-
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy Jun 2021: Major depressive disorder (MDD) remains one of the most prevalent mental health conditions. It is a chronic, relapsing condition and despite multiple treatment... (Review)
Review
: Major depressive disorder (MDD) remains one of the most prevalent mental health conditions. It is a chronic, relapsing condition and despite multiple treatment options, many patients fail to achieve remission of symptoms. Inadequacy of treatment has stimulated the search for agents with significant therapeutic advantages.: This review examines literature concerning the use of desvenlafaxine in the treatment of MDD published since a previous analysis in this journal in 2014. Published papers were identified via a PubMed and Web of Science search and excluded congress presentations. Results from clinical trials in MDD, systematic reviews, and post hoc analyses in patient subgroups, are reviewed.: Desvenlafaxine was an effective antidepressant with favorable safety and tolerability in adults. Efficacy was demonstrated in the subgroup of peri- and post-menopausal women with MDD but not in children and adolescents. There is a relatively low potential for drug-drug interactions due to its metabolic profile. Hepatic impairment does not significantly alter dose requirements, whereas severe renal disease requires some adjustments of dose. Desvenlafaxine maybe suitable in patients with comorbid physical illnesses. Desvenlafaxine can be a first line consideration for the treatment of cases of MDD uncomplicated by medical comorbidities.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Child; Cyclohexanols; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Double-Blind Method; Drug Interactions; Female; Humans
PubMed: 33706624
DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2021.1900826 -
Clinical Toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.) Jan 2017Desvenlafaxine is used to treat major depression. Desvenlafaxine is also the active metabolite of venlafaxine. Venlafaxine overdose can cause serotonin toxicity,... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
CONTEXT
Desvenlafaxine is used to treat major depression. Desvenlafaxine is also the active metabolite of venlafaxine. Venlafaxine overdose can cause serotonin toxicity, seizures and cardiovascular effects, but there is limited information on desvenlafaxine overdose.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed at investigating the clinical effects and complications from desvenlafaxine overdose.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This was a retrospective observational study of desvenlafaxine overdoses over a six-year period. Demographic details, dose and timing of the overdose, together with clinical effects, treatment and complications were extracted from a local hospital network database or the medical records of patients following hospital admission with a desvenlafaxine overdose.
RESULTS
There were 182 cases of desvenlafaxine overdose included in the study. From the 182 cases, 75 were desvenlafaxine (± alcohol) only ingestions and 107 included one or more co-ingested drugs. In single-agent desvenlafaxine ingestions, median age was 25 years (range: 13-68 years) with a median ingested dose of 800 mg (range: 250-3500 mg; interquartile range (IQR): 600-1400 mg), and 54/75 (72%) were female. The Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) was 15 in 68/74 (92%) patients, 13-14 in 5/74 (7%), and was seven in one patient following aspiration. Mild hypertension (systolic blood pressure [BP] > 140-180 mmHg) occurred in 23/71 patients (32%), and tachycardia occurred in 29/74 (39%) patients. There were no abnormal QT intervals and no QRS >120 m s. Serotonin toxicity was diagnosed by the treating physician in 7/75 (9%) patients, but only one of these met the Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria. None of the 75 patients who took desvenlafaxine only (± alcohol) had seizures, were admitted to intensive care or died. In comparison, the 107 patients taking desvenlafaxine in overdose with other medications developed more pronounced toxicity. Generalised seizures occurred in 5/107 (5%), but in three of these cases co-ingestants were possible proconvulsants. Fifteen patients had a GCS ≤9 and none had an abnormal QT or QRS. Severe effects appeared to be associated with coingestants.
CONCLUSION
Desvenlafaxine overdose causes minor effects with mild hypertension and tachycardia. The risk of seizures or serotonin toxicity is low.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Antidepressive Agents; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Drug Overdose; Female; Glasgow Coma Scale; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Seizures; Tachycardia; Young Adult
PubMed: 27622824
DOI: 10.1080/15563650.2016.1223847 -
The Journal of Mental Health Policy and... Mar 2024Consensus-guidelines for prescribing antidepressants recommend that clinicians should be vigilant to match antidepressants to patient's medical history but provide no... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
BACKGROUND
Consensus-guidelines for prescribing antidepressants recommend that clinicians should be vigilant to match antidepressants to patient's medical history but provide no specific advice on which antidepressant is best for a given medical history.
AIMS OF THE STUDY
For patients with major depression who are in psychotherapy, this study provides an empirically derived guideline for prescribing antidepressant medications that fit patients' medical history.
METHODS
This retrospective, observational, cohort study analyzed a large insurance database of 3,678,082 patients. Data was obtained from healthcare providers in the U.S. between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2018. These patients had 10,221,145 episodes of antidepressant treatments. This study reports the remission rates for the 14 most commonly prescribed single antidepressants (amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, doxepin, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, mirtazapine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, sertraline, trazodone, and venlafaxine) and a category named "Other" (other antidepressants/combination of antidepressants). The study used robust LASSO regressions to identify factors that affected remission rate and clinicians' selection of antidepressants. The selection bias in observational data was removed through stratification. We organized the data into 16,770 subgroups, of at least 100 cases, using the combination of the largest factors that affected remission and selection bias. This paper reports on 2,467 subgroups of patients who had received psychotherapy.
RESULTS
We found large, and statistically significant, differences in remission rates within subgroups of patients. Remission rates for sertraline ranged from 4.5% to 77.86%, for fluoxetine from 2.86% to 77.78%, for venlafaxine from 5.07% to 76.44%, for bupropion from 0.5% to 64.63%, for desvenlafaxine from 1.59% to 75%, for duloxetine from 3.77% to 75%, for paroxetine from 6.48% to 68.79%, for escitalopram from 1.85% to 65%, and for citalopram from 4.67% to 76.23%. Clearly these medications are ideal for patients in some subgroups but not others. If patients are matched to the subgroups, clinicians can prescribe the medication that works best in the subgroup. Some medications (amitriptyline, doxepin, nortriptyline, and trazodone) always had remission rates below 11% and therefore were not suitable as single antidepressant therapy for any of the subgroups.
DISCUSSIONS
This study provides an opportunity for clinicians to identify an optimal antidepressant for their patients, before they engage in repeated trials of antidepressants.
IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE
To facilitate the matching of patients to the most effective antidepressants, this study provides access to a free, non-commercial, decision aid at http://MeAgainMeds.com.
IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES
Policymakers should evaluate how study findings can be made available through fragmented electronic health records at point-of-care. Alternatively, policymakers can put in place an AI system that recommends antidepressants to patients online, at home, and encourages them to bring the recommendation to their clinicians at their next visit.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Future research could investigate (i) the effectiveness of our recommendations in changing clinical practice, (ii) increasing remission of depression symptoms, and (iii) reducing cost of care. These studies need to be prospective but pragmatic. It is unlikely random clinical trials can address the large number of factors that affect remission.
Topics: Humans; Citalopram; Fluoxetine; Paroxetine; Sertraline; Bupropion; Nortriptyline; Amitriptyline; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Escitalopram; Trazodone; Doxepin; Prospective Studies; Cohort Studies; Retrospective Studies; Antidepressive Agents; Psychotherapy
PubMed: 38634393
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Jul 2020The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lists 22 medications as clinical inhibitors of cytochrome P450 2D6 isoenzyme, with classifications of strong, moderate, and... (Review)
Review
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lists 22 medications as clinical inhibitors of cytochrome P450 2D6 isoenzyme, with classifications of strong, moderate, and weak. It is accepted that strong inhibitors result in nearly null enzymatic activity, but reduction caused by moderate and weak inhibitors is less well characterized. The objective was to identify if the classification of currently listed FDA moderate and weak inhibitors is supported by publicly available primary literature. We conducted a literature search and reviewed product labels for area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) fold-changes caused by inhibitors in humans and identified 89 inhibitor-substrate pairs. Observed AUC fold-change of the substrate was used to create an observed inhibitor classification per FDA-defined AUC fold-change thresholds. We then compared the observed inhibitor classification with the classification listed in the FDA Table of Inhibitors. We found 62% of the inhibitors within the pairs matched the listed FDA classification. We explored reasons for discordance and suggest modifications to the FDA table of clinical inhibitors for cimetidine, desvenlafaxine, and fluvoxamine.
Topics: Area Under Curve; Cimetidine; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6 Inhibitors; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Fluvoxamine; Humans
PubMed: 31910286
DOI: 10.1002/cpt.1768 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2018Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. People with fibromyalgia often report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy, for example, with serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life. This review updates and extends the 2013 version of this systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the US National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles, to 8 August 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently extracted data, examined study quality, and assessed risk of bias. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 50% or greater and of 30% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for fatigue, sleep problems, health-related quality of life, mean pain intensity, depression, anxiety, disability, sexual function, cognitive disturbances and tenderness. For tolerability we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawals due to adverse events and for nausea, insomnia and somnolence as specific adverse events. For safety we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We added eight new studies with 1979 participants for a total of 18 included studies with 7903 participants. Seven studies investigated duloxetine and nine studies investigated milnacipran against placebo. One study compared desvenlafaxine with placebo and pregabalin. One study compared duloxetine with L-carnitine. The majority of studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in three to five domains.The quality of evidence of all comparisons of desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran versus placebo in studies with a parallel design was low due to concerns about publication bias and indirectness, and very low for serious adverse events due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness. The quality of evidence of all comparisons of duloxetine and desvenlafaxine with other active drugs was very low due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness.Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater: 1274 of 4104 (31%) on duloxetine and milnacipran reported pain relief of 50% or greater compared to 591 of 2814 (21%) participants on placebo (risk difference (RD) 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.11; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 14). Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit over placebo in patient's global impression to be much or very much improved: 888 of 1710 (52%) on duloxetine and milnacipran (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26; NNTB 5, 95% CI 4 to 8) reported to be much or very much improved compared to 354 of 1208 (29%) of participants on placebo. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo for pain relief of 30% or greater. RD was 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.12; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 12. Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit for fatigue (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; NNTB 18, 95% CI 12 to 29), compared to placebo. There were no differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.01). Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo in improving health-related quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.15; NNTB 11, 95% CI 8 to 14).There were 794 of 4166 (19%) participants on SNRIs who dropped out due to adverse events compared to 292 of 2863 (10%) of participants on placebo (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; NNTH 14, 95% CI 10 to 25). There was no difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine, milnacipran or desvenlafaxine and placebo (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00).There was no difference between desvenlafaxine and placebo in efficacy, tolerability and safety in one small trial.There was no difference between duloxetine and desvenlafaxine in efficacy, tolerability and safety in two trials with active comparators (L-carnitine, pregabalin).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The update did not change the major findings of the previous review. Based on low- to very low-quality evidence, the SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in the frequency of pain relief of 50% or greater, but for patient's global impression to be much or very much improved and in the frequency of pain relief of 30% or greater there was a clinically relevant benefit. The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in improving health-related quality of life and in reducing fatigue. Duloxetine and milnacipran did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. On average, the potential benefits of duloxetine and milnacipran in fibromyalgia were outweighed by their potential harms. However, a minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically relevant adverse events with duloxetine or milnacipran.We did not find placebo-controlled studies with other SNRIs than desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran.
Topics: Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors; Adult; Carnitine; Cyclopropanes; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Fibromyalgia; Humans; Milnacipran; Norepinephrine; Pregabalin; Quality of Life; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Syndrome
PubMed: 29489029
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010292.pub2 -
Journal of Affective Disorders May 2023Desvenlafaxine and duloxetine are selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Their efficacy has not been directly compared using statistical hypotheses.... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, duloxetine-controlled, non-inferiority trial of desvenlafaxine succinate extended-release in patients with major depressive disorder.
BACKGROUND
Desvenlafaxine and duloxetine are selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Their efficacy has not been directly compared using statistical hypotheses. This study evaluated the non-inferiority of desvenlafaxine extended-release (XL) to duloxetine in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).
