-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2009The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical practice guideline on the treatment of depressive disorder recommended that selective serotonin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical practice guideline on the treatment of depressive disorder recommended that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors should be the first-line option when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Preliminary evidence suggested that sertraline might be slightly superior in terms of effectiveness.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of escitalopram in comparison with tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs and newer agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.
SEARCH STRATEGY
MEDLINE (1966 to 2008), EMBASE (1974 to 2008), the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to July 2008. No language restriction was applied. Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were hand-searched. Pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to sertraline versus any other antidepressive agent.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved with another member of the team. A double-entry procedure was employed by two reviewers. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects).
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 59 studies, mostly of low quality, were included in the review, involving multiple treatment comparisons between sertraline and other antidepressant agents. Evidence favouring sertraline over some other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression was found, either in terms of efficacy (fluoxetine) or acceptability/tolerability (amitriptyline, imipramine, paroxetine and mirtazapine). However, some differences favouring newer antidepressants in terms of efficacy (mirtazapine) and acceptability (bupropion) were also found. In terms of individual side effects, sertraline was generally associated with a higher rate of participants experiencing diarrhoea.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted a trend in favour of sertraline over other antidepressive agents both in terms of efficacy and acceptability, using 95% confidence intervals and a conservative approach, with a random effects analysis. However, the included studies did not report on all the outcomes that were pre-specified in the protocol of this review. Outcomes of clear relevance to patients and clinicians were not reported in any of the included studies.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Sertraline
PubMed: 19370626
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006117.pub2 -
Psychiatry Research Nov 2019Depression has brought huge disease burden to the world. This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological...
Depression has brought huge disease burden to the world. This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD). We searched electronic databases with time range from 1990.1.1 to 2018.9.5. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adult patients with MDD were eligible for inclusion. We conducted network meta-analyses using multivariate meta-analyses models under the frequency framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (response rate) and safety (overall risk of adverse events). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) based on group-level data. 20,937 citations were identified, 91 trials comprising 10,991 participants were included in efficacy study, and 32 trials comprising 5245 participants were included in safety study. In terms of efficacy, all treatments studied (acupuncture, mirtazapine, herbal medicine, venlafaxine, physical exercise, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), bupropion, fluoxetine, and vortioxetine) except for probiotics were significantly more effective than placebo. In terms of safety, bupropion, fluoxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine were significantly less safe than placebo. Herbal medicine and mirtazapine had no significant difference in overall risk of adverse events compared with placebo. Acupuncture, CBT, physical exercise and probiotics were lack of eligible safety data.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Bupropion; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Depressive Disorder, Major; Fluoxetine; Humans; Mirtazapine; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Vortioxetine
PubMed: 31627074
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112595 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anticancer treatment, suicide risk and possibly the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in this population are few and often report conflicting results.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (aged 18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was November 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants, in adults (aged 18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was 1. efficacy as a continuous outcome. Our secondary outcomes were 2. efficacy as a dichotomous outcome, 3. Social adjustment, 4. health-related quality of life and 5. dropouts. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 14 studies (1364 participants), 10 of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Six of these compared antidepressants and placebo, three compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update, we included four additional studies, three of which contributed data for the primary outcome. For acute-phase treatment response (six to 12 weeks), antidepressants may reduce depressive symptoms when compared with placebo, even though the evidence is very uncertain. This was true when depressive symptoms were measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to -0.12; 7 studies, 511 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and when measured as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.96; 5 studies, 662 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons, we retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and for mirtazapine versus TCAs. There was no difference between the various classes of antidepressants (continuous outcome: SSRI versus TCA: SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18; 3 studies, 237 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mirtazapine versus TCA: SMD -4.80, 95% CI -9.70 to 0.10; 1 study, 25 participants). There was a potential beneficial effect of antidepressants versus placebo for the secondary efficacy outcomes (continuous outcome, response at one to four weeks; very low-certainty evidence). There were no differences for these outcomes when comparing two different classes of antidepressants, even though the evidence was very uncertain. In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; 9 studies, 889 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and TCAs (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.22; 3 studies, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of the heterogeneous quality of the studies, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide CIs, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were few and of low quality. This review found a potential beneficial effect of antidepressants against placebo in depressed participants with cancer. However, the certainty of evidence is very low and, on the basis of these results, it is difficult to draw clear implications for practice. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which drug to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of people with major depression, also taking into account that data on people with other serious medical conditions suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Furthermore, this update shows that the usage of the newly US Food and Drug Administration-approved antidepressant esketamine in its intravenous formulation might represent a potential treatment for this specific population of people, since it can be used both as an anaesthetic and an antidepressant. However, data are too inconclusive and further studies are needed. We conclude that to better inform clinical practice, there is an urgent need for large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer who have depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Mirtazapine; Neoplasms; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 36999619
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006.pub4 -
Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &... Mar 2022Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are still widely used and are available to purchase without prescription in some countries. Awareness of adverse cutaneous drug...
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are still widely used and are available to purchase without prescription in some countries. Awareness of adverse cutaneous drug reactions is essential.
METHOD
We reported a case of photo-distributed hyperpigmentation due to imipramine and carried out a systematic search of the related articles using the search terms "tricyclic antidepressants" or "tricyclic antidepressive agents", and "hyperpigmentation" or "photosensitivity disorder". Fifty non-duplicate citations were identified of which 28 articles which were independently assessed in full. The review was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42018107338.
RESULTS
The remaining 25 articles met our inclusion criteria. Photo-distributed hyperpigmentation tricyclic antidepressant-induced photosensitivity reactions (TIPs) was the most common presentation. In 21 cases, this presented as an asymptomatic discolouration of exposed sites. Imipramine (81%), amitriptyline (9.5%), desipramine hydrochloride (4.8%) and mirtazapine (4.8%) were reported to be the culprit drugs. Nineteen were female with a mean age at presentation of 55 years. Mean duration from commencing the culprit drug until the development of discolouration was 10.4 years. Mean daily dose was 222.7 mg for imipramine. Histology was characteristic with golden-brown or brownish granules deposited in dermis. Staining for Masson-Fontana and MEL-5 was positive in all cases. Phototesting had not been done in cases prior to ours (negative 3 months after discontinuation of imipramine). Three further reports of suspected TIP presented with non-specific and eczematous eruption. The two presentations were reported along with systemic problems (thrombocytopenia and hepatic injury).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review highlights the characteristic features of exposed site hyperpigmentation of TCA-induced photosensitivity occurring after prolonged drug exposure in many cases.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Female; Humans; Hyperpigmentation; Imipramine; Photosensitivity Disorders; Skin
PubMed: 34358364
DOI: 10.1111/phpp.12724 -
Drug Safety 2008Evidence indicates that only minor differences in efficacy exist among second-generation antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). However, a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence indicates that only minor differences in efficacy exist among second-generation antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). However, a comprehensive assessment of both benefits and harms is crucial to evaluate the net benefit.
OBJECTIVE
To review systematically the comparative harms of second-generation antidepressants for the treatment of MDD in adults by including both experimental and observational evidence.
DATA SOURCES
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychLit, The Cochrane Library and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from 1980 to April 2007. We manually searched reference lists of pertinent review articles and explored the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research database to identify unpublished research.
STUDY SELECTION
Eligible study designs were trials and observational studies comparing one drug of interest with another.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two persons independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles. One investigator extracted relevant data. A senior reviewer checked data for completeness and accuracy.
DATA SYNTHESIS
We included 104 experimental and observational studies. If data were sufficient, we conducted meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials on the relative risk of specific adverse events. Findings indicate that the spectrum of adverse events is similar. The frequency of specific adverse events, however, differed across drugs. Venlafaxine was associated with a significantly higher rate of nausea and vomiting than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Compared with other drugs, paroxetine frequently led to more sexual adverse effects and bupropion to fewer such effects; mirtazapine and paroxetine was associated with more weight gain and sertraline with a higher rate of diarrhoea. Overall, however, these differences did not lead to different discontinuation rates. The evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions about rare but severe adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Adverse event profiles are similar among second-generation antidepressants. However, different frequencies of specific adverse events might be clinically relevant and influence the choice of a treatment.
Topics: Adult; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Blood Pressure; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Nausea; Risk Assessment; Seizures; Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological; Sexual Dysfunctions, Psychological; Treatment Outcome; Vomiting
PubMed: 18759509
DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200831100-00004 -
The Consultant Pharmacist : the Journal... Apr 2014To evaluate the literature investigating the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for treating depression in individuals with dementia. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the literature investigating the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for treating depression in individuals with dementia.
