101
|
Cox GR, Callahan P, Churchill R, Hunot V, Merry SN, Parker AG, Hetrick SE. Psychological therapies versus antidepressant medication, alone and in combination for depression in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 11:CD008324. [PMID: 23152255 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008324.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Depressive disorders are common in children and adolescents and, if left untreated, are likely to recur in adulthood. Depression is highly debilitating, affecting psychosocial, family and academic functioning. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies and antidepressant medication, alone and in combination, for the treatment of depressive disorder in children and adolescents. We have examined clinical outcomes including remission, clinician and self reported depression measures, and suicide-related outcomes. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to 11 November 2011. This register contains reports of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date). SELECTION CRITERIA RCTs were eligible for inclusion if they compared i) any psychological therapy with any antidepressant medication, or ii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy alone, or an antidepressant medication alone, or iii) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a placebo or 'treatment as usual', or (iv) a combination of psychological therapy and antidepressant medication with a psychological therapy or antidepressant medication plus a placebo.We included studies if they involved participants aged between 6 and 18 years, diagnosed by a clinician as having Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of the studies. We applied a random-effects meta-analysis, using the odds ratio (OR) to describe dichotomous outcomes, mean difference (MD) to describe continuous outcomes when the same measures were used, and standard mean difference (SMD) when outcomes were measured on different scales. MAIN RESULTS We included ten studies, involving 1235 participants in this review. Studies recruited participants with different severities of disorder and with a variety of comorbid disorders, including anxiety and substance use disorder, therefore limiting the comparability of the results. Regarding the risk of bias in studies, half the studies had adequate allocation concealment (there was insufficient information to determine allocation concealment in the remainder), outcome assessors were blind to the participants' intervention in six studies, and in general, studies reported on incomplete data analysis methods, mainly using intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. For the majority of outcomes there were no statistically significant differences between the interventions compared. There was limited evidence (based on two studies involving 220 participants) that antidepressant medication was more effective than psychotherapy on measures of clinician defined remission immediately post-intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.98), with 67.8% of participants in the medication group and 53.7% in the psychotherapy group rated as being in remission. There was limited evidence (based on three studies involving 378 participants) that combination therapy was more effective than antidepressant medication alone in achieving higher remission from a depressive episode immediately post-intervention (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.47), with 65.9% of participants treated with combination therapy and 57.8% of participants treated with medication, rated as being in remission. There was no evidence to suggest that combination therapy was more effective than psychological therapy alone, based on clinician rated remission immediately post-intervention (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.68).Suicide-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) were reported in various ways across studies and could not be combined in meta-analyses. However suicidal ideation specifically was generally measured and reported using standardised assessment tools suitable for meta-analysis. In one study involving 188 participants, rates of suicidal ideation were significantly higher in the antidepressant medication group (18.6%) compared with the psychological therapy group (5.4%) (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.72) and this effect appeared to remain at six to nine months (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.36), with 13.6% of participants in the medication group and 3.9% of participants in the psychological therapy group reporting suicidal ideation. It was unclear what the effect of combination therapy was compared with either antidepressant medication alone or psychological therapy alone on rates of suicidal ideation. The impact of any of the assigned treatment packages on drop out was also mostly unclear across the various comparisons in the review.Limited data and conflicting results based on other outcome measures make it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of any specific intervention based on these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is very limited evidence upon which to base conclusions about the relative effectiveness of psychological interventions, antidepressant medication and a combination of these interventions. On the basis of the available evidence, the effectiveness of these interventions for treating depressive disorders in children and adolescents cannot be established. Further appropriately powered RCTs are required.
Collapse
|
102
|
Cipriani A, Purgato M, Furukawa TA, Trespidi C, Imperadore G, Signoretti A, Churchill R, Watanabe N, Barbui C. Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 7:CD006534. [PMID: 22786497 PMCID: PMC4204633 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006534.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
103
|
Watanabe N, Omori IM, Nakagawa A, Cipriani A, Barbui C, Churchill R, Furukawa TA. Mirtazapine versus other antidepressive agents for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011:CD006528. [PMID: 22161405 PMCID: PMC4158430 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006528.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 86] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Mirtazapine has a unique mechanism of antidepressive action and is one of the commonly used antidepressants in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES The aim of the present review was to assess the evidence on the efficacy and acceptability of mirtazapine compared with other antidepressive agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis review group's specialised register (CCDANCTR), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years to April 2011), EMBASE, (1980 to July 2011) MEDLINE (1950 to July 2011) and PsycINFO (1974 to July 2011). Reference lists of the reports of relevant studies were checked and experts in the field contacted. The review was not limited to English-language articles. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) allocating participants with major depression to mirtazapine versus any other antidepressive agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary outcome was response to treatment. The secondary outcomes included dropouts and individual adverse events.Meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS A total of 29 RCTs (n = 4974), mostly following up the participants for six weeks in outpatient clinics and inadequately reporting the risk of bias, were included. In comparison with tricyclic antidepressants (10 trials, n = 1553) there was no robust evidence to detect a difference between mirtazapine and tricyclics in terms of response at two weeks (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.13) or at the end of acute-phase treatment (at 6 to 12 weeks) (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.10). In comparison with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (12 trials, n = 2626) mirtazapine was significantly more effective at two weeks (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.88) and at the end of acute-phase treatment (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.39). Mirtazapine was significantly more effective than a serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (venlafaxine only, two trials, n = 415) at two weeks (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.59) and at the end of acute-phase treatment (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.25).In terms of dropouts, there was no robust evidence to detect a difference between mirtazapine and other antidepressants. Mirtazapine was more likely to cause weight gain or increased appetite and somnolence than SSRIs but less likely to cause nausea or vomiting and sexual dysfunction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Some statistically significant and possibly clinically meaningful differences between mirtazapine and other antidepressive agents were found for the acute-phase treatment of major depression. Mirtazapine is likely to have a faster onset of action than SSRIs during the acute-phase treatment. Dropouts occur similarly in participants treated with mirtazapine and those treated with other antidepressants, although the adverse event profile of mirtazapine is unique.
Collapse
|
104
|
Churchill R. Systematic reviews and the Cochrane Collaboration: improving the evidence-base for all psychiatric treatments. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2011; 12:137-45. [PMID: 14610848 DOI: 10.1017/s1121189x00002906] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
105
|
|
106
|
Churchill R, Caldwell D, Moore THM, Davies P, Jones H, Lewis G, Hunot V. Behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008696. [PMID: 25067905 PMCID: PMC4110712 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depressionTo examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different BT approaches (behavioural therapy, behavioural activation, social skills training and relaxation training) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural and third wave CBT) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
107
|
Churchill R, Davies P, Caldwell D, Moore THM, Jones H, Lewis G, Hunot V. Humanistic therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. THE COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 2010. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008700] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
108
|
Churchill R, Moore THM, Davies P, Caldwell D, Jones H, Lewis G, Hunot V. Mindfulness-based 'third wave' cognitive and behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008705. [PMID: 25067907 PMCID: PMC4110888 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008705] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different third wave CBT approaches (ACT, compassionate mind training, functional analytic psychotherapy, meta-cognitive therapy, dialectical behaviour therapy, MBCT, extended behavioural activation and meta-cognitive therapy) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
109
|
Hunot V, Moore THM, Caldwell D, Davies P, Jones H, Lewis G, Churchill R. Mindfulness-based 'third wave' cognitive and behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008704. [PMID: 25067906 PMCID: PMC4110713 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different third wave CBT approaches (ACT,compassionate mind training, functional analytic psychotherapy, extended behavioural activation and meta-cognitive therapy) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all third wave CBT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
110
|
Cipriani A, La Ferla T, Furukawa TA, Signoretti A, Nakagawa A, Churchill R, McGuire H, Barbui C. Sertraline versus other antidepressive agents for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD006117. [PMID: 20393946 PMCID: PMC4163971 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006117.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
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 sertraline 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.
Collapse
|
111
|
Omori IM, Watanabe N, Nakagawa A, Cipriani A, Barbui C, McGuire H, Churchill R, Furukawa TA. Fluvoxamine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD006114. [PMID: 20238342 PMCID: PMC4171125 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006114.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fluvoxamine, one of the oldest selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), is prescribed to patients with major depression in many countries. Several studies have previously reviewed the efficacy and tolerability of fluvoxamine for the treatment of major depression. However, these reviews are now outdated. OBJECTIVES Our objective is to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability and side effect profile of fluvoxamine for major depression in comparison with other anti-depressive agents, including tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs, SNRIs, other newer agents and other conventional psychotropic drugs. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register. Trial databases and ongoing trial registers in North America, Europe, Japan and Australia, were handsearched for randomised controlled trials. We checked reference lists of the articles included in the review, previous systematic reviews and major textbooks of affective disorder for published reports and citations of unpublished research. The date of last search was 31 August 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all randomised controlled trials, published in any language, that compared fluvoxamine with any other active antidepressants in the acute phase treatment of major depression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two independent review authors inspected citations and abstracts, obtained papers, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We analysed dichotomous data using odds ratios (ORs) and continuous data using the standardised mean difference (SMD). A random effects model was used to combine studies. MAIN RESULTS A total of 54 randomised controlled trials (n = 5122) were included. No strong evidence was found to indicate that fluvoxamine was either superior or inferior to other antidepressants regarding response, remission and tolerability. However, differing side effect profiles were evident, especially with regard to gastrointestinal side effects of fluvoxamine when compared to other antidepressants. For example, fluvoxamine was generally associated with a higher incidence of vomiting/nausea (versus imipramine, OR 2.23, CI 1.59 to 3.14; versus clomipramine, OR 2.13, CI 1.06 to 4.27; versus amitriptyline, OR 2.86, CI 1.31 to 2.63). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found no strong evidence that fluvoxamine was either superior or inferior to any other antidepressants in terms of efficacy and tolerability in the acute phase treatment of depression. However, differing side effect profiles were evident. Based on these findings, we conclude that clinicians should focus on practical or clinically relevant considerations, including these differences in side effect profiles.
Collapse
|
112
|
Callahan P, Hetrick SE, Churchill R, Hunot V, Merry SN, Parker AG. Psychological therapies versus antidepressant medication, alone and in combination for depression in children and adolescents. THE COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 2010. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
|
113
|
Cipriani A, La Ferla T, Furukawa TA, Signoretti A, Nakagawa A, Churchill R, McGuire H, Barbui C. Sertraline versus other antidepressive agents for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD006117. [PMID: 20091586 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd006117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
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 sertraline 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.
Collapse
|
114
|
Churchill R, Moore THM, Caldwell D, Davies P, Jones H, Furukawa TA, Lewis G, Hunot V. Cognitive behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008698. [PMID: 25411559 PMCID: PMC4234083 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all CBT approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depressionTo examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different CBT approaches (cognitive therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy, problem-solving therapy, self-control therapy and Coping with Depression course) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all CBT approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, third wave CBT) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
115
|
Churchill R, Davies P, Caldwell D, Moore THM, Jones H, Lewis G, Hunot V. Humanistic therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 2010:CD008700. [PMID: 25278809 PMCID: PMC4179874 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd007800] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different humanistic therapy models (person-centred, gestalt, process-experiential, transactional analysis, existential and non-directive therapies) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
116
|
Caldwell D, Hunot V, Moore THM, Davies P, Jones H, Lewis G, Churchill R. Behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008697. [PMID: 25411561 PMCID: PMC4234087 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008697] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different BT approaches (behavioural therapy, behavioural activation, social skills training and relaxation training) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all BT approaches compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
117
|
Davies P, Hunot V, Moore THM, Caldwell D, Jones H, Lewis G, Churchill R. Humanistic therapies versus treatment as usual for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008701. [PMID: 25408624 PMCID: PMC4233123 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008701] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different humanistic therapy models (person-centred, gestalt, process-experiential, transactional analysis, existential and non-directive therapies) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all humanistic therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
118
|
Hunot V, Moore THM, Caldwell D, Davies P, Jones H, Lewis G, Churchill R. Interpersonal, cognitive analytic and other integrative therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008702. [PMID: 25408623 PMCID: PMC4233115 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different integrative therapy models (IPT, CAT, psychodynamic-interpersonal therapy, CBASP, counselling) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with different psychological therapy approaches (psychodynamic, behavioural, humanistic, cognitive-behavioural, third wave CBT) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
119
|
Churchill R, Moore THM, Davies P, Caldwell D, Jones H, Lewis G, Hunot V. Psychodynamic therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008706. [PMID: 25267905 PMCID: PMC4176678 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008706] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapy approaches compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different psychodynamic therapy approaches (drive/structural, relational and integrative analytic models) compared with all other psychological therapy approaches for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapy approaches compared with different psychological therapy approaches (behavioural, humanistic, integrative, cognitive-behavioural, 'third-wave' CBT) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
120
|
Churchill R, Davies P, Caldwell D, Moore THM, Jones H, Lewis G, Hunot V. Interpersonal, cognitive analytic and other integrative therapies versus treatment as usual for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008703. [PMID: 25411560 PMCID: PMC4234086 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different integrative therapies (IPT, CAT, psychodynamic-interpersonal therapy, cognitive behavioural analysis system of psychotherapy and counselling) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all integrative therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
121
|
Moore THM, Hunot V, Davies P, Caldwell D, Jones H, Lewis G, Churchill R. Psychodynamic therapies versus treatment as usual for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008707. [PMID: 25267906 PMCID: PMC4176682 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008707] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different psychodynamic therapy models (drive/structural, relational and integrative analytic models) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all psychodynamic therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
122
|
