than traditional psychiatric diagnoses or past treatment history., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00021528., (© Copyright 2014 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: In this study, we assessed the efficacy of 2 pharmacodynamically different antidepressants, citalopram (a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) and reboxetine (a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor), as adjunctive therapy to risperidone and olanzapine for the treatment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia., Method: We performed a 6-month, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The recruitment period was from November 2008 to December 2011.The sample comprised 90 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (DSM-IV criteria) who exhibited negative symptoms. The patients were recruited from 10 centers in different cities of the Spanish State. The primary efficacy measure was change in score on the negative subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) between baseline and 6-month assessment. Other efficacy measures were changes in the PANSS subscales and total score, as well as the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) subscales and total score., Results: For statistical analysis, we employed mixed-effects models. We did not find statistically significant differences between the placebo group and the 2 treatment groups at 6-month assessments for the PANSS total (P=.6511), any PANSS subscale (negative [P=.5533], positive [P=.1723], or general psychopathology [P=.2083]), or the SANS (P= .5884). Cohen d measure showed a small effect size below the 0.5 threshold for all comparisons., Conclusions: In conclusion, our results do not support adjunctive use of citalopram or reboxetine with risperidone or olanzapine for the treatment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01300364., (© Copyright 2014 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate augmentation for major depressive disorder (MDD) in escitalopram nonremitters., Method: In this proof-of-concept study (conducted from July 2009-August 2010) with a prespecified critical α = .10, adults with nonpsychotic MDD (DSM-IV-TR criteria) and residual depressive symptoms (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score ≥ 4) after 8 weeks of open-label escitalopram were randomized to 6 weeks of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (20-50 mg/d) or placebo augmentation. The primary endpoint, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score change in escitalopram nonremitters (MADRS total score > 10) from week 8 (augmentation baseline) to week 14/end of study, was assessed using analysis of covariance, with last observation carried forward., Results: For nonremitters (placebo, n = 64; lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, n = 65), the least squares (LS) mean (90% CI) treatment difference for MADRS total score reduction at week 14/end of study (-2.3 [-4.5 to -0.1]; P = .0902) met the prespecified criterion for lisdexamfetamine dimesylate superiority (adjusted effect size, -0.3); the number needed to treat for MADRS remission (MADRS total score ≤ 10) was 6.7. The LS mean treatment difference in remitters was not statistically significant (1.2 [-1.6 to 4.0]; P = .4726). Among randomized participants, 49.4% (42/85) receiving placebo and 60.2% (53/88) receiving lisdexamfetamine dimesylate had ≥ 1 treatment-emergent adverse event, the most frequent with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate being dry mouth and headache (both 11.4%). Mean (SD) vital sign and electrocardiogram changes (placebo vs lisdexamfetamine dimesylate) were 0.5 (8.98) versus 2.3 (9.04) mm Hg (systolic blood pressure), -1.0 (7.19) versus 0.9 (6.61) mm Hg (diastolic blood pressure), -0.4 (7.39) versus 4.8 (8.64) beats per minute (heart rate), and -1.6 (11.23) versus -4.9 (11.84) milliseconds (Fridericia-adjusted QTc)., Conclusions: Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate augmentation reduced depressive symptoms in participants with inadequate escitalopram response., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00905424., (© Copyright 2013 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Clinical trials in major depressive disorder (MDD) commonly assess remission at a single endpoint. Complementary, clinically relevant metrics include the likelihood and speed of achieving sustained remission. A neurophysiologic measure, the Antidepressant Treatment Response (ATR) index, previously predicted 8-week outcomes of pharmacotherapy. We retrospectively examined data from the Biomarkers for Rapid Identification of Treatment Effectiveness in Major Depression (BRITE-MD) trial to evaluate this biomarker's properties in predicting sustained remission and time to achieve sustained remission., Method: In the BRITE-MD trial, 67 adults with DSM-IV MDD received escitalopram continuously for 13 weeks. The 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) was used to define sustained remission as achieving remission (HDRS17 score ≤ 7) at a series of consecutive assessments, including week 13. The onset of sustained remission was defined as the earliest time from which all subsequent HDRS17 assessments were ≤ 7. The ATR was evaluated by using frontal quantitative electroencephalogram recordings at baseline and week 1. Subjects were stratified based on ATR status (ie, ATR+/ATR-). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis evaluated group differences in time to sustained remission. Higher ATR was hypothesized to predict sustained remission and time to sustained remission. Subjects participated between January 2006 and July 2007., Results: Of 67 subjects, 36 achieved remission by week 13, and ATR predicted this single endpoint in receiver operating characteristic analyses (P = .016; sensitivity, 52.8%; positive predictive value, 76.0%). Remitters had a higher mean (SD) ATR value than those who did not remit (57.9 [10.0] vs 51.9 [8.7], P = .012). Sixteen of the 31 individuals with sustained remission had ATR+ status, while 28 of the 36 who were not sustained remitters had ATR- status (P = .012). The mean time to reach sustained remission was significantly shorter among ATR+ subjects than ATR- individuals (38 vs 53 days, P = .038)., Conclusions: The ATR index predicted remission at 13 weeks as well as the speed of achieving sustained remission with antidepressant monotherapy. This finding suggests that the ATR biomarker may predict stable longer-term outcomes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00289523., (© Copyright 2013 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate the antidepressant effect of oral scopolamine as an adjunct to citalopram., Method: In this randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study, patients were assessed in the outpatient clinics of 2 large hospitals from November 2011 to January 2012. Forty patients (18-55 years) with major depressive disorder (DSM-IV-TR criteria) and 17-Item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score ≥ 22 were randomly assigned to scopolamine hydrobromide (1 mg/d) (n = 20) or placebo (n = 20) in addition to citalopram for 6 weeks. HDRS score was measured at baseline and days 4, 7, 14, 28, and 42. The primary outcome measure was HDRS score change from baseline to week 6 in the scopolamine group versus the placebo group. Response was defined as ≥ 50% decrease in HDRS score; remission, as HDRS score ≤ 7., Results: Augmentation with scopolamine was significantly more effective than placebo (F(1,38) = 5.831, P = .021). Patients receiving scopolamine showed higher rates of response (65%, 13/20 at week 4) and remission (65%, 13/20 at week 6) than the placebo group (30%, 6/20 and 20%, 4/20, respectively; P = .027, P = .004, respectively). Patients in the scopolamine group showed higher rates of dry mouth, blurred vision, and dizziness than the placebo group., Conclusions: Oral scopolamine is a safe and effective adjunct for treatment of patients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder., Trial Registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: IRCT201201181556N31., (© Copyright 2012 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: A subset of patients undergoing initial antidepressant treatment experience worsening of symptoms, including thoughts of suicide or suicidal behavior. The present study explores whether this subset of patients is also more likely to experience recurrence or worsening of these symptoms during a second treatment trial with a different antidepressant., Method: We examined data collected between July 2001 and September 2006 from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study, a multicenter effectiveness study of outpatients with major depressive disorder diagnosed by a DSM-IV checklist. In that study, subjects who did not remit with citalopram treatment were randomized among next-step treatment options. The main outcome measure for this post hoc analysis, presence of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, was assessed using the suicide item on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology--Self-Rated. Logistic regression was used to examine association between emergence or worsening of these symptoms with the first-step (level 1) citalopram treatment and emergence or worsening with next-step (level 2) pharmacologic or psychosocial treatment, including augmentation with bupropion or buspirone; switch to sertraline, venlafaxine, or bupropion; or addition of or switch to cognitive therapy., Results: Of 1,240 subjects entering level 2 with a score less than 3 on the suicide item, 102 (8.2%) experienced emergence or worsening of suicidal thoughts or behaviors. Emergence or worsening at level 1 was strongly associated with reemergence or worsening at level 2 (crude OR = 4.00 [95% CI, 2.45-6.51], adjusted OR = 2.95 [95% CI, 1.76-4.96]). Overall magnitude of risk was similar among next-step pharmacologic augmentation versus switching., Conclusions: These results suggest that individuals who experience emergence or worsening of suicidal thoughts or behaviors with one antidepressant treatment may warrant closer follow-up during the next-step treatment, as these symptoms may recur regardless of which modality is selected., (© Copyright 2012 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: These studies were designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the first nonpeptide vasopressin V(1b) receptor antagonist, SSR149415, in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)., Method: Studies were randomized 8-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating 100- and 250-mg twice daily doses of SSR149415, placebo, and escitalopram 10 mg/day or paroxetine 20 mg/day, conducted from August 2006 through February 2008. Participants met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria for MDD or GAD. Baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) total scores were ≥ 24 and 18, respectively, and in the GAD trial baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) score was ≥ 22. Primary efficacy variables included changes from baseline in total score on HDRS or HARS and MADRS, and the secondary variable included changes in the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness score (CGI-S). A 4-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the effect of 100- and 250-mg twice daily doses of SSR149415 on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in MDD patients was also conducted., Results: In the GAD trial, SSR149415 did not separate from placebo on the primary (HARS-100 mg: P = .29; 250 mg: P = .21) and secondary (CGI-S-100 mg: P = .18; 250 mg: P = .24) outcome measures, while paroxetine demonstrated efficacy (HARS: P = .003; CGI-S: P = .01). In 2 MDD trials, SSR149415-treated patients did not show significant improvement from baseline on any outcome measure compared with placebo-treated patients (HDRS-100 mg: P = .21 and .48, respectively; 250 mg: P = .22 and P = .46, respectively; CGI-S-100 mg: P = .64 and P = .82, respectively; 250 mg: P = .33 and P = .08, respectively). In the third MDD study, SSR149415 250 mg (P = .04), but not escitalopram (P = .15), demonstrated significant improvement compared to placebo on the HDRS total score at week 8. SSR149415 had no deleterious effects on the HPA axis., Conclusions: These studies demonstrate that SSR149415 may not be useful for the treatment of GAD and that its antidepressant potential needs to be further evaluated., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00374166 (Sanofi ID number: DFI5880), NCT00361491 (Sanofi ID number: DFI5879), NCT00358631 (Sanofi ID number: DFI5878), NCT01606384 (Sanofi ID number: PDY5467)., (© Copyright 2012 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To compare sociodemographic and clinical features, acute and continuation treatment outcomes, and adverse events/side effect burden between outpatients with chronic (current episode > 2 years) versus nonchronic major depressive disorder (MDD) who were treated with combination antidepressant therapy or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) monotherapy., Method: 663 outpatients with chronic (n = 368) or nonchronic (n = 295) moderate to severe DSM-IV-TR MDD (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score ≥ 16) were enrolled from March 2008 through September 2009 in a single-blind 7-month prospective randomized trial conducted at 6 primary and 9 psychiatric care sites across the United States. Participants were treated with escitalopram monotherapy plus placebo or 1 of 2 combination treatments (bupropion sustained-release [SR] + escitalopram or venlafaxine extended-release [XR] + mirtazapine). Analyses compared baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, rates of remission (at least 1 of the last 2 consecutive scores on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report [QIDS-SR16] < 6, with the other < 8), and adverse events/side effect burden (Frequency, Intensity, and Burden of Side Effects Ratings) obtained at 12 and 28 weeks., Results: Participants with chronic MDD were at greater socioeconomic disadvantage and had greater medical and psychiatric disease burden. The chronic and nonchronic groups did not differ in rates of remission at 12 weeks (35.9% vs 42.0%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 0.778, P = .1500; adjusted OR [AOR] = 0.956, P = .8130) or at 28 weeks (41.0% vs 49.8%, respectively; OR = 0.706, P = .0416; AOR = 0.837, P = .3448). Participants with chronic MDD had higher final QIDS-SR(16) scores and smaller overall percent changes in QIDS-SR(16) from baseline to exit, but these differences did not remain after adjusting for covariates. There were no significant differences in adverse events or side effect burden. No significant interactions were found between chronicity and type of treatment at 12 or 28 weeks., Conclusion: Chronicity of illness does not appear to differentially impact acute or longer-term outcomes with SSRI monotherapy or combination antidepressant medication treatment in patients with moderate to severe nonpsychotic MDD., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00590863., (© Copyright 2012 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: This investigation was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of zolpidem extended-release in patients with insomnia associated with major depressive disorder (MDD)., Method: Patients (N = 385) received open-label escitalopram 10 mg/d and were randomized to concomitant zolpidem extended-release 12.5 mg/night or placebo for 8 weeks (phase 1) in a randomized, parallel-group, multicenter trial. Responders (≥ 50% in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS(17)] score) continued 16 weeks of double-blind treatment (phase 2); escitalopram only was given during a 2-week run-out period. The study was conducted between February 2006 and June 2007. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in subjective total sleep time. Secondary efficacy measures included subjective sleep-onset latency, number of awakenings, wake time after sleep onset, sleep quality, sleep-related next-day functioning, HDRS(17), Sleep Impact Scale score, Patient and Clinical Global Impressions of Insomnia Treatment, the Massachusetts General Hospital Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire, and the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire. Adverse events were recorded throughout the study; sleep measures were also evaluated during the run-out period., Results: Throughout phase 1, zolpidem extended-release led to significantly greater improvements in total sleep time (P < .0001), wake time after sleep onset, sleep onset latency, number of awakenings, and sleep quality (P ≤ .0003), and some measures of sleep-related next-day functioning but not in depressive symptoms or quality of life. During phase 2, improvements with the zolpidem extended-release/escitalopram group occurred for total sleep time (significant [P < .05] at weeks 12 and 16), as well as for a few other secondary efficacy measures but not in depressive symptoms or quality of life. The most common adverse events associated with combination treatment included nausea, somnolence, dry mouth, dizziness, fatigue, and amnesia., Conclusions: Zolpidem extended-release administered concomitantly with escitalopram for up to 24 weeks was well tolerated and improved insomnia and some sleep-related next-day symptoms and next-day functioning in patients with MDD but did not significantly augment the antidepressant response of escitalopram., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00296179., (© Copyright 2011 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: This study examines whether continuation therapy with citalopram can prevent a relapse following remission of major depression due to traumatic brain injury., Method: After 65 subjects with DSM-IV-diagnosed major depression following traumatic brain injury were treated with open-label citalopram (20 mg to 50 mg/d), 25 subjects (38.5%) met criteria for remission. Of those, 21 (84.0%) were randomly assigned to either same-dose citalopram or placebo and followed monthly over 40 weeks. Remission was defined as a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score of ≤ 7 or a Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement rating of "much improved" or better. The main outcome variable was the presence of relapse, as defined by meeting criteria for major depressive episode according to the DSM-IV and an HDRS score ≥ 16. Data were collected from February 16, 2005, to May 5, 2008., Results: Ten subjects were randomly assigned to citalopram and 11 to placebo. There were 3 dropouts, including 1 for adverse drug effects (diarrhea). Relapse occurred in 11 subjects (52.4%), with a mean ± SD time to relapse of 23.52 ± 16.6 weeks. The groups did not differ in relapse rates (drug: 50.0% [5/10] vs placebo: 54.5% [6/11], Fisher exact test, P = .835) or time to relapse (log rank test χ² = 0.148, P = .700)., Conclusions: The present study suggests important limitations of continuation pharmacotherapy in the prevention of relapse of major depression following traumatic brain injury., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00162916., (© Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To examine the effects of citalopram augmentation of antipsychotics on suicidal ideation in middle-aged and older people with schizophrenia and subthreshold depressive symptoms., Method: In this placebo-controlled trial conducted from September 1, 2001, to August 31, 2007, 198 outpatients > or = 40 years old with DSM-IV-diagnosed schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and subthreshold depressive symptoms were