DATA SOURCES
A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception to May 2013 for studies in English that evaluated the treatment of depression in patients with dementia. All relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses were identified using the search terms "dementia" or "Alzheimer's disease," and "depression" or "major depressive disorder." Reference lists from retrieved articles and practice guidelines were also searched for relevant literature.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
Only randomized, placebo-controlled trials and meta-analyses that compared an antidepressant with placebo for the treatment of depression in patients with dementia were included.
DATA SYNTHESIS
In this systematic review, 10 RCTs and 3 meta-analyses were identified that examined the efficacy and safety of antidepressants compared with placebo in treating depression in patients with dementia. The majority of the RCTs consisted of a small sample size, and the antidepressants studied were not routinely used in practice.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence for antidepressants in the treatment of depression in patients with dementia is inconclusive. The accumulation of evidence suggests nonpharmacologic approaches and watchful waiting be attempted for the first 8 to 12 weeks in a patient who presents with both mild-to-moderate depression and dementia. In cases of severe depression, or depression not managed through nonpharmacologic means, a trial of an antidepressant may be initiated. However, further well-designed trials are needed to support these recommendations.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Dementia; Depression; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24704894
DOI: 10.4140/TCP.n.2014.254 -
Depression and Anxiety Jun 2012Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often suffer from accompanying symptoms that influence the choice of pharmacotherapy with second-generation antidepressants... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often suffer from accompanying symptoms that influence the choice of pharmacotherapy with second-generation antidepressants (SGAs). We conducted a systematic review to determine the comparative effectiveness of citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, venlafaxine, bupropion, mirtazapine, nefazodone, and trazodone, for accompanying anxiety, insomnia, and pain in patients with MDD.
METHODS
We conducted searches in multiple databases including MEDLINE®, Embase, the Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and PsycINFO, from 1980 through August 2011 and reviewed reference lists of pertinent articles. We dually reviewed abstracts, full-text articles, and abstracted data. We included randomized, head-to-head trials of SGAs of at least 6 weeks' duration. We grouped SGAs into three classes for the analysis: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and others. We graded the strength of the evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
We located 19 head-to-head trials in total: 11 on anxiety, six on insomnia, and four on pain. For the majority of comparisons, the strength of the evidence was moderate or low: evidence is weakened by inconsistency and imprecision. For treating anxiety, insomnia, and pain moderate evidence suggests that the SSRIs do not differ.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence guiding the selection of an SGA based on accompanying symptoms of depression is limited. Very few trials were designed and adequately powered to answer questions about accompanying symptoms; analyses were generally of subgroups in larger MDD trials.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Anxiety Disorders; Chronic Pain; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22553134
DOI: 10.1002/da.21951 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2009Few studies examined treatments for amphetamine withdrawal, although it is a common problem among amphetamine users. Its symptoms, in particular intense craving, may be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Few studies examined treatments for amphetamine withdrawal, although it is a common problem among amphetamine users. Its symptoms, in particular intense craving, may be a critical factor leading to relapse to amphetamine use. In clinical practice, medications for cocaine withdrawal are commonly used to manage amphetamine withdrawal although the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of these two illicit substances are different.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of pharmacological alone or in combination with psychosocial treatment for amphetamine withdrawals on discontinuation rates, global state, withdrawal symptoms, craving, and other outcomes.
SEARCH STRATEGY
MEDLINE (1966 - 2008), CINAHL (1982 - 2008), PsycINFO (1806 - 2008), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library 2008 issue 2), references of obtained articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled and clinical trials evaluating pharmacological and or psychosocial treatments (alone or combined) for people with amphetamine withdrawal symptoms.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors evaluated and extracted data independently. The data were extracted from intention-to-treat analyses. The Relative Risk (RR) with the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to assess dichotomous outcomes. The Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) with 95% CI was used to assess continuous outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
Four randomised controlled trials (involving 125 participants) met the inclusion criteria for the review. Two studies found that amineptine significantly reduced discontinuation rates and improved overall clinical presentation, but did not reduce withdrawal symptoms or craving compared to placebo. The benefits of mirtazapine over placebo for reducing amphetamine withdrawal symptoms were not as clear. One study suggested that mirtazapine may reduce hyperarousal and anxiety symptoms associated with amphetamine withdrawal. A more recent study failed to find any benefit of mirtazapine over placebo on retention or on amphetamine withdrawal symptoms.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
No medication is effective for treatment of amphetamine withdrawal. Amineptine showed reduction in discontinuation rates and improvement in clinical presentation compared to placebo, but had no effect on reducing withdrawal symptoms or craving. In spite of these limited benefits, amineptine is not available for use due to concerns over abuse liability when using the drug. The benefits of mirtazapine as a withdrawal agent are less clear based on findings from two randomised controlled trials: one report showed improvements in amphetamine withdrawal symptoms over placebo; a second report showed no differences in withdrawal symptoms compared to placebo. Further potential treatment studies should examine medications that increase central nervous system activity involving dopamine, norepinephrine and/or serotonin neurotransmitters, including mirtazapine.
