Efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in adults with social anxiety disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Li X
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7220791 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in adults with social anxiety disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Li Xinyuan X Hou Yanbo Y Su Yingying Y Liu Hongping H Zhang Beilin B Fang Shaokuan S
Medicine 20200401 14
<h4>Objective</h4>The present study aimed to estimate the comprehensive efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in adult patients with social anxiety disorder (SAD).<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a comprehensive literature review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials databases for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The efficacy outcome was the mean change of different kinds of scale scores as well as response and remiss ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundNo meta-analysis for estimating the comprehensive efficacy and tolerability of fluvoxamine in patients with social anxiety disorder (SAD) has been published.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and tolerability of fluvoxamine in adults with SAD, trials meeting the following criteria were identified: population: ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of SAD; intervention: fluvoxamine; study design: placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs); outcomes: efficacy and tolerability outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs on January 3, 2018. Review Manager 5.3 and Stata Version 12.0 software were used for all statistical analyses. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous variables, and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated for dichotomous variables. Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool was used to assess the likelihood of risk of bias. Efficacy was assessed by mean changes in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety scale (LSAS) total score and the Clinical Global Impression Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score as well as the response rate. Tolerability was mainly assessed by the discontinuation rate due to adverse events (AEs) and the incidence of most frequent treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs).ResultsThis meta-analysis included 5 RCTs. Mean changes in LSAS total and CGI-S scores were both significantly greater in patients treated with fluvoxamine than those treated with placebo (LSAS: MD = 11.90, 95% CI = 8.09-15.71, P < .001; CGI-S: MD = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.33-0.72, P < .001). Response rate was higher in fluvoxamine group as compared with placebo (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.30-2.24, P < .001). Additionally, mean change in the Sheehan disability scale score was significantly greater in fluvoxamine group than placebo group (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.03-3.18, P < .001). The discontinuation rate due to AEs was higher in patients that received fluvoxamine compared to those received placebo (OR = 5.99, 95% CI = 2.24-15.99, P < .001), as was the incidence of overall TEAEs (any AE) (OR = 2.66, 95% CI = 1.77-4.02, P < .001). However, the incidence of serious AEs was not significantly different between the 2 groups (OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.25-3.89, P = .99).ConclusionFluvoxamine was found to be effective in adult patients with SAD, with acceptable tolerability.
| S-EPMC6076099 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo explore the short-term efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder in adults.MethodsMultiple electronic databases were searched to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on paroxetine and panic disorder. The primary efficacy outcomes were: the mean change compared to the baseline in the total number of full panic attacks, Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score, and the proportion of participants with zero full panic attacks and with a 50% or greater reduction in the number of full panic attacks. The tolerability outcomes included withdrawal rate and the incidence of adverse events (AEs).Results13RCTs were included. The pooled analyses showed patients who received paroxetine experienced greater improvements in the number of full panic attacks (total: MD=-1.96, 95%CI -3.45 to -0.47, P=0.010; ≥50% reduction: OR=1.66, 95%CI 1.08 to 2.55, P=0.02; zero full panic attacks: OR=1.70, 95%CI 1.42 to 2.03, P < 0.00001) and CGI-S (MD=-0.37, 95%CI -0.74 to -0.01, P=0.05) than placebo. There was no evident difference in the total withdrawal rate (OR=0.91, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.08, P=0.26) and withdrawal rate due to AEs (OR=1.29, 95%CI 0.97 to 1.72, P=0.07) between the two groups. Withdrawal rate due to lack of efficacy or relapse (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.63, P < 0.00001) and the incidence of serious AEs (OR=0.42, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.79, P=0.007) in the paroxetine group was lower than the placebo group. Meanwhile, the incidence of any treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (OR=1.32, 95%CI 1.05 to 1.64, P=0.02) in the paroxetine group was higher in comparison with the placebo.ConclusionsParoxetine is an effective and well-tolerated short-term treatment for adults with panic disorder.
| S-EPMC7136560 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine during short-term treatment in adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).We conducted a comprehensive literature review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials databases for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) comparing duloxetine or duloxetine plus other antipsychotics with placebo for the treatment of GAD in adults. Outcome measures were (1) efficacy, assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale(HADS) anxiety subscale score, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety(HAM-A) psychic and somatic anxiety factor scores, and response and remission rates based on total scores of HAM-A; (2) tolerability, assessed by discontinuation rate due to adverse events, the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events(TEAEs) and serious adverse events(SAEs). Review Manager 5.3 and Stata Version 12.0 software were used for all statistical analyses.The meta-analysis included 8 RCTs. Mean changes in the HADS anxiety subscale score [mean difference(MD) = 2.32, 95% confidence interval(CI) 1.77-2.88, P<0.00001] and HAM-A psychic anxiety factor score were significantly greater in patients with GAD that received duloxetine compared to those that received placebo (MD = 2.15, 95%CI 1.61-2.68, P<0.00001). However, there was no difference in mean change in the HAM-A somatic anxiety factor score (MD = 1.13, 95%CI 0.67-1.58, P<0.00001). Discontinuation rate due to AEs in the duloxetine group was significantly higher than the placebo group [odds ratio(OR) = 2.62, 95%CI 1.35-5.06, P = 0.004]. The incidence of any TEAE was significantly increased in patients that received duloxetine (OR = 1.76, 95%CI 1.36-2.28, P<0.0001), but there was no significant difference in the incidence of SAEs (OR = 1.13, 95%CI 0.52-2.47, P = 0.75).Duloxetine resulted in a greater improvement in symptoms of psychic anxiety and similar changes in symptoms of somatic anxiety compared to placebo during short-term treatment in adults with GAD and its tolerability was acceptable.
| S-EPMC5860757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although efficacy of venlafaxine extended release (XR) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) has been reported in previous analyses in 2002 and 2004, the sample size was rather small and estimate of safety or tolerability was not clear. The present analysis had the advantage of large sample size and provided evidence for tolerability.Literature databases were searched, including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science and clinical trials. 10 eligible articles were finally selected and data was extracted and logged into the Review Manager 5.3 by two independent authors. The risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool and the stability of the results was assessed by sensitivity analysis. The publication bias was assessed by funnel plot and Egger's/Begg's test using Stata Version 12.0 software.In the current meta-analysis, 10 articles (14 studies) satisfying the inclusion criteria were analyzed. As efficacy outcomes, our findings indicated venlafaxine XR was significantly more effective than placebo according to mean change of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety total scores [mean difference = 3.31, 95% confidence interval(CI) 1.44-5.18, P = 0.0005], response [odds ratio(OR) = 1.83, 95%CI 1.58-2.12, P<0.00001], and remission (OR = 2.55, 95%CI 1.36-4.78, P = 0.003). In terms of tolerability, the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, insomnia, somnolence, and headache. In addition, discontinuation due to all-cause (OR = 1.17, 95%CI 0.92-1.49, P = 0.19) was not significantly different between the two groups, whereas discontinuation due to adverse events was statistically higher in the venlafaxine XR group compared with the placebo treatment (OR = 2.80, 95%CI 2.21-3.54, P<0.00001) and discontinuation due to inefficacy was lower in venlafaxine than placebo treatment (OR = 0.26, 95%CI 0.17-0.40, P<0.00001). There was no significant publication bias and sensitivity analysis showed that our analysis exhibited high stability.We concluded that venlafaxine XR (75-225 mg/day) is an effective and well-tolerated pharmacological treatment option for adult patients with GAD.
| S-EPMC5628888 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo assess the blood pressure and lipid-lowering efficacy and tolerability of 'polypills' used in cardiovascular disease prevention trials.Methodology/principal findingsSystematic review and meta-analysis.Search strategyThe Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and PubMed databases were searched for eligible trials. Study inclusion criteria: Randomised controlled trials of at least six weeks duration, which compared a 'polypill' (that included at least one anti-hypertensive and one lipid-lowering medication) with a placebo (or one active component).Outcome measuresChange from baseline in systolic and diastolic blood pressures, and total and LDL-cholesterol; discontinuation of study medication and reported adverse effects. Of 44 potentially eligible studies, six trials (including 2,218 patients without previous cardiovascular disease) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with placebo, 'polypills' reduced systolic blood pressure by -9.2 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI): -13.4, -5.0) diastolic blood pressure by -5.0 mmHg (95%CI: -7.4, -2.6), total cholesterol by -1.22 mmol/L (95%CI: -1.60, -0.84) and LDL-cholesterol by -1.02 mmol/L (95%CI: -1.37, -0.67). However, those taking a 'polypill' (vs. placebo or component) were more likely to discontinue medication (20% vs 14%) (Odds ratio: 1.5 (95% CI: 1.2, 1.9)). There was no significant difference in reported adverse effects amongst those on a 'polypill' (36% vs. 28%) (OR: 1.3 (95%CI: 0.7, 2.5)). There was high statistical heterogeneity in comparisons for blood pressure and lipid-lowering but use of random-effects and quality-effects models produced very similar results.Conclusions/significanceCompared with placebo, the 'polypills' reduced blood pressure and lipids. Tolerability was lower amongst those on 'polypills' than those on placebo or one component, but differences were moderate. Effectiveness trials are needed to help clarify the status of 'polypills' in primary care and prevention strategies.
| S-EPMC3526586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Several studies have shown that lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is efficacious in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Aims of this study were to systematically review the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of LDX in child and adolescent ADHD. Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of LDX versus placebo carried out in children and adolescents with ADHD were included.The searches of the SCOPUS, MEDLINE, CINAHL and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were performed in September 2014. Additional searches in the ClinicalTrials. gov and EU Clinical Trials Register database were conducted.This review included all RCTs of LDX versus placebo which were carried out in children and adolescents up to 18 years old. Additionally, the included studies must have reported the final outcomes of: i) severity of ADHD symptoms with standardized scales, ii) rates of improvement, iii) rates of discontinuation. To be more thorough, the languages of such RCTs were not limited.The abstracts from databases were inspected and the full text versions of relevant trials were examined and extracted for important outcomes. The efficacious measurements included either the pooled mean end-point or changed scores of ADHD rating scales, and the rate of improvement. Acceptability and tolerability were measured by the pooled overall discontinuation rate and the pooled discontinuation rate due to adverse events, respectively. A random effect model technique was utilized to synthesize the mean differences (either standardized mean differences or weighted mean differences) and relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).A total of 1,016 children and adolescents with ADHD were included. The dosage of LDX was 30 to 70 mg/day. The pooled mean change scores of LDX-treated group was significantly greater than that of the placebo (weighted mean difference [95% CI] of -15.20 [-19.95, -10.46], I (2)=94%). The pooled improvement rate of the LDX-treated group was also significantly higher than that of the placebo (RR [95% CI] of 0.34 [0.24, 0.47], I (2)=80%). The pooled overall discontinuation rate between the two groups was not significantly different (RR [95% CI] of 0.78 [0.46, 1.31], I (2)=63%). Similarly, the pooled discontinuation rate due to adverse events between the two groups showed no significant difference (RR [95% CI] of 1.99 [0.70, 5.64], I (2)=0%).The number of included studies was limited (five RCTs).According to the present review, LDX was effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of child and adolescent ADHD. Unfortunately, the acceptability of LDX was not better than the placebo. Since the number of included studies was limited, the outcome from this review should be carefully interpreted and considered as preliminary. Further studies, therefore, should be conducted to confirm these findings.Lisdexamfetamine is an efficacious stimulant for treating child and adolescent ADHD.
| S-EPMC4389815 | biostudies-other
Project description:Vilazodone is a new molecule approved for major depressive disorder (MDD). This report focuses on the efficacy and tolerability of vilazodone for MDD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched. A total of 1,930 patients from four trials were included. A significant improvement in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score was seen as early as week 2 (P<0.01) in vilazodone-treated patients. The results showed a higher rate of MADRS response with vilazodone compared with placebo (P<0.001). There were also greater improvements in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety as well as the Clinical Global Impressions (severity of illness and improvement of illness) scores from baseline in vilazodone-treated patients compared to placebo patients (P<0.001). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were higher with vilazodone than placebo (P=0.0002). The most common adverse events of vilazodone were vomiting, nausea, diarrhea, insomnia, somnolence, dizziness, and dry mouth (P<0.05). Treatment-related effects on sexual function were mild compared to placebo in men (P=0.03). In conclusion, 40 mg/day of vilazodone had a rapid onset of response and showed good improvement in anxiety symptoms as well as good tolerability during short-term treatment (8-10 weeks) for MDD. Further studies should focus on the efficacy and tolerability of vilazodone over a longer duration and should utilize active comparators.
| S-EPMC5135073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Attention bias to threat (selective attention toward threatening stimuli) has been frequently found in anxiety disorder samples, but its distribution both within and beyond this category is unclear. Attention bias has been studied extensively in social anxiety disorder (SAD) but relatively little in obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), historically considered an anxiety disorder, or anorexia nervosa (AN), which is often characterized by interpersonal as well as body image/eating fears.Medication-free adults with SAD (n = 43), OCD (n = 50), or AN (n = 30), and healthy control volunteers (HC, n = 74) were evaluated for attention bias with an established dot probe task presenting images of angry and neutral faces. Additional outcomes included attention bias variability (ABV), which summarizes fluctuation in attention between vigilance and avoidance, and has been reported to have superior reliability. We hypothesized that attention bias would be elevated in SAD and associated with SAD severity.Attention bias in each disorder did not differ from HC, but within the SAD group attention bias correlated significantly with severity of social avoidance. ABV was significantly lower in OCD versus HC, and it correlated positively with severity of OCD symptoms within the OCD group.Findings do not support differences from HC in attention bias to threat faces for SAD, OCD, or AN. Within the SAD sample, the association of attention bias with severity of social avoidance is consistent with evidence that attention bias moderates development of social withdrawal. The association of ABV with OCD diagnosis and severity is novel and deserves further study.