randomly assigned to flexible-dose citalopram (n = 104) or placebo (n = 94) augmentation of their antipsychotic for 12 weeks. Depression was measured with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and Calgary Depression Rating Scale (CDRS). Primary suicidal ideation measures were the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Suicide scale (CGI-SS) and the InterSePT Scale for Suicidal Thinking (ISST); secondary outcomes were the Scale for Suicidal Ideation (SSI), Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS), HDRS item 3, and CDRS item 8., Results: Compared to placebo, at the final visit, citalopram was associated with lower BHS scores (4.21 vs 4.98; P < .05) and lower likelihood of having suicidal ideation on the ISST (17.7% vs 38.7%; P < .005) and HDRS item 3 (14.4% vs 22.6%; P < .05). Among the 114 participants with no baseline suicidal ideation, there were no significant differences between citalopram and placebo regarding "emergent" ideation on either primary outcome. Among the 55 participants with baseline suicidal ideation, fewer treated with citalopram had endpoint ideation on the ISST (28.6% vs 66.7%; P < .05). Significantly more depression responders than nonresponders went from having baseline suicidal ideation to no suicidal ideation on both the ISST (75.0% vs 31.4%; P < .05) and CGI-SS (84.6% vs 31.3%; P < .05)., Conclusions: Treatment-emergent suicidal ideation was no more common with citalopram than placebo. In participants with baseline suicidal ideation, citalopram reduced suicidal ideation, especially in those whose depressive symptoms responded to treatment., ((c) Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: Generic drugs are lower-cost versions of patent-expired brand-name medications. Bioequivalence is decreed when the 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of the generic to the reference compound for the area under the curve and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) fall within a 0.80 to 1.25 range. The aim of the present pilot study was to compare the pharmacokinetic profiles of brand-name and generic formulations of citalopram and extended-release venlafaxine., Method: Effexor XR/Novo-venlafaxine XR 75 mg and Celexa/Gen-citalopram 40 mg were studied in a randomized crossover design. Healthy male volunteers took either Effexor XR or Novo-venlafaxine XR for 4 days, a 4-day washout was allowed, and then participants took the other venlafaxine formulation for 4 days. This was followed by a washout of at least 7 days. The participants then took Celexa or Gen-citalopram for 8 days, a 14-day washout was allowed, and then participants took the other citalopram formulation for 8 days. In each of the study phases, the sequence of treatment (brand-name x generic) was randomly assigned. Plasma levels of drugs were measured at fixed intervals after participants took the drugs and at steady state. The study was conducted from November 2007 through July 2008., Results: Twelve participants completed the venlafaxine study. Nine of the participants, plus 3 new participants, were then enrolled in the citalopram study, to maintain a total of 12. The plasma levels of citalopram were similar after ingestion of the brand-name and generic drugs. After ingestion of venlafaxine, the C(max) values were 36 +/- 6 ng/mL and 52 +/- 8 ng/mL in the brand-name and generic groups, respectively. The ratio of the log-transformed values of C(max) was 150% and, therefore, not within the acceptable 80% to 125% range. The concentration of the active metabolite of venlafaxine (O-desmethyl-venlafaxine [ODV]) was also significantly increased in the generic group (+43% higher in the generic group at 3 h; +48% higher at 5 h; p < .05). No differences were seen at steady state for either ODV or venlafaxine. Participants taking Novo-venlafaxine reported 3 times more side effects than those taking Effexor XR. Pill contents were identical in the 2 groups, but extraction of venlafaxine occurred more readily with the generic formulation than with the brand-name formulation, which required an additional sonication., Conclusion: Gen-citalopram appeared to be bioequivalent to Celexa, whereas Novo-venlafaxine XR was not bioequivalent to Effexor XR. Consequently, the Novo-venlafaxine formulation released its active ingredient more rapidly and outside the acceptable norm., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00676039., (©Copyright 2009 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To ascertain the impact of treatment with citalopram on irritability, apathy, delusions, and hallucinations in nondepressed behaviorally disturbed Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients., Method: This was a retrospective analysis of data from the 36-week Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness in Alzheimer's Disease in which patients with probable AD (diagnosed according to criteria of the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke and Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association [NINCDS/ADRDA]) were treated in a naturalistic manner. Scores were compared on the irritability, apathy, delusions, and hallucinations subscales of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. The trial was conducted between April 2001 and November 2004., Results: Of the 421 patients enrolled, 44 were started on placebo and were later randomly assigned to citalopram treatment. There were data available for 34 subjects who took placebo for at least 14 days. In this group, there was a 60% reduction in irritability and apathy scores, no effect on scores for delusions, and a clinically insignificant drop in scores for hallucinations., Conclusions: The use of citalopram was associated with greatly reduced irritability without sedation in a group of behaviorally disturbed patients with AD., (Copyright 2009 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To determine the feasibility and safety of aripiprazole augmentation for incomplete response to sequential selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) pharmacotherapy in late-life depression., Method: This study was a 12-week, open-label pilot study of 24 patients (recruited from June 1, 2006, to June 1, 2007) aged 65 years and above (mean, 73.9 years) diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) (according to DSM-IV) who responded partially (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D-17] score of 11 to 15) or not at all (HAM-D score > 15) to a 16-week trial of escitalopram (up to 20 mg/day), followed by either duloxetine (up to 120 mg/day) or venlafaxine (up to 225 mg/day) for 12 weeks. Subjects received 2.5 to 15 mg per day of adjunctive aripiprazole (mean dose, 9.0 mg/day) for 12 weeks. The criterion for remission during treatment with aripiprazole was a HAM-D score < or = 10 for 2 consecutive weeks., Results: Of 24 subjects in the intent-to-treat study group, 19 completed 12 weeks of augmentation with aripiprazole, 12 of 24 (50%) met criteria for remission, and 2 of 24 discontinued due to side effects (sedation, akathisia). The mean (SD) HAM-D score decreased significantly by 6.4 (5.8) points (paired t test for means, p < .01, df = 16). There were no relapses among the 12 subjects who participated in continuation treatment over a median period of 27.6 weeks., Conclusions: In older adults with MDD with incomplete response to SSRI and SNRI pharmacotherapy, aripiprazole was well tolerated, and symptoms of depression improved significantly during treatment with aripiprazole. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of adjunctive aripiprazole for incomplete response in late-life depression is warranted to further evaluate benefit and risk., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00177671., (Copyright 2009 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: It is unclear whether a positive family history of depression affects the clinical presentation or effectiveness of treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). We aimed to determine whether depressed patients with a positive family history of depression differed from those without in terms of baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, including concurrent comorbid conditions and treatment outcome with citalopram in a large, multicenter effectiveness trial., Method: Clinical outcome and sociodemographic information were collected on 2876 participants with DSM-IV MDD enrolled from July 2001 through April 2004 in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study. Participants with and without a family history of depression, as determined by self-report at initial assessment, were compared., Results: Over half (55.6%) (1585/2853) of the evaluable sample reported a positive family history of depression. A positive family history of depression was associated with an earlier age at onset of MDD, a longer length of illness, and more comorbid generalized anxiety disorder and prior suicide attempts. These participants had a slightly faster onset of remission, and slightly greater side effect burden, but they did not differ overall in response or remission rates., Conclusions: A family history of depression was associated with several clinical characteristics, although its usefulness as a predictor of treatment outcome is questionable. The slightly faster remission with an SSRI despite the slightly greater side effect burden indicates the effectiveness of using an SSRI in treating depressed patients both with and without a family history of depression., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00021528., (Copyright 2009 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: This study examined demographic and clinical correlates of DSM-IV major depressive disorder with melancholic features and assessed whether melancholic features were predictive of response to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant., Method: Participants with major depressive disorder (N = 2875) at primary and specialty care sites who received the first step treatment with citalopram in the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression study were included. Patients were enrolled between July 2001 and April 2004. Melancholic features were ascribed by previously developed algorithms of telephone interview ratings prior to treatment. Demographics, clinical features, and treatment response were compared between those with and without melancholic features., Results: The 23.5% of participants with melancholic features were characterized by higher severity scores, greater rates of previous suicide attempts and ratings of current suicidal risk, and more concurrent psychiatric comorbidity. Unadjusted remission rates for those with melancholic features were statistically significantly reduced in absolute terms by up to 8.4% compared to those without melancholic features, which is a 24.1% decrease in relative chance of remission (p < .0001). Following adjustments for between-group baseline differences, remission rates were no longer different., Conclusion: Melancholic features are associated with a significantly reduced remission rate with an SSRI. This effect appears to be accounted for by demographic and clinical features associated with melancholic features., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT0021528., (Copyright 2008 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: Kleptomania has no definitive treatment. Mixed reports of benefit from openly prescribed selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors led us to design a double-blind, placebo-controlled discontinuation trial of escitalopram., Method: Between December 2002 and March 2005, we recruited 24 subjects aged >or=20 years with DSM-IV kleptomania of >or=1 year's duration. We excluded subjects with organic mental disorders, psychoses, substance or alcohol abuse, suicidal risk, bipolar I or II disorder, anorexia nervosa, or antisocial personality disorder and subjects requiring other psychotropic medications. Our primary outcome measure was theft episodes per week. A responder was defined as a subject having a > 50% decrease in theft episodes per week and a Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale score of "much improved" or "very much improved." Escitalopram was started at 10 mg/day and increased as necessary and tolerated after week 4 to 20 mg/day. At the end of week 7, responders were randomly assigned to a 1-week taper followed by 16 weeks of placebo or to continuation of treatment for 17 weeks at their week 7 escitalopram dose., Results: Nineteen subjects (79%) were week 7 responders and 15 were randomly assigned. Five subjects (4 responders) withdrew early: 1 for unrelated illness, 1 for protocol deviation, 2 for side effects, and 1 for withdrawn consent. Three (43%) of 7 escitalopram subjects relapsed compared with 4 (50%) of 8 placebo subjects (Fisher exact test p = .38)., Conclusion: The high response rate during open-label escitalopram treatment was not better maintained by double-blind escitalopram than by placebo. Kleptomania may be a heterogeneous pathological behavior better treated with pharma-cotherapy in some cases and psychologically or with combined treatment in others.