Topics: Amphetamine; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Dextroamphetamine; Dibenzocycloheptenes; Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors; Humans; Methamphetamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 19370579
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003021.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2012Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Systematic reviews have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants. Citalopram, one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) introduced in the market, is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics, heterocyclics, other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to February 2012. No language restriction was applied. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field for supplemental data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to citalopram versus any other antidepressants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently extracted data. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), patient acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects).
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty-seven trials compared citalopram with other antidepressants (such as tricyclics, heterocyclics, SSRIs and other antidepressants, either conventional ones, such as mirtazapine, venlafaxine and reboxetine, or non-conventional, like hypericum). Citalopram was shown to be significantly less effective than escitalopram in achieving acute response (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 2.02), but more effective than paroxetine (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.96) and reboxetine (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91). Significantly fewer patients allocated to citalopram withdrew from trials due to adverse events compared with patients allocated to tricyclics (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.78) and fewer patients allocated to citalopram reported at least one side effect than reboxetine or venlafaxine (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.97 and OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.88, respectively).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy, tolerability and acceptability. Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics, reboxetine and venlafaxine, however, it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram. As with most systematic reviews in psychopharmacology, the potential for overestimation of treatment effect due to sponsorship bias and publication bias should be borne in mind when interpreting review findings. Economic analyses were not reported in the included studies, however, cost effectiveness information is needed in the field of antidepressant trials.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Citalopram; Cyclohexanols; Depression; Humans; Morpholines; Paroxetine; Reboxetine; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 22786497
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006534.pub2 -
Current Pharmaceutical Design 2012Impaired glucose tolerance is observed in depressed patients, and patients suffering from depression have an increased risk to develop diabetes mellitus. In depressed... (Review)
Review
Impaired glucose tolerance is observed in depressed patients, and patients suffering from depression have an increased risk to develop diabetes mellitus. In depressed and diabetic patients, studies have shown both a beneficial effect of antidepressants on glucose homeostasis and the opposite. This review aims to structure the conflicting data and focuses on the question, which effect specific antidepressants have on glucose homeostasis. We therefore performed a systematic review of all available studies referenced in Medline from 1960 to 2011. We included antidepressant agents indexed in the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system of the WHO in 2011 and searched for studies investigating their effects on glucose metabolism in clinical samples as well as in healthy subjects. Of 876 studies screened we included 66. Most studies had small sample sizes and lacked a placebo group limiting conclusions about antidepressant effects on glucose tolerance. However, some evidence points to beneficial effects on glucose homeostasis of hydrazine-type monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). In case of SSRIs, the effect is more pronounced in diabetic patients or patients with comorbid depression and diabetes mellitus. Noradrenegic substances (and possibly also dualacting antidepressants), in contrast, may deteriorate glucose tolerance. They can be used in depressed patients when favorable effects on mood outweigh adverse metabolic effects, but in depressed diabetics this can be at the expense of worsening of glycemic control. The effects of other antidepressants, like bupropione, mirtazapine or newer agents, require further investigation before reliable conclusions can be made. The synthesis of the findings is discussed in light of the specific pharmacodynamic properties of the antidepressants as well as the pathophysiological changes in depression and impaired glucose homeostasis, including animal studies.
Topics: Animals; Antidepressive Agents; Blood Glucose; Brain; Depression; Female; Glucose Metabolism Disorders; Homeostasis; Humans; Insulin Resistance; Male; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22681169
DOI: 10.2174/138161212803523662