Dataset Information

Is duloxetine's effect on painful physical symptoms in depression an indirect result of improvement of depressive symptoms? Pooled analyses of three randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: In treating Major Depressive Disorder with associated painful physical symptoms (PPS), the effect of duloxetine on PPS has been shown to decompose into a direct effect on PPS and an indirect effect on PPS via depressive symptoms (DS) improvement. To evaluate the changes in relative contributions of the direct and indirect effects over time, we analyzed pooled data from 3 randomized double-blind studies comparing duloxetine 60 mg/d with placebo in patients with major depressive disorder and PPS. Changes from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total and Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form average pain score were assessed over 8 weeks. Path analysis examined the (1) direct effect of treatment on PPS and/or indirect effect on PPS via DS improvement and (2) direct effect of treatment on DS and/or indirect effect on DS via PPS improvement. At week 1, the direct effect of duloxetine on PPS (75.3%) was greater than the indirect effect through DS improvement (24.7%) but became less (22.6%) than the indirect effect (77.4%) by week 8. Initially, the direct effect of duloxetine on PPS was markedly greater than its indirect effect, whereas later the indirect effect predominated. Conversely, at week 1, the direct effect of treatment on DS (46.4%) was less than the indirect effect (53.6%), and by week 8 it superseded (62.6%) the indirect effect (37.4%). Thus, duloxetine would relieve PPS directly in the initial phase and indirectly via improving DS in the later phase.

SUBMITTER: Harada E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4751744 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is duloxetine's effect on painful physical symptoms in depression an indirect result of improvement of depressive symptoms? Pooled analyses of three randomized controlled trials.

Harada Eiji E Tokuoka Hirofumi H Fujikoshi Shinji S Funai Jumpei J Wohlreich Madelaine M MM Ossipov Michael H MH Iwata Nakao N

Pain 20160301 3

In treating Major Depressive Disorder with associated painful physical symptoms (PPS), the effect of duloxetine on PPS has been shown to decompose into a direct effect on PPS and an indirect effect on PPS via depressive symptoms (DS) improvement. To evaluate the changes in relative contributions of the direct and indirect effects over time, we analyzed pooled data from 3 randomized double-blind studies comparing duloxetine 60 mg/d with placebo in patients with major depressive disorder and PPS. ...[more]

PMID: 26882344

Similar Datasets

Project description:To review efficacy of duloxetine for physical symptoms and depressive illness in patients with at least mild to moderate major depressive disorder (MDD; DSM-IV) and clinically significant painful physical symptoms at baseline. Global database of duloxetine clinical trials (Eli Lilly and Company). All 11 acute, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of duloxetine (7 with duloxetine 60-mg doses and 4 with non-60-mg doses) in the database that used a scale to measure painful physical symptoms and were completed before March 17, 2011. For each study, patients with clinically significant pain levels at baseline (Visual Analog Scale overall pain rating ≥ 30, Numerical Rating Scale score ≥ 3, or Brief Pain Inventory 24-hour average pain rating ≥ 3) were selected in order to determine the effect sizes of duloxetine (compared with placebo for each trial) on the pain and depression measures. Overall effect sizes for both painful physical symptoms and MDD were obtained from the mean of individual-trial effect sizes, and each effect size was weighted relative to the number of patients within each study. The overall mean effect sizes were as follows: painful physical symptoms-60-mg trials, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.52); non-60-mg trials, 0.13 (95% CI, -0.19 to 0.45); MDD-60-mg trials, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.40); non-60-mg trials, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.32). Across the 11 studies, the weighted effect size for painful physical symptoms was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.51) and for MDD, 0.25 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.34). According to this meta-analysis, duloxetine 60 mg once daily is as effective in improving painful physical symptoms as it is for depression in patients with MDD and clinically significant painful physical symptoms. The results of this meta-analysis indicate that duloxetine has small effect sizes in reducing painful physical symptoms and depressive symptoms in patients with MDD and clinically significant pain levels at baseline. Thus, the results of the study permit one to conclude that duloxetine has a clinically significant impact on painful physical symptoms and in reducing the severity of depressive symptoms. However, the results do not address its efficacy compared to other alternatives, as in all studies the comparator was placebo.

Project description:ObjectivePoor diet can be detrimental to mental health. However, the overall evidence for the effects of dietary interventions on mood and mental well-being has yet to be assessed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis examining effects of dietary interventions on symptoms of depression and anxiety.MethodsMajor electronic databases were searched through March 2018 for all randomized controlled trials of dietary interventions reporting changes in symptoms of depression and/or anxiety in clinical and nonclinical populations. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to determine effect sizes (Hedges' g with 95% confidence intervals [CI]) for dietary interventions compared with control conditions. Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored using subgroups and meta-regression analyses.ResultsResults: Sixteen eligible randomized controlled trials (published in English) with outcome data for 45,826 participants were included; the majority of which examined samples with nonclinical depression (n = 15 studies). Nonetheless, dietary interventions significantly reduced depressive symptoms (g = 0.162, 95% CI = 0.055 to 0.269, p = 0.003). Similar effects were observed among high-quality trials (g = 0.171, 95% C.I.=0.057 to 0.286, p=0.003) and when compared with both inactive (g = 0.114, 95% C.I.=0.008 to 0.219, p=0.035) and active controls (g = 0.224, 95% C.I.= 0.052 to 0.397, p = 0.011). No effect of dietary interventions was observed for anxiety (k = 11, n = 2270, g = 0.085, 95% C.I. = -0.031 to 0.202, p=0.151). Studies with female samples observed significantly greater benefits from dietary interventions, for symptoms of both depression and anxiety.ConclusionsDietary interventions hold promise as a novel intervention for reducing symptoms of depression across the population. Future research is required to determine the specific components of dietary interventions that improve mental health, explore underlying mechanisms, and establish effective schemes for delivering these interventions in clinical and public health settings.RegistrationPROSPERO Online Protocol: CRD42018091256.

Dataset Information

Is duloxetine's effect on painful physical symptoms in depression an indirect result of improvement of depressive symptoms? Pooled analyses of three randomized controlled trials.

Publications

Is duloxetine's effect on painful physical symptoms in depression an indirect result of improvement of depressive symptoms? Pooled analyses of three randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure