-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2011To appraise the evidence for comparative efficacy and tolerability of drug treatments in patients with generalised anxiety disorder. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To appraise the evidence for comparative efficacy and tolerability of drug treatments in patients with generalised anxiety disorder.
DESIGN
Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Primary Bayesian probabilistic mixed treatment meta-analyses allowed pharmacological treatments to be ranked for effectiveness for each outcome measure, given as percentage probability of being the most effective treatment. Secondary frequentist mixed treatment meta-analyses conducted with random effects model; effect size reported as odds ratio and 95% confidence interval.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, BIOSIS, PsycINFO, Health Economic Evaluations Database, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects via DataStar, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews via Cochrane Library (January 1980 to February 2009). Eligibility criteria Double blind placebo controlled randomised controlled trials; published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Randomised controlled trials including adult participants (aged ≥ 18) receiving any pharmacological treatment for generalised anxiety disorder. Data abstraction methods Titles or abstracts reviewed initially, followed by review of full text publications for citations remaining after first pass. A three person team conducted screening; an independent reviewer checked a random selection (10%) of articles screened. Data extracted for meta-analysis were also independently reviewed.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Proportion of participants experiencing ≥ 50% reduction from baseline score on Hamilton anxiety scale (HAM-A) (response), proportion with final HAM-A score ≤ 7 (remission), proportion withdrawing from trial because of adverse events (tolerability).
RESULTS
The review identified 3249 citations, and 46 randomised controlled trials met inclusion criteria; 27 trials contained sufficient or appropriate data for inclusion in the analysis. Analyses compared nine drugs (duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, lorazepam, paroxetine, pregabalin, sertraline, tiagabine, and venlafaxine). In the primary probabilistic mixed treatment meta-analyses, fluoxetine was ranked first for response and remission (probability of 62.9% and 60.6%, respectively) and sertraline was ranked first for tolerability (49.3%). In a subanalysis ranking treatments for generalised anxiety disorder currently licensed in the United Kingdom, duloxetine was ranked first for response (third across all treatments; 2.7%), escitalopram was ranked first for remission (second across all treatments; 26.7%), and pregabalin was ranked first for tolerability (second across all treatments; 7.7%).
CONCLUSIONS
Though the frequentist analysis was inconclusive because of a high level of uncertainty in effect sizes (based on the relatively small number of comparative trials), the probabilistic analysis, which did not rely on significant outcomes, showed that fluoxetine (in terms of response and remission) and sertraline (in terms of tolerability) seem to have some advantages over other treatments. Among five UK licensed treatments, duloxetine, escitalopram, and pregabalin might offer some advantages over venlafaxine and paroxetine.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Anxiety Disorders; Humans; Middle Aged; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 21398351
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d1199 -
Pharmacopsychiatry Sep 2015Desvenlafaxine, the active metabolite of venlafaxine, was approved in 2008 by the FDA for the treatment of depression. The aim of the present review is to provide an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Desvenlafaxine, the active metabolite of venlafaxine, was approved in 2008 by the FDA for the treatment of depression. The aim of the present review is to provide an overview of the existing trials with desvenlafaxine and assess its overall efficacy and tolerability.
METHODS
We searched in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for eligible studies (double-blind randomized control trials). A random effects model was used for the estimation of effect sizes.
RESULTS
17 trials were found in total. In the placebo-controlled trials the overall risk ratio for response was 1.24 (1.16-1.32, p<0.001), for remission 1.29 (1.16-1.43, p<0.001), for dropouts 1.16 (0.99-1.35, p=0.066) and for dropouts due to adverse events 1.98 (1.45-2.69, p<0.001). There were no differences between the various doses that were used (i. e., 50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, 400 mg). The mean risk ratio for response in the head-to-head trials was 0.90 (0.82-0.98, p=0.014) and for remission 0.82 (0.71-0.95, p=0.009).
DISCUSSION
The risk ratios for response and remission were moderate. We further provide some evidence that desvenlafaxine might not be as efficacious as other antidepressants.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Desvenlafaxine Succinate; Humans
PubMed: 26205685
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1555879 -
Pharmacopsychiatry Sep 2019The association between CYP2D6 metabolizer status and clinical outcomes of venlafaxine was extensively investigated previously, but no widely accepted conclusion has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The association between CYP2D6 metabolizer status and clinical outcomes of venlafaxine was extensively investigated previously, but no widely accepted conclusion has been reached so far. To obtain a more precise estimation of the association, a systematic review by meta-analysis was conducted in the present study.