Watanabe N, Omori IM, Nakagawa A, Cipriani A, Barbui C, McGuire H, Churchill R, Furukawa TA. Safety reporting and adverse-event profile of mirtazapine described in randomized controlled trials in comparison with other classes of antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression: systematic review and meta-analysis. CNS Drugs 2010; 24:35-53. [PMID: 20030418 DOI: 10.2165/11319480-000000000-00000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Mirtazapine has a unique mechanism of antidepressant action, and thus is thought to have a different profile of adverse events from that of other antidepressants. OBJECTIVE To present a methodologically rigorous systematic review of the adverse event profile of mirtazapine and point to possible problems with safety reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the acute-phase treatment of major depression in adults with mirtazapine in comparison with other types of antidepressant. METHODS The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register was electronically searched using the following search terms: 'depress*', 'dysthymi*', 'adjustment disorder*', 'mood disorder*', 'affective disorder', 'affective symptoms' and 'mirtazapine'. Pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field were contacted, and the reference lists of the relevant RCTs were checked, for additional data. No language restriction was imposed. Two authors independently assessed the quality of trials for inclusion in the review. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Two authors independently extracted data on adverse events. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The adequacy of safety reporting was assessed by one author. Regarding the adequacy of safety reporting, the qualitative and quantitative parameters of safety reporting were determined. Regression analyses were conducted to assess characteristics of trials influencing safety reporting. The primary and secondary outcomes in the systematic review of the adverse events associated with mirtazapine were defined as the proportion of patients having each of 43 adverse events listed in the modified version of the WHO Adverse Reaction Terminology, and the proportion of patients experiencing at least one adverse event, respectively. Meta-analyses were conducted for these outcomes. RESULTS Twenty-five RCTs involving 4842 patients were identified as meeting our inclusion criteria. With regard to safety reporting, only two trials and no trials were rated as 'adequate' in terms of the reporting of clinical adverse events and laboratory-determined toxicity, respectively. The proportion of text in the results sections of the study reports devoted to safety reporting was a mean of 22%. No associations were observed between the adequacy of safety reporting and any characteristics of the trials; however, sample size over 100 participants in total and over 50 subjects in a study arm, double blindness and sponsorship by the company marketing mirtazapine were significantly associated with a greater number of reported adverse events in mirtazapine recipients. In terms of individual adverse events, mirtazapine was significantly less likely to cause hypertension or tachycardia (risk ratio [RR] 0.51) and tremor (RR 0.43) than tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). In comparison with selective serotonin uptake inhibitors (SSRIs), mirtazapine was significantly more likely to cause weight gain or increased appetite (RR 3.68), increased salivation (RR 3.66), somnolence (RR 1.62) and fatigue (RR 1.45), but less likely to cause flatulence (RR 0.26), sweating (RR 0.28), sexual dysfunction (RR 0.34), tremor (RR 0.37), nausea or vomiting (RR 0.40), sleep disturbance (RR 0.55) and diarrhoea (RR 0.61). In comparison with the serotonin-noradrenaline (norepinephrine) reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) venlafaxine, mirtazapine was significantly more likely to cause fatigue (RR 2.02), but less likely to cause sleep disturbance (RR 0.03), sweating (RR 0.03) and constipation (RR 0.25). Relative to trazodone, mirtazapine was significantly more likely to cause weight gain or increased appetite (RR 4.00). Approximately 70% of patients treated with mirtazapine experienced at least one adverse event, with no significant difference in comparison with other antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS The study confirmed the paucity of adequate safety reporting in trials comparing mirtazapine with other types of antidepressant in the acute-phase treatment of depression in adults. Based on the available evidence, mirtazapine appears to have a unique adverse-event profile. Using these findings, clinicians can inform their patients, not only of the simple frequency of adverse events with mirtazapine, but also of the relative difference in the frequency of adverse events in comparison with that of other antidepressants, to aid pragmatic clinical decisions.
Collapse
|
123
|
Hunot V, Moore THM, Caldwell D, Davies P, Jones H, Furukawa TA, Lewis G, Churchill R. Cognitive behavioural therapies versus treatment as usual for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD008699. [PMID: 25411558 PMCID: PMC4234030 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008699] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all cognitive behavioural therapies compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of different cognitive behavioural therapy models (cognitive therapy, rational emotive behaviour therapy, problem-solving therapy, self-control therapy and the Coping with Depression course) compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/attention placebo control conditions for acute depression.To examine the effectiveness and acceptability of all cognitive behavioural therapies compared with different types of comparator (standard care, no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo) for acute depression.
Collapse
|
124
|
Barbui C, Cipriani A, Furukawa TA, Salanti G, Higgins JPT, Churchill R, Watanabe N, Nakagawa A, Omori IM, Geddes JR. Making the best use of available evidence: the case of new generation antidepressants: A response to: Are all antidepressants equal? EVIDENCE-BASED MENTAL HEALTH 2009; 12:101-4. [DOI: 10.1136/ebmh.12.4.101] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
|
125
|
Barley EA, Murray J, Churchill R. Using research evidence in mental health: user-rating and focus group study of clinicians’ preferences for a new clinical question-answering service. Health Info Libr J 2009; 26:298-306. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00833.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|