| S-EPMC4891283 | biostudies-other
Project description:OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and tolerability of topical pimecrolimus and tacrolimus compared with other treatments for atopic dermatitis. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches of the Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials of topical pimecrolimus or tacrolimus reporting efficacy outcomes or tolerability. DATA EXTRACTION: EFFICACY: investigators' global assessment of response; patients' global assessment of response; proportions of patients with flares of atopic dermatitis; and improvements in quality of life. Tolerability: overall rates of withdrawal; withdrawal due to adverse events; and proportions of patients with burning of the skin and skin infections. DATA SYNTHESIS: 4186 of 6897 participants in 25 randomised controlled trials received pimecrolimus or tacrolimus. Both drugs were significantly more effective than a vehicle control. Tacrolimus 0.1% was as effective as potent topical corticosteroids at three weeks and more effective than combined treatment with hydrocortisone butyrate 0.1% (potent used on trunk) plus hydrocortisone acetate 1% (weak used on face) at 12 weeks (number needed to treat (NNT) = 6). Tacrolimus 0.1% was also more effective than hydrocortisone acetate 1% (NNT = 4). In comparison, tacrolimus 0.03% was more effective than hydrocortisone acetate 1% (NNT = 5) but less effective than hydrocortisone butyrate 0.1% (NNT = -8). Direct comparisons of tacrolimus 0.03% and tacrolimus 0.1% consistently favoured the higher strength formulation, but efficacy differed significantly between the two strengths only after 12 weeks' treatment (rate ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.99). Pimecrolimus was far less effective than betamethasone valerate 0.1% (NNT = -3 at three weeks). Pimecrolimus and tacrolimus caused significantly more skin burning than topical corticosteroids. Rates of skin infections in any of the comparisons did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Both topical pimecrolimus and topical tacrolimus are more effective than placebo treatments for atopic dermatitis, but in the absence of studies that show long term safety gains, any advantage over topical corticosteroids is unclear. Topical tacrolimus is similar to potent topical corticosteroids and may have a place for long term use in patients with resistant atopic dermatitis on sites where side effects from topical corticosteroids might develop quickly. In the absence of key comparisons with mild corticosteroids, the clinical need for topical pimecrolimus is unclear. The usefulness of either treatment in patients who have failed to respond adequately to topical corticosteroids is also unclear.
| S-EPMC552812 | biostudies-other
Project description:Some studies have indicated the efficacy of quetiapine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).The purpose of this study was to systematically review the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of quetiapine in adult patients with GAD.The SCOPUS, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched in April 2015. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of GAD were considered to be included in this meta-analysis. All RCTs of quetiapine in GAD patients providing endpoint outcomes relevant to severity of anxiety, response rate, remission rate, overall discontinuation rate, or discontinuation rate due to adverse events were included. The version reports from suitable clinical studies were explored, and the important data were extracted. Measurement for efficacy outcomes consisted of the mean-changed scores of the rating scales for anxiety, and response rate.A total of 2,248 randomized participants in three RCTs were included. The pooled mean-changed score of the quetiapine-treated group was greater than that of the placebo-treated group and comparable to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Unfortunately, the response and the remission rates in only 50 and 150 mg/day of quetiapine-XR (extended-release) were better than those of the placebo. Their response and remission rates were comparable to SSRIs. The rates of pooled overall discontinuation and discontinuation due to adverse events of quetiapine-XR were greater than placebo. Only the overall discontinuation rate of quetiapine-XR at 50 and 150 mg/day and the discontinuation rate due to adverse events of quetiapine-XR at 50 mg/day were comparable to SSRIs.Based on this meta-analysis, quetiapine-XR is efficacious in the treatment of GAD in adult patients. Despite its low acceptability and tolerability, the use of 50-150 mg/day quetiapine-XR for adult GAD patients may be considered as an alternative treatment. Further well-defined studies should be conducted to warrant these outcomes.
| S-EPMC4716733 | biostudies-other