METHODS
The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Technology of Chongqing, and Wan Fang Database were searched for eligible studies up to August 2018.
RESULTS
Fourteen related studies involving 1035 patients were finally included. Significant associations were found among 3 CYP2D6 phenotypes (NM, IM, and PM) and most pharmacokinetic parameters of venlafaxine. However, CYP2D6 phenotypes were not associated with Hamilton Depression Rating Scale response of venlafaxine. In addition, we also found no significant association between CYP2D6 phenotype and overall rate of adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
CYP2D6 metabolizer status had significant influence on venlafaxine pharmacokinetics, but insufficient evidence demonstrated that CYP2D6 metabolizer status was associated with its therapeutic effects and overall rate of adverse events, which provided further evidence regarding the relationship between CYP2D6 metabolizer status and venlafaxine.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Depression; Humans; Treatment Outcome; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 30485867
DOI: 10.1055/a-0792-1340 -
CNS Drugs Sep 2023Although one of the major presentations of vestibular migraine is dizziness with/without unsteady gait, it is still classified as one of the migraine categories.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Although one of the major presentations of vestibular migraine is dizziness with/without unsteady gait, it is still classified as one of the migraine categories. However, in contrast to ordinary migraine, vestibular migraine patients have distinct characteristics, and the detailed treatment strategy for vestibular migraine is different and more challenging than ordinary migraine treatment. Currently, there is no conclusive evidence regarding its management, including vestibular migraine prophylaxis.
AIM
The objective of this current network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of individual treatment strategies in patients with vestibular migraine.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, Web of Science, ClinicalKey, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with a final literature search date of 30 December 2022. Patients diagnosed with vestibular migraine were included. The PICO of the current study included (1) patients with vestibular migraine; (2) intervention: any active pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic intervention; (3) comparator: placebo-control, active control, or waiting list; and (4) outcome: changes in migraine frequency or severity. This NMA of RCTs of vestibular migraine treatment was conducted using a frequentist model. We arranged inconsistency and similarity tests to re-examine the assumption of NMA, and also conducted a subgroup analysis focusing on RCTs of pharmacological treatment for vestibular migraine management. The primary outcome was changes in the frequency of vestibular migraines, while the secondary outcomes were changes in vestibular migraine severity and acceptability. Acceptability was set as the dropout rate, which was defined as the participant leaving the study before the end of the trial for any reason. Two authors independently evaluated the risk of bias for each domain using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.
RESULTS
Seven randomized controlled trials (N = 828, mean age 37.6 years, 78.4% female) and seven active regimens were included. We determined that only valproic acid (standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.69, -0.54), propranolol (SMD -1.36, 95% CI -2.55, -0.17), and venlafaxine (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.32, -0.18) were significantly associated with better improvement in vestibular migraine frequency than the placebo/control groups. Furthermore, among all the investigated pharmacologic/non-pharmacologic treatments, valproic acid yielded the greatest decrease in vestibular migraine frequency among all the interventions. In addition, most pharmacologic/non-pharmacologic treatments were associated with similar acceptability (i.e. dropout rate) as those of the placebo/control groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The current study provides evidence that only valproic acid, propranolol, and venlafaxine might be associated with beneficial efficacy in vestibular migraine treatment.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CRD42023388343.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Migraine Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Propranolol; Valproic Acid; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 37676473
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-023-01037-0 -
Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology Apr 2011This systematic review evaluated Chinese trials examining the efficacy of venlafaxine in the treatment of depression. Chinese databases CNKI and VIP and western... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review evaluated Chinese trials examining the efficacy of venlafaxine in the treatment of depression. Chinese databases CNKI and VIP and western databases were searched for blinded randomized controlled trial publications comparing venlafaxine to other antidepressants or placebo (in English or Chinese). Trials had to establish diagnosis of depression according to the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or International Classification of Diseases. Studies were excluded if more than 20% of participants had a primary diagnosis of dysthymia or if more than 15% had a primary diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Effect sizes were calculated as Hedges' g for rating scale scores and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (MH RR) for response and remission data. Effect sizes were combined in a fixed-effects model. A total of 25 studies were included. Nine trials compared venlafaxine to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; placebo-controlled trials were lacking. Quality was at best modest, and all trials were underpowered. There were more responders (MH RR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.15) and remitters (MH RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.24) in venlafaxine groups compared with those in tricyclic antidepressant group. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale end point scores in the venlafaxine groups were lower (Hedges' g = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.27), and venlafaxine was better tolerated than tricyclic antidepressant (Hedges' g = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74). There were no significant differences between venlafaxine and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor on any of these parameters. Analyses of publication bias were inconclusive. Chinese researchers have published a number of randomized controlled trials comparing venlafaxine to active comparators, but study quality was found to be low. To make optimal use of their research potential Chinese, researchers will have to improve trial reporting and the peer-review process.
Topics: Asian People; Cyclohexanols; Depressive Disorder; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 21346611
DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0b013e31820f932a -
The British Journal of Psychiatry : the... May 2002In individual studies and limited meta-analyses venlafaxine has been reported to be more effective than comparator antidepressants, particularly selective serotonin... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In individual studies and limited meta-analyses venlafaxine has been reported to be more effective than comparator antidepressants, particularly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).
AIMS
To perform a systematic review of all such studies.
METHOD
We conducted a systematic review of double-blind, randomised trials comparing venlafaxine with alternative antidepressants in the treatment of depression. The primary outcome was the difference in final depression rating scale value, expressed as a standardised effect size. Secondary outcomes were response rate, remission rate and tolerability.
RESULTS
A total of 32 randomised trials were included. Venlafaxine was more effective than other antidepressants (standardised effect size was -0.14, 95% Cl -0.07 to -0.22). A similar significant advantage was found against SSRIs (20 studies) but not tricyclic antidepressants (7 studies).
CONCLUSIONS
Venlafaxine has greater efficacy than SSRIs although there is uncertainty in comparison with other antidepressants. Further studies are required to determine the clinical importance of this finding.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Cyclohexanols; Depressive Disorder; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Treatment Outcome; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 11983635
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.180.5.396 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2008Up to 1% of young women may have bulimia nervosa, characterised by an intense preoccupation with body weight, uncontrolled binge-eating episodes, and use of extreme... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Up to 1% of young women may have bulimia nervosa, characterised by an intense preoccupation with body weight, uncontrolled binge-eating episodes, and use of extreme measures to counteract the feared effects of overeating. People with bulimia nervosa may be of normal weight, making it difficult to diagnose. After ten years, about half of people with bulimia nervosa will have recovered fully, a third will have made a partial recovery, and 10-20% will still have symptoms.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for bulimia nervosa in adults? What are the effects of discontinuing treatment in people with bulimia nervosa in remission? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to June 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 26 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: cognitive behavioural therapy (alone or plus exposure response prevention enhancement); cognitive orientation therapy; dialectical behavioural therapy; discontinuing fluoxetine in people with remission; guided self-help cognitive behavioural therapy; hypnobehavioural therapy; interpersonal psychotherapy; mirtazapine; monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs); motivational enhancement therapy; pharmacotherapy plus psychotherapy; pure or unguided self-help cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT); reboxetine; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs); topiramate; tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs); and venlafaxine.
Topics: Binge-Eating Disorder; Bulimia; Bulimia Nervosa; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Humans; Psychotherapy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 19450294
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024Amidst rising global burden of depression and the associated challenges with conventional antidepressant therapies, there is a growing interest in exploring the...
Amidst rising global burden of depression and the associated challenges with conventional antidepressant therapies, there is a growing interest in exploring the efficacy and safety of alternative treatments. This study uses a Bayesian network meta-analysis to rigorously evaluate the therapeutic potential of Chinese herbal medicines in the treatment of depression, focusing on their comparative efficacy and safety against standard pharmacological interventions. Five databases (PubMed, Wanfang Data, EMBASE, CNKI, and the Cochrane Library) and grey literature were searched from inception to end of July 2023 to identify studies that assessed the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicines in treating depression. The response rate, Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) scores, and rates of adverse events were assessed through both direct and indirect comparisons. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were meticulously performed. Statistical analysis used Markov chain Monte Carlo methods, with effect size estimates provided as odd ratios and their 95% confidence intervals. A total of 198 RCTs involving 8,923 patients were analyzed, assessing 17 Chinese herbal medicines. Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking results indicated that the top three treatments with the best response rate were possibly , , and ; the top three treatments on the reduction of HAMD scores were , , and ; and the top three treatments with the lowest adverse effects rates were , , and . Interestingly, commonly used synthetic drugs such as , , , , , and , not only appeared to be less effective than specific Chinese herbal medicines (, , , , and ), but they were also related to substantially higher risk of adverse events. Our findings elucidate the promising therapeutic potential of Chinese herbal medicines as viable alternatives in the treatment of depression, with certain herbs demonstrating enhanced efficacy and safety profiles. The outcomes of this study advocate for the integration of these alternative modalities into contemporary depression management paradigms. However, it underscores the necessity for larger, methodologically robust trials to further validate and refine these preliminary findings. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023452109.
PubMed: 38633609
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1295564 -
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Apr 2020The novel phenethylamines 4-fluoroamphetamine (4-FA) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-bromophenethylamine (2C-B) fall in the top 10 most used new psychoactive substances (NPSs) among...
BACKGROUND
The novel phenethylamines 4-fluoroamphetamine (4-FA) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-bromophenethylamine (2C-B) fall in the top 10 most used new psychoactive substances (NPSs) among high-risk substance users. Various phenethylamines and NPS are also highly used in populations with mental disorders, depression, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Moreover, NPS use is highly prevalent among men and women with risky sexual behavior. Considering these specific populations and their frequent concurrent use of drugs, such as antidepressants, ADHD medication, and antiretrovirals, reports on potential interactions between these drugs, and phenethylamines 4-FA and 2C-B, were reviewed.
METHODS
The authors performed a systematic literature review on 4-FA and 2C-B interactions with antidepressants (citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, duloxetine, bupropion, venlafaxine, phenelzine, moclobemide, and tranylcypromine), ADHD medications (atomoxetine, dexamphetamine, methylphenidate, and modafinil), and antiretrovirals.
RESULTS
Limited literature exists on the pharmacokinetics and drug-drug interactions of 2C-B and 4-FA. Only one case report indicated a possible interaction between 4-FA and ADHD medication. Although pharmacokinetic interactions between 4-FA and prescription drugs remain speculative, their pharmacodynamic points toward interactions between 4-FA and ADHD medication and antidepressants. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of 2C-B also points toward such interactions, between 2C-B and prescription drugs such as antidepressants and ADHD medication.
CONCLUSIONS
A drug-drug (phenethylamine-prescription drug) interaction potential is anticipated, mainly involving monoamine oxidases for 2C-B and 4-FA, with monoamine transporters being more specific to 4-FA.
Topics: Amphetamines; Antidepressive Agents; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Depressive Disorder; Dimethoxyphenylethylamine; Drug Interactions; Humans; Phenethylamines; Prescription Drugs
PubMed: 32022784
DOI: 10.1097/FTD.0000000000000725 -
PloS One 2022Clinical Depression and the subsequent low immunity is a comorbidity that can act as a risk factor for the severity of COVID-19 cases. Antidepressants such as Selective... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Clinical Depression and the subsequent low immunity is a comorbidity that can act as a risk factor for the severity of COVID-19 cases. Antidepressants such as Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors are associated with immune-modulatory effects, which dismiss inflammatory responses and reduce lung tissue damage. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of antidepressant drugs on the prognosis and severity of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.
METHODS
A systematic search was carried out in PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus up to June 14, 2022. The following keywords were used: "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "2019-nCoV", "SSRI", "SNRI", "TCA", "MAOI", and "Antidepressant". A fixed or random-effect model assessed the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We considered P < 0.05 as statistically significant for publication bias. Data were analyzed by Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, Version 2.0 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ).
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included in our systematic review. Five of them were experimental with 2350, and nine of them were observational with 290,950 participants. Eight out of fourteen articles revealed the effect of antidepressants on reducing the severity of COVID-19. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors drugs, including Fluvoxamine, Escitalopram, Fluoxetine, and Paroxetine, and among the Serotonin-norepinephrine inhibitors medications Venlafaxine, are reasonably associated with reduced risk of intubation or death. Five studies showed no significant effect, and only one high risk of bias article showed the negative effect of antidepressants on the prognosis of Covid-19. The meta-analysis of clinical trials showed that fluvoxamine could significantly decrease the severity outcomes of COVID-19 (RR: 0.763; 95% CI: 0.602-0.966, I2: 0.0).
FINDINGS
Most evidence supports that the use of antidepressant medications, mainly Fluvoxamine, may decrease the severity and improve the outcome in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. Some studies showed contradictory findings regarding the effects of antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19. Further clinical trials should be conducted to clarify the effects of antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Fluoxetine; Fluvoxamine; Humans; Norepinephrine; Paroxetine; SARS-CoV-2; Serotonin; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 36201406
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267423