METHODS
In this study, 420 adult patients with moderate-to-severe MDD were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 50 mg (once daily [QD]) of desvenlafaxine XL (n = 212) or 60 mg QD of duloxetine (n = 208). The primary endpoint was evaluated using a non-inferiority comparison based on the change from baseline to 8 weeks in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) total score. Secondary endpoints and safety were evaluated.
RESULTS
Least-squares mean change in HAM-D total score from baseline to 8 weeks was -15.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -17.73, -12.89) in the desvenlafaxine XL group and - 15.9 (95% CI, -18.44, -13.39) in the duloxetine group. The least-squares mean difference was 0.6 (95% CI: -0.48, 1.69), and the upper boundary of 95% CI was less than the non-inferiority margin (2.2). No significant between-treatment differences were found in most secondary efficacy endpoints. The incidence of the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was lower for desvenlafaxine XL than for duloxetine for nausea (27.2% versus 48.8%) and dizziness (18.0% versus 28.8%).
LIMITATIONS
A short-term non-inferiority study without a placebo arm.
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrated that desvenlafaxine XL 50 mg QD was non-inferior to duloxetine 60 mg QD in efficacy in patients with MDD. Desvenlafaxine had a lower incidence of TEAEs than duloxetine did.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Duloxetine Hydrochloride; Depressive Disorder, Major; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Antidepressive Agents; Double-Blind Method; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36813043
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.02.067 -
Biomedical Chromatography : BMC Jan 2021Venlafaxine (VFX) is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor chiral drug used in therapy as an antidepressant in the form of a racemate consisting of R- and... (Review)
Review
Venlafaxine (VFX) is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor chiral drug used in therapy as an antidepressant in the form of a racemate consisting of R- and S-VFX. The two enantiomers of VFX exhibit different pharmacological activities: R-VFX inhibits both norepinephrine and serotonin synaptic reuptake, whereas S-VFX inhibits only the serotonin one. R- and S-VFX are metabolized in the liver to the respective R- and S-O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVFX), R- and S-N-desmethylvenlafaxine (NDVFX), and R- and S-N,O-didesmethylvenlafaxine (NODVFX). The pharmacological profile of ODVFX is close to that of VFX, whereas the other two chiral metabolites (NDVFX and NODVFX) have lower affinity for the receptor sites. The pharmacokinetics of the VFX enantiomers appear stereoselective, including the metabolism process. In the past 20 years, several studies describing the enantioselective analysis of R- and S-VFX in pharmaceutical formulations and its chiral metabolites in biological matrices were published. These methods encompass liquid chromatography coupled with UV detection, mass spectrometry, or tandem mass spectrometry, and capillary electrophoresis. This paper reviews the published methods used for the determination of the individual enantiomers of VFX and its chiral metabolites in different matrices.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Chromatography, Liquid; Cyclohexanols; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Electrophoresis, Capillary; Humans; Stereoisomerism; Tandem Mass Spectrometry; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 32367587
DOI: 10.1002/bmc.4874 -
Clinical Pharmacology in Drug... May 2018Desvenlafaxine exposure in Korean and US populations was compared using population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis. Data from a single- and multiple-dose study of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Desvenlafaxine exposure in Korean and US populations was compared using population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis. Data from a single- and multiple-dose study of desvenlafaxine (50, 100, and 200 mg) in 30 healthy Korean subjects were added to a population PK model previously developed using sparse PK samples from patients with major depressive disorder, including 140 Korean patients, combined with rich PK data from healthy volunteers. The structural PK model was an open 1-compartment linear disposition model with parallel first-order and 0-order inputs. The effects of Korean status on apparent oral clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V/F) were tested against the base model separately. External validation results indicated good agreement between the model predictions and observed desvenlafaxine concentrations for Korean subjects. The geometric mean CL/F and V/F of Korean subjects were 9.1% and 16.7% lower, respectively, than those of US subjects, who had a 20% higher mean body weight. Results for patients with major depressive disorder were similar. There were no meaningful differences for weight-normalized CL/F and V/F values between Korean and US subjects or patients. The minor differences in CL/F and V/F observed between Korean and US populations appear to be solely due to lower body weights in the Korean population.
Topics: Adult; Body Weight; Depressive Disorder, Major; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Humans; Male; Metabolic Clearance Rate; Middle Aged; Republic of Korea; United States; Young Adult
PubMed: 29228473
DOI: 10.1002/cpdd.419 -
CNS Spectrums Oct 2019Two similarly designed extension studies evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of children and adolescents with major... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
Two similarly designed extension studies evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). Efficacy was evaluated as a secondary objective.
METHODS
Both 6-month, open-label, flexible-dose extension studies enrolled children and adolescents who had completed one of two double-blind, placebo-controlled, lead-in studies. One lead-in study included a 1-week transition period prior to the extension study. Patients received 26-week treatment with flexible-dose desvenlafaxine (20-50 mg/d). Safety assessments included comprehensive psychiatric evaluations, vital sign assessments, laboratory evaluations, 12-lead electrocardiogram, physical examination with Tanner assessment, and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Adverse events (AEs) were collected throughout the studies. Efficacy was assessed using the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R).
RESULTS
A total of 552 patients enrolled (completion rates: 66.4 and 69.1%). AEs were reported by 79.4 and 79.1% of patients in the two studies; 8.9 and 5.2% discontinued due to AEs. Treatment-emergent suicidal ideation or behavior was reported for 16.6 and 14.1% of patients in the two studies. Mean (SD) CDRS-R total score decreased from 33.83 (11.93) and 30.92 (10.20) at the extension study baseline to 24.31 (7.48) and 24.92 (8.45), respectively, at week 26.
CONCLUSION
Desvenlafaxine 20 to 50 mg/d was generally safe and well tolerated with no new safety signals identified in children and adolescents with MDD who received up to 6 months of treatment in these studies. Patients maintained the reduction in severity of depressive symptoms observed in all treatment groups at the end of the lead-in study.
Topics: Adolescent; Antidepressive Agents; Child; Depressive Disorder, Major; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Drug Tolerance; Female; Humans; Long Term Adverse Effects; Male; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30419989
DOI: 10.1017/S1092852918001128 -
Journal of Clinical PsychopharmacologyHeterogeneity has been documented in trajectories of symptom change during antidepressant treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). It is unclear whether distinct... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
PURPOSE/BACKGROUND
Heterogeneity has been documented in trajectories of symptom change during antidepressant treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). It is unclear whether distinct trajectories of change exist for functioning during antidepressant treatment.
METHODS/PROCEDURES
This analysis explored distinct trajectories of functioning in MDD and tested whether they corresponded to trajectories of symptom change. Data were from 4317 patients and were pooled from 9 randomized placebo-controlled trials. Growth mixture modeling was used to identify trajectories of Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) for placebo- and desvenlafaxine-treated patients.
FINDINGS/RESULTS
Three trajectories were identified for symptoms (HRSD) in patients receiving placebo (mean reduction baseline to week 8, -18.4 [most favorable] to -2.6 points [least favorable]). Four HRSD trajectories were identified for patients receiving desvenlafaxine (mean reduction from baseline to week 8, -17.2 [most favorable] to -2.6 points [least favorable]). Four trajectories were identified for functioning (SDS) in patients receiving placebo (mean reduction baseline to week 8, -13.6 [most favorable] to -0.8 points [least favorable]), and 3 for desvenlafaxine (-12.8 to -1.4 points, respectively). Percentages of agreement between most favorable HRSD and SDS trajectories were 75% (placebo) and 85% (desvenlafaxine), and for least favorable trajectories were 88% (placebo) and 80% (desvenlafaxine).
IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS
Distinct trajectories of change based on symptoms and functioning were identified among patients with MDD receiving desvenlafaxine and among patients with MDD receiving placebo. Differentiating subpopulations of patients has the potential to provide a more personalized treatment of patients with MDD.ClinicalTrials.govIdentifiers: NCT00072774; NCT00277823; NCT00300378; NCT00384033; NCT00798707; NCT00863798; NCT01121484; NCT00824291; NCT01432457.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depressive Disorder, Major; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Humans; Precision Medicine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34183490
DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000001435