Treatment for major depressive disorder does not achieve remission in about 50% of patients following 2 treatment trials. Researchers conducted the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study to compare various treatments for efficacy and tolerability. This article will focus on the efficacy of antidepressant monotherapy as determined by the STAR*D trial. Patients in the first treatment step of STAR*D received citalopram monotherapy and, depending on their response, moved either to follow-up or through a series of up to 4 additional treatment steps, each comprising different monotherapies, combinations, or augmentation treatment options. Only 1 of 3 patients remitted with the initial monotherapy. Rates of remission for each consecutive monotherapy were increasingly lower, suggesting that a series of monotherapy options may not be the best treatment strategy for patients who are nonresponsive to an initial monotherapy.

Augmentation strategies for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) are needed when patients with MDD have not tolerated or responded to antidepressant monotherapies. Clinicians can employ sequenced treatment steps, preferably coupled with the use of a treatment algorithm, to utilize augmentation strategies that will enable patients to achieve remission. The focus of augmentation therapy has been combining an antidepressant medication with another antidepressant; however, atypical antipsychotics are becoming commonly used to augment antidepressants. Beyond antidepressants and antipsychotics, alternative augmentation strategies include emerging pharmacologic treatments and nonpharmacologic strategies.

Objective: To compare the effects on sexual functioning and the antidepressant efficacy of once-daily bupropion extended release (XL) and escitalopram in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD)., Method: Adult outpatients with moderate to severe DSM-IV-defined MDD and normal sexual functioning were randomly assigned to receive bupropion XL (300-450 mg/day; N = 276), escitalopram (10-20 mg/day; N = 281), or placebo (N = 273) for up to 8 weeks in 2 identically designed, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group studies (study 1 conducted from February 6, 2003, to June 10, 2004; study 2 conducted from January 21, 2003, to June 15, 2004). Data were analyzed prospectively for each study individually, and pooled data were analyzed retrospectively., Results: In both the individual studies and the pooled dataset, the incidence of orgasm dysfunction at week 8 (primary endpoint) and the incidence of worsened sexual functioning at the end of the treatment period were statistically significantly lower with bupropion XL than with escitalopram (p < .05), not statistically different between bupropion XL and placebo (p > or = .067), and statistically significantly higher with escitalopram than with placebo (p < or = .001). The percentages of patients with orgasm dysfunction at week 8 in study 1, study 2, and the pooled dataset, respectively, were 13%, 16%, and 15% with bupropion XL; 32%, 29%, and 30% with escitalopram; and 11%, 8%, and 9% with placebo. The respective percentages of patients with worsened sexual functioning at the end of the treatment period were 18%, 22%, and 20% with bupropion XL; 37%, 34%, and 36% with escitalopram; and 14%, 16%, and 15% with placebo. Mean changes in Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire scores for all domains at week 8 were statistically significantly worse for escitalopram compared with bupropion XL (p < or = .05). Separation from placebo could not be established at a statistical .05 level for bupropion on 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) total score. However, escitalopram showed statistical superiority to placebo on HAM-D-17 total score in one of the 2 studies and in the pooled data. Bupropion XL did not statistically differ from escitalopram with respect to mean change in HAM-D-17 total score, HAM-D-17 response or remission rates, percentage of patients much or very much improved on Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale scores, or mean changes in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale total score or Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale score at week 8., Conclusions: Bupropion XL had a sexual tolerability profile significantly better than that of escitalopram with similar HAM-D-17 remission rates and HAD total scores in patients with MDD.

Introduction: Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is a chronic disorder that requires long-term treatment. Escitalopram has previously been shown to be effective and well tolerated in the acute treatment of GAD., Method: Three 8-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of nearly identical design were conducted of escitalopram in moderate-to-severe GAD (DSM-IV criteria). Patients completing these trials were given the option of entering a 24-week, open-label, flexible-dose trial of escitalopram (10-20 mg/day). Data were collected from September 20, 2000, to August 15, 2002., Results: Two hundred ninety-nine (56.8%) of 526 patients completed 24 weeks of open-label treatment. The mean Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) score at baseline of open-label treatment was 13.1. Long-term escitalopram treatment led to continuing improvement on all anxiety and quality-of-life (QOL) scores. Of those completing 24 weeks of treatment, 92.0% were responders (Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale score < or = 2), and the mean HAM-A score in the completed analysis was 6.9; using the last observation carried forward (LOCF), 75.9% were responders, and the mean HAM-A score in the LOCF analysis was 9.2 at endpoint. Insufficient therapeutic response and adverse events led to withdrawal of 4.2% and 9.9% of patients, respectively. Mean increase in weight from baseline was 3.0 lb. No clinically notable changes in mean laboratory, vital sign, or electrocardiographic values were observed., Conclusion: These results support the long-term tolerability and effectiveness of escitalopram in the treatment of GAD.

Objective: The effects of escitalopram 10 to 20 mg/day and mirtazapine 30 to 45 mg/day on actual driving and psychomotor performance of 18 healthy subjects were determined in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, 3-way crossover trial., Method: Each treatment period lasted for 15 days and was separated from the next period by a washout period of at least 13 days. Subjects received an evening dose of escitalopram 10 mg, mirtazapine 30 mg, or placebo from days 1 to 7 and an evening dose of escitalopram 20 mg, mirtazapine 45 mg, or placebo from days 8 to 15. On days 2, 9, and 16, reflecting acute period, dose increase, and steady state, respectively, the Road Tracking Test was performed. The main parameter was standard deviation of lateral position. Psychomotor performance was also assessed on days 2, 9, and 16 by laboratory computer tasks. Subjective sleep quality was measured with the Groninger Sleep Quality Scale, and mood was measured by visual analogue scales., Results: Treatment differences were apparent during the acute treatment period, in which subjects treated with mirtazapine 30 mg performed less well on the driving test as compared to placebo. The Divided Attention Task results also revealed a significant increase in tracking error after a single dose of mirtazapine 30 mg as compared to placebo. Mirtazapine decreased feelings of alertness and contentedness. Mirtazapine did not affect performance on days 9 and 16 of treatment. Escitalopram did not affect driving, psychomotor performance, or subjective mood throughout treatment., Conclusion: Driving performance, as well as psychomotor functioning, was not affected by escitalopram treatment in healthy subjects. Driving performance was significantly impaired after ingestion of mirtazapine 30 mg during the acute treatment period.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare over 1 year the effect of sertraline and citalopram on depressive symptoms and cognitive functions of nondemented elderly patients with minor depressive disorder and subsyndromal depressive symptomatology., Method: We recruited 138 consecutive non-demented outpatients of either sex, aged > or =65 years, who were classified as meeting research criteria for minor depressive disorder or sub-syndromal depressive symptomatology using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. Subjects were assigned to receive citalopram 20 mg/day (66 patients) or sertraline 50 mg/day (72 patients) orally for 1 year. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 1, 2, 3, and 6 months and at 1 year by raters masked with regard to patients' treatment assignments. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, the Geriatric Depression Scale, and the Global Assessment of Functioning were administered to assess the course of depressive symptoms and social functioning during the study. Cognitive measures included Trail Making Test-Parts A and B, Wechsler Memory Scale, Mini-Mental State Examination, and a verbal fluency test. Data were collected from March 2000 to March 2003., Results: The overall completion rate was 72%. Both treatments induced a significant, sustained, and comparable improvement in depressive symptoms and in social functioning. Nearly half of the subjects in the 2 groups achieved remitter status at study endpoint. Significant within-group improvements also were observed in all cognitive measures. Both drugs were well tolerated during the whole study period., Conclusion: Our results suggest that sertraline and citalopram can improve depressive symptoms and cognitive functions of minor depressive disorder and subsyndromal depressive symptomatology in elderly nondemented patients.

Objective: The incidence of sexual dysfunction due to antidepressant drugs reported in pre-marketing clinical efficacy trials is often several times lower than in subsequent clinical experiences and independent reports. Although it is commonly believed that the reason for this discrepancy is that the nonleading questions employed in conventional clinical trials underestimate sexual dysfunction while the direct questioning used in independent trials provides more accurate data, few studies have actually compared these 2 methods., Method: In this study, 119 patients with a DSM-IV-defined major depressive episode (82 women and 37 men) who had been treated with but not responded to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI; either citalopram or paroxetine) were assessed regarding sexual functioning by means of open-ended questions and direct questioning at baseline (after SSRI treatment only) and after 4 weeks of SSRI treatment plus buspirone or placebo., Results: More patients reported sexual dysfunction in response to direct questioning (41%) as compared with spontaneous report (6%) (p < .001). Sexual dysfunction correlated with the duration of the depressive episode, but not with age, dose of SSRI, plasma level of SSRI, duration of SSRI treatment, or any measurement of depression. No statistically significant differences regarding the incidence of sexual dysfunction were found between the citalopram and the paroxetine groups., Conclusion: Open-ended questions are an insufficient tool to estimate sexual dysfunction, and premarketing clinical trials should therefore include basic explicit assessments. The failure to find a correlation between treatment duration and sexual dysfunction adds to the notion that sexual side effects due to SSRIs do not abate over time.

Background: Therapeutic action of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is delayed from 8 to 12 weeks in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Several different agents have been tested to reduce the SSRI therapeutic latency time. Mirtazapine, an antagonist at alpha2-adrenoceptors, does not enhance serotonin (5-HT) neurotransmission directly but disinhibits the norepinephrine activation of 5-HT neurons and thereby increases 5-HT neurotransmission by a mechanism that may not require a time-dependent desensitization of receptors. The present study was undertaken to determine whether the mirtazapine-citalopram combination could induce an earlier and/or greater effect on the 5-HT system in OCD subjects than citalopram alone., Method: Forty-nine patients with OCD (DSM-IV) without comorbid depression were randomly assigned to a 2-tailed, single-blind, 12-week clinical trial with citalopram (20-80 mg/day) plus placebo or citalopram plus mirtazapine (15-30 mg/day). Assessments were performed weekly with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and the Clinical Global Impressions scale. Data were collected from November 2001 to July 2003., Results: The citalopram plus mirtazapine group achieved a reduction of at least 35% in YBOCS score and a "much improved" or "very much improved" rating on the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale from the fourth week, while the citalopram plus placebo group obtained these results only from the eighth week. The number of responders was higher in the citalopram plus mirtazapine group at the fourth week of treatment, while no difference between groups in the response rate was noted at the eighth and twelfth weeks of treatment., Conclusions: We found an earlier onset of response action in OCD symptoms and reduced undesired side effects when mirtazapine was added to citalopram. This augmentation strategy deserves clinical and research consideration through further double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

Background: The effect of extended anti-depressant treatment on weight has been poorly investigated. Also unknown is whether different compounds have differential effects. The aim of the present study was to assess changes in weight in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) patients treated for 2.5 years with clomipramine or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors., Method: 138 DSM-IV OCD patients who responded to 6-month acute treatment at the Mood and Anxiety Disorders Unit, Department of Neuroscience, University of Turin, Italy, were followed-up for 2 years while receiving open-label clomipramine, citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, or sertraline. Patients were consecutively recruited and followed from May 1998 to March 2003. The mean percentage change in weight was compared for each group, as was the proportion of patients who had a > or = 7% weight increase from baseline., Results: At the end of the 2.5-year study period, patients had gained a mean of 2.5% of their body weight with respect to baseline (1.58 kg); 14.5% of the total sample experienced a significant (> or = 7%) weight increase. Within each but the fluoxetine treatment group, paired t tests showed a significant increase in weight from baseline to final visit. Analysis of variance showed a significant difference between treatment groups (p = .009), with clomipramine being associated with the highest weight increase and fluoxetine and sertraline with the lowest. A higher proportion of clomipramine-treated patients (34.8%) gained > or = 7% in weight as compared with sertraline and fluoxetine, which accounted for the lowest percentage of patients with a significant weight gain (4.5% and 8.7%, respectively), although this difference was not statistically significant., Conclusion: Risk of weight gain during extended serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment for OCD differs depending on which compound is used. The differences among antiobsessive drugs may affect compliance with medication and health risks.

Background: Escitalopram is the most selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) antidepressant available. Venlafaxine is a non-selective SRI that also inhibits noradrenergic re-uptake. This study compared escitalopram and venlafaxine extended release (XR) in depressed outpatients at the highest doses recommended in the United States., Method: In this randomized trial, patients (diagnosis of DSM-IV-defined major depressive disorder; baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score of >/= 20) received 1 week of single-blind placebo treatment, followed by 8 weeks of double-blind, fixed-dose treatment with either escitalopram or venlafaxine XR (rapidly titrated to 20 mg/day and 225 mg/day, respectively, in accordance with prescribing information). The primary efficacy variable was change from baseline to week 8 in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Data were collected from May to December 2002., Results: Mean baseline MADRS scores for the escitalopram (N = 97) and venlafaxine XR (N = 98) groups were 30.7 and 30.0, respectively. There were no significant differences in measures of efficacy between the 2 antidepressants. Mean changes from baseline to endpoint in MADRS total score for escitalopram and venlafaxine XR were -15.9 and -13.6, respectively. Remission (MADRS score of /= 50% reduction from baseline MADRS score) rates for the escitalopram and venlafaxine XR groups were 58.8% and 48.0%, respectively. Tolerability measures favored escitalopram over venlafaxine XR treatment. The venlafaxine XR group had a higher incidence than the escitalopram group of treatment-emergent adverse events (85.0% vs. 68.4%) and discontinuation due to adverse events (16.0% vs. 4.1%; p <.01)., Conclusion: Results of this study indicate that, when titrated rapidly to their maximum recommended doses, escitalopram is at least as effective as venlafaxine XR and significantly better tolerated. These results do not support the hypothesis that nonselective SRIs have greater efficacy than selective SRIs.