Dataset Information

Antidepressant efficacy and side effect burden: an updated guide for clinicians.

ABSTRACT: Antidepressant treatment has been evolving and changing since the 1950s following the discovery of the classic antidepressant treatments including tricyclic antidepressants and monoamine oxidase inhibitors. The heterogeneity of the disorder became apparent in the beginning when individuals remained symptomatic despite medication compliance. This spurred further research in order to understand the neurobiology underlying the disorder. Subsequently, newer medications were designed to target specific neurotransmitters and areas of the brain involved in symptom development and maintenance. Our original review article looked at both classic and modern antidepressant medications used in the treatment of major depressive disorder. This manuscript is an update to the original review and serves to provide clinicians with information about novel antidepressant medications, augmentation strategies with atypical antipsychotics, over-the-counter medications, as well as nonpharmaceutical treatments that should be considered when treating each individual patient who remains symptomatic despite treatment efforts.

SUBMITTER: Kutzer T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7255467 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Antidepressant efficacy and side effect burden: an updated guide for clinicians.

Kutzer Tatum T Dick Michelle M Scudamore Trevor T Wiener Mark M Schwartz Thomas T

Drugs in context 20200526

Antidepressant treatment has been evolving and changing since the 1950s following the discovery of the classic antidepressant treatments including tricyclic antidepressants and monoamine oxidase inhibitors. The heterogeneity of the disorder became apparent in the beginning when individuals remained symptomatic despite medication compliance. This spurred further research in order to understand the neurobiology underlying the disorder. Subsequently, newer medications were designed to target specif ...[more]

PMID: 32523610

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundValid assessment of drug efficacy and safety requires an evidence base free of reporting bias. Using trial reports in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval packages as a gold standard, we previously found that the published literature inflated the apparent efficacy of antidepressant drugs. The objective of the current study was to determine whether this has improved with recently approved drugs.Methods and findingsUsing medical and statistical reviews in FDA drug approval packages, we identified 30 Phase II/III double-blind placebo-controlled acute monotherapy trials, involving 13,747 patients, of desvenlafaxine, vilazodone, levomilnacipran, and vortioxetine; we then identified corresponding published reports. We compared the data from this newer cohort of antidepressants (approved February 2008 to September 2013) with the previously published dataset on 74 trials of 12 older antidepressants (approved December 1987 to August 2002). Using logistic regression, we examined the effects of trial outcome and trial cohort (newer versus older) on transparent reporting (whether published and FDA conclusions agreed). Among newer antidepressants, transparent publication occurred more with positive (15/15 = 100%) than negative (7/15 = 47%) trials (OR 35.1, CI95% 1.8 to 693). Controlling for trial outcome, transparent publication occurred more with newer than older trials (OR 6.6, CI95% 1.6 to 26.4). Within negative trials, transparent reporting increased from 11% to 47%. We also conducted and contrasted FDA- and journal-based meta-analyses. For newer antidepressants, FDA-based effect size (ESFDA) was 0.24 (CI95% 0.18 to 0.30), while journal-based effect size (ESJournals) was 0.29 (CI95% 0.23 to 0.36). Thus, effect size inflation, presumably due to reporting bias, was 0.05, less than for older antidepressants (0.10). Limitations of this study include a small number of trials and drugs-belonging to a single class-and a focus on efficacy (versus safety).ConclusionsReporting bias persists but appears to have diminished for newer, compared to older, antidepressants. Continued efforts are needed to further improve transparency in the scientific literature.

Project description:RationaleCytochrome P450 enzymes are important in the metabolism of antidepressants. The highly polymorphic nature of these enzymes has been linked to variability in antidepressant metabolism rates, leading to hope regarding the use of P450 genotyping to guide treatment. However, evidence that P450 genotypic differences underlie the variation in treatment outcomes is inconclusive.ObjectivesWe explored the links between both P450 genotype and serum concentrations of antidepressant with antidepressant side effects, using data from the Genome-Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression Project (GENDEP), which is a large (n = 868), pharmacogenetic study of depressed individuals treated with escitalopram or nortriptyline.MethodsPatients were genotyped for the enzymes CYP2C19 and CYP2D6, and serum concentrations of both antidepressant and primary metabolite were measured after 8 weeks of treatment. Side effects were assessed weekly. We investigated associations between P450 genotypes, serum concentrations of antidepressants and side effects, as well as the relationship between P450 genotype and study discontinuation.ResultsP450 genotype did not predict total side effect burden (nortriptyline: n = 251, p = 0.5638, β = -0.133, standard error (SE) = 0.229; escitalopram: n = 340, p = 0.9627, β = -0.004, SE = 0.085), study discontinuation (nortriptyline n = 284, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.300, p = 0.174; escitalopram n = 376, HR = 0.870, p = 0.118) or specific side effects. Serum concentrations of antidepressant were only related to a minority of the specific side effects measured: dry mouth, dizziness and diarrhoea.ConclusionsIn this sample where antidepressant dosage is titrated using clinical judgement, P450 genotypes do not explain differences between patients in side effects with antidepressants. Serum drug concentrations appear to only explain variability in the occurrence of a minority of specific side effects.

Project description:ObjectiveThe most recent systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the analgesic efficacy and side effects of paravertebral and epidural blockade for thoracotomy was published in 2006. Nine well-designed randomized trials with controversial results have been published since then. The present report constitutes an updated meta-analysis of this issue.Summary of backgroundThoracotomy is a major surgical procedure and is associated with severe postoperative pain. Epidural analgesia is the gold standard for post-thoracotomy pain management, but has its limitations and contraindications, and paravertebral blockade is increasingly popular. However, it has not been decided whether the analgesic effect of the two methods is comparable, or whether paravertebral blockade leads to a lower incidence of adverse side effects after thoracotomy.MethodsTwo reviewers independently searched the databases PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (last performed on 1 February, 2013) for reports of studies comparing post-thoracotomy epidural analgesia and paravertebral blockade. The same individuals independently extracted data from the appropriate studies.ResultEighteen trials involving 777 patients were included in the current analysis. There was no significant difference in pain scores between paravertebral blockade and epidural analgesia at 4-8, 24, 48 hours, and the rates of pulmonary complications and morphine usage during the first 24 hours were also similar. However, paravertebral blockade was better than epidural analgesia in reducing the incidence of urinary retention (p<0.0001), nausea and vomiting (p?=?0.01), hypotension (p<0.00001), and rates of failed block were lower in the paravertebral blockade group (p?=?0.01).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis showed that PVB can provide comparable pain relief to traditional EPI, and may have a better side-effect profile for pain relief after thoracic surgery. Further high-powered randomized trials are to need to determine whether PVB truly offers any advantages over EPI.

Dataset Information

Antidepressant efficacy and side effect burden: an updated guide for clinicians.

Publications

Antidepressant efficacy and side effect burden: an updated guide for clinicians.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets