A meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing milnacipran, a serotonin--norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor for the treatment of major depressive disorder

Early Response to Antidepressant Medications in Adults With Major Depressive Disorder: A Naturalistic Study and Odds of Remission at 14 Weeks

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Early response after 2 to 4 weeks of antidepressant therapy has been shown to predict remission by 8 to 12 weeks. Most of the work to date on early response has been done using data from randomized controlled trials.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

This naturalistic study uses archival data from a national tele-mental health company. The positive and negative predictive values as well as sensitivity and specificity were calculated using different drops in baseline Patient Health Questionnaire 9 scores at various periods. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between early responders versus those lacking early response. Binary logistic regression analyses determined if early response was predictive of remission, response, and greater than minimal improvement at 14 weeks. For those who do not show early improvement, treatments were investigated using binary logistic regression to see if changes predicted later outcomes.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

Positive predictive values for all endpoints improved with the strength of early response but did not improve much with the time allowed for that response to occur. In contrast, negative predictive values increased substantially with time. Using a definition of 30% drop in Patient Health Questionnaire 9 score at week 4, 56.5% of patients were early responders. Early responders were ~3.2 times more likely to achieve remission than those lacking early response. Of nonresponders by week 4, those prescribed atypical antipsychotics (+SSRI) had significantly reduced odds of response at week 14, whereas those prescribed a norepinephrine and dopamine reuptake inhibitor had increased odds.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Early response may be associated with better outcomes at 14 weeks. In those with lack of response by week 4, patients prescribed a norepinephrine and dopamine reuptake inhibitor may achieve superior outcomes.

Consensus statements on the clinical understanding and use of milnacipran in Hong Kong

OBJECTIVE

Our aim is to develop a local consensus to guide medical practitioners and psychiatrists on the use of milnacipran in different psychiatric conditions.

METHODS

By utilizing the modified Delphi technique, 12 statements were electronically voted on anonymously for their practicability of recommendation.

RESULTS

There was a very high degree of agreement among the consensus group on 10 finalized consensus statements, but 2 statements were voted down due to a poor degree of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

The present consensus statements were developed as general recommendations for medical practitioners and psychiatrists to be practically referred to in clinical settings.

Serotonin and Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors

This chapter covers antidepressants that fall into the class of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) reuptake inhibitors. That is, they bind to the 5-HT and NE transporters with varying levels of potency and binding affinity ratios. Unlike the selective serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), most of these antidepressants have an ascending rather than a flat dose-response curve. The chapter provides a brief review of the chemistry, pharmacology, metabolism, safety and adverse effects, clinical use, and therapeutic indications of each antidepressant. Venlafaxine, a phenylethylamine, is a relatively weak 5-HT and weaker NE uptake inhibitor with a 30-fold difference in binding of the two transporters. Therefore, the drug has a clear dose progression, with low doses predominantly binding to the 5-HT transporter and more binding of the NE transporter as the dose ascends. Venlafaxine is metabolized to the active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV; desvenlafaxine) by CYP2D6, and it therefore is subject to significant inter-individual variation in blood levels and response dependent on variations in CYP2D6 metabolism. The half-life of venlafaxine is short at about 5 h, with the ODV metabolite being 12 h. Both parent compound and metabolite have low protein binding and neither inhibit CYP enzymes. Therefore, both venlafaxine and desvenlafaxine are potential options if drug-drug interactions are a concern, although venlafaxine may be subject to drug-drug interactions with CYP2D6 inhibitors. At low doses, the adverse effect profile is similar to an SSRI with nausea, diarrhea, fatigue or somnolence, and sexual side effects, while venlafaxine at higher doses can produce mild increases in blood pressure, diaphoresis, tachycardia, tremors, and anxiety. A disadvantage of venlafaxine relative to the SSRIs is the potential for dose-dependent blood pressure elevation, most likely due to the NE reuptake inhibition caused by higher doses; however, this adverse effect is infrequently observed at doses below 225 mg per day. Venlafaxine also has a number of potential advantages over the SSRIs, including an ascending dose-antidepressant response curve, with possibly greater overall efficacy at higher doses. Venlafaxine is approved for MDD as well as generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Desvenlafaxine is the primary metabolite of venlafaxine, and it is also a relatively low-potency 5-HT and NE uptake inhibitor. Like venlafaxine it has a favorable drug-drug interaction profile. It is subject to CYP3A4 metabolism, and it is therefore vulnerable to enzyme inhibition or induction. However, the primary metabolic pathway is direct conjugation. It is approved in the narrow dose range of 50-100 mg per day. Duloxetine is a more potent 5-HT and NE reuptake inhibitor with a more balanced profile of binding at about 10:1 for 5HT and NE transporter binding. It is also a moderate inhibitor of CYP2D6, so that modest dose reductions and careful monitoring will be needed when prescribing duloxetine in combination with drugs that are preferentially metabolized by CYP2D6. The most common side effects identified in clinical trials are nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, constipation, insomnia, asthenia, and hypertension, consistent with its mechanisms of action. Clinical trials to date have demonstrated rates of response and remission in patients with major depression that are comparable to other marketed antidepressants reviewed in this book. In addition to approval for MDD, duloxetine is approved for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and musculoskeletal pain. Milnacipran is marketed as an antidepressant in some countries, but not in the USA. It is approved in the USA and some other countries as a treatment for fibromyalgia. It has few pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with other drugs. Milnacipran has a half-life of about 10 h and therefore needs to be administered twice per day. It is metabolized by CYP3A4, but the major pathway for clearance is direct conjugation and renal elimination. As with other drugs in this class, dysuria is a common, troublesome, and dose-dependent adverse effect (occurring in up to 7% of patients). High-dose milnacipran has been reported to cause blood pressure and pulse elevations. Levomilnacipran is the levorotary enantiomer of milnacipran, and it is pharmacologically very similar to the racemic compound, although the side effects may be milder within the approved dosing range. As with other NE uptake inhibitors, it may increase blood pressure and pulse, although it appears to do so less than some other medications. All medications in the class can cause serotonin syndrome when combined with MAOIs.

The serotonergic system in the neurobiology of depression: Relevance for novel antidepressants

The monoamine hypothesis of depression posits that an imbalance in monoaminergic neurotransmission is causally related to the clinical features of depression. Antidepressants influencing serotonin mainly aim at raising serotonin concentrations, thereby increasing serotonergic transmission at the level of the synapse, for example by inhibiting the serotonin transporter. However, the serotonin system is multifaceted. Different serotonin receptor subtypes turn the serotonergic system into a complex neurochemical arrangement that influences diverse neurotransmitters in various brain regions. Classical antidepressants as well as other psychopharmacological agents have various crucial effects on serotonin receptors. We aim at providing a clinically useful characterization of serotonin receptor subtypes in the treatment of depression. Clarifying the mode of action and the interplay of serotonin receptors with pharmacological agents should help antidepressant mechanisms and typical side effects to be better understood. Against this background, we feature the novel antidepressants vortioxetine, vilazodone and milnacipran/levomilnacipran with regard to their serotonin receptor targets such as the 5-HT1A, 5-HT3 and 5-HT7 which may account for their specific effects on certain symptoms of depression (e.g. cognition and anxiety) as well as a characteristic side-effect profile.

Major Depressive Disorder and Kappa Opioid Receptor Antagonists

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common psychiatric disease worldwide. The clinical use of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRIs) for this condition have been widely accepted, but they were challenged by unacceptable side-effects, potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) or slow onset/lack of efficacy. The endogenous opioid system is involved in stress and emotion regulatory processes and its role in MDD has been implicated. Although several KOR antagonists including JDTic and PF-04455242 were discontinued in early clinical trials, ALKS 5461 and CERC-501(LY-2456302) survived and entered into Phase-III and Phase-II trials, respectively. Considering the efficacy and safety of early off-label use of buprenorphine in the management of the treatment-resistant depression (TRD), it will be not surprising to predict the potential success of ALKS 5461 (a combination of buprenorphine and ALKS-33) in the near future. Moreover, CERC-501 will be expected to be available as monotherapy or adjuvant therapy with other first-line antidepressants in the treatment of TRD, if ongoing clinical trials continue to provide positive benefit-risk profiles. Emerging new researches might bring more drug candidates targeting the endogenous opioid system to clinical trials to address current challenges in MDD treatment in clinical practice.

Optimizing the Use of Aripiprazole Augmentation in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: From Clinical Trials to Clinical Practice

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a recurrent, chronic, and devastating disorder leading to serious impairment in functional capacity as well as increasing public health care costs. In the previous decade, switching therapy and dose adjustment of ongoing antidepressants was the most frequently chosen subsequent treatment option for MDD. However, such recommendations were not based on firmly proven efficacy data from well-designed, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) but on practical grounds and clinical reasoning. Aripiprazole augmentation has been dramatically increasing in clinical practice owing to its unique action mechanisms as well as proven efficacy and safety from adequately powered and well-controlled RCTs. Despite the increased use of aripiprazole in depression, limited clinical information and knowledge interfere with proper and efficient use of aripiprazole augmentation for MDD. The objective of the present review was to enhance clinicians' current understanding of aripiprazole augmentation and how to optimize the use of this therapy in the treatment of MDD.

Aripiprazole augmentation versus antidepressant switching for patients with major depressive disorder: A 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, prospective study

No study has directly compared the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole augmentation (AA) and antidepressant switching (SW) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This is the first 6-week, randomized, rater-blinded, direct comparison study between AA and SW in outpatients. An inadequate response to antidepressants was defined as a total score ≥ 14 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-item 17 (HDRS-17) despite adequate antidepressant dosage for at least 6 weeks in the current depressive episode. The primary endpoint was change in the total score of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy measures included the response and remission rates as priori defined at the end of treatment: changes in total scores of the HDRS-17, Iowa Fatigue Scale (IFS), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) from baseline to the end of treatment and the proportion of patients who scored 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Score (CGI-I) at the end of treatment. Tolerability was assessed with the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Arizona Sexual dysfunction scale (ASEX), and the numbers of adverse events were compared between the two groups. A total of 101 patients were randomized to either AA (n = 52) or SW (n = 49). The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline was significantly higher in the AA, with a difference in magnitude of -8.7 (p < 0.0001). The intergroup difference was first evident in week 2. The numbers of responders (p = 0.0086) and remitters (p = 0.0005) were also significantly higher in the AA (60% and 54%, respectively) compared with the SW (32.6% and 19.6%, respectively). On most secondary endpoints, AA showed better clinical outcomes compared to SW. The tolerability profiles were comparable between the two groups. Overall, AA yielded potentially beneficial clinical outcomes compared to SW. Given the methodological shortcomings of the present study, adequately powered, more rigorously controlled clinical trials are strongly warranted to confirm the present findings.

Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines

A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants was undertaken in order to incorporate new evidence and to update the recommendations where appropriate. A consensus meeting involving experts in depressive disorders and their management was held in September 2012. Key areas in treating depression were reviewed and the strength of evidence and clinical implications were considered. The guidelines were then revised after extensive feedback from participants and interested parties. A literature review is provided which identifies the quality of evidence upon which the recommendations are made. These guidelines cover the nature and detection of depressive disorders, acute treatment with antidepressant drugs, choice of drug versus alternative treatment, practical issues in prescribing and management, next-step treatment, relapse prevention, treatment of relapse and stopping treatment. Significant changes since the last guidelines were published in 2008 include the availability of new antidepressant treatment options, improved evidence supporting certain augmentation strategies (drug and non-drug), management of potential long-term side effects, updated guidance for prescribing in elderly and adolescent populations and updated guidance for optimal prescribing. Suggestions for future research priorities are also made.

Does adding noradrenaline reuptake inhibition to selective serotonin reuptake inhibition improve efficacy in patients with depression? A systematic review of meta-analyses and large randomised pragmatic trials

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are recommended as first-line pharmacological treatment for depression and are the most commonly prescribed class of antidepressants. However, there is substantial evidence that noradrenaline has a role in the pathogenesis and treatment of depression. This review aims to examine the evidence of including noradrenaline reuptake inhibition with serotonin reuptake inhibition with respect to increasing efficacy in the treatment of depression. Evidence from meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and randomised pragmatic trials was found in support of greater efficacy of the serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), venlafaxine and duloxetine, in moderate to severe depression compared to SSRIs but no evidence was found for superiority of milnacipran. There is sufficient current evidence that demonstrates an increase in efficacy, when noradrenaline reuptake is added to serotonin (5-HT) reuptake, to suggest that patients with severe depression or those who have failed to reach remission with a SSRI may benefit from treatment with a SNRI. However, as these conclusions are drawn from the evidence derived from meta-analyses and pragmatic trials, large adequately powered RCTs using optimal dosing regimens and clinically relevant outcome measures in severe depression and SSRI treatment failures are still required to confirm these findings.

A systematic review of duloxetine and venlafaxine in major depression, including unpublished data

OBJECTIVE

To determine the short-term antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine and venlafaxine vs. each other, placebo, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and tri- and tetracyclic antidepressants (TCAs) in adults with major depression.

METHOD

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials identified through bibliographical databases and other sources, including unpublished manufacturer reports.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies including venlafaxine arms (n = 12,816), 14 including duloxetine arms (n = 4,528), and two direct comparisons (n = 836) were analysed. Twenty-three studies were previously unpublished. In the meta-analysis, both duloxetine and venlafaxine showed superior efficacy (higher remission and response rates) and inferior tolerability (higher discontinuation rates due to adverse events) to placebo. Venlafaxine had superior efficacy in response rates but inferior tolerability to SSRIs (OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.07-1.35 and 1.38, 95% CI 1.15-1.66, respectively), and no differences in efficacy and tolerability to TCAs. Duloxetine did not show any advantages over other antidepressants and was less well tolerated than SSRIs and venlafaxine (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.10-2.13 and OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.16-2.78, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Rather than being a first-line option, venlafaxine appears to be a valid alternative in patients who do not tolerate or respond to SSRIs or TCAs. Duloxetine does not seem to be indicated as a first-line treatment.

Treatment goals of depressed outpatients: a qualitative investigation of goals identified by participants in a depression treatment trial

Treatment goals and preferences of depressed patients are important, but they are rarely empirically studied. Although clinicians are likely to discuss goals with individual patients, research that clarifies overall patterns in the treatment goals of depressed patients could be useful in informing new interventions for depression. Such research could also potentially help address problems such as poor adherence and psychotherapy drop-out. In this preliminary qualitative investigation, we examined treatment goals established by depressed outpatients in the context of a trial of behaviorally oriented psychotherapy. The treatment goals that were most commonly articulated included improving social and family relationships, increasing physical health behaviors, finding a job, and organizing one's home. These results underscore the fact that, in addition to improvement in the symptoms of depression, functional improvements are viewed as key treatment goals by depressed individuals.

Milnacipran: a unique antidepressant?

Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are among the most effective antidepressants available, although their poor tolerance at usual recommended doses and toxicity in overdose make them difficult to use. While selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are better tolerated than TCAs, they have their own specific problems, such as the aggravation of sexual dysfunction, interaction with coadministered drugs, and for many, a discontinuation syndrome. In addition, some of them appear to be less effective than TCAs in more severely depressed patients. Increasing evidence of the importance of norepinephrine in the etiology of depression has led to the development of a new generation of antidepressants, the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). Milnacipran, one of the pioneer SNRIs, was designed from theoretic considerations to be more effective than SSRIs and better tolerated than TCAs, and with a simple pharmacokinetic profile. Milnacipran has the most balanced potency ratio for reuptake inhibition of the two neurotransmitters compared with other SNRIs (1:1.6 for milnacipran, 1:10 for duloxetine, and 1:30 for venlafaxine), and in some studies milnacipran has been shown to inhibit norepinephrine uptake with greater potency than serotonin (2.2:1). Clinical studies have shown that milnacipran has efficacy comparable with the TCAs and is superior to SSRIs in severe depression. In addition, milnacipran is well tolerated, with a low potential for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. Milnacipran is a first-line therapy suitable for most depressed patients. It is frequently successful when other treatments fail for reasons of efficacy or tolerability.

Getting the balance right: Established and emerging therapies for major depressive disorders

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common and serious illness of our times, associated with monoamine deficiency in the brain. Moreover, increased levels of cortisol, possibly caused by stress, may be related to depression. In the treatment of MDD, the use of older antidepressants such as monoamine oxidase inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants is decreasing rapidly, mainly due to their adverse effect profiles. In contrast, the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors and newer antidepressants, which have dual modes of action such as inhibition of the serotonin and noradrenaline or dopamine reuptake, is increasing. Novel antidepressants have additive modes of action such as agomelatine, a potent agonist of melatonin receptors. Drugs in development for treatment of MDD include triple reuptake inhibitors, dual-acting serotonin reuptake inhibitors and histamine antagonists, and many more. Newer antidepressants have similar efficacy and in general good tolerability profiles. Nevertheless, compliance with treatment for MDD is poor and may contribute to treatment failure. Despite the broad spectrum of available antidepressants, there are still at least 30% of depressive patients who do not benefit from treatment. Therefore, new approaches in drug development are necessary and, according to current research developments, the future of antidepressant treatment may be promising.

Open Trial of Vinyasa Yoga for Persistently Depressed Individuals: Evidence of Feasibility and Acceptability

The aim of this study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of Vinyasa yoga as an adjunctive treatment for depressed patients who were not responding adequately to antidepressant medication. The authors also planned to ask participants for qualitative feedback on their experience of the class and to assess change over time in depression and in possible mediating variables. The authors recruited 11 participants in 1 month for an 8-week open trial of yoga classes. They found that 10 participants completed follow-up assessments, 9 of 10 were positive about their experience, and all provided feedback about what was and was not helpful about yoga, as well as barriers to class attendance. Over the 2-month period, participants exhibited significant decreases in depression symptoms and significant increases in an aspect of mindfulness and in behavior activation. This pilot study provided support for continuing to investigate Vinyasa yoga as an adjunct treatment for depression. The next step required is a rigorous randomized clinical trial.

Milnacipran versus other antidepressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

Although pharmacological and psychological interventions are both effective for major depression, antidepressant drugs are frequently used as first-line treatment in primary and secondary care settings. Milnacipran, a dual serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), is one of the antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of milnacipran in comparison with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), heterocyclics, SSRIs and other newer antidepressive agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety & Neurosis review group Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References) were electronically searched in August 2008. References of relevant trials and other reviews were also checked. Trial databases of the drug-approving agencies and ongoing clinical trial registers for all published and unpublished trials were hand-searched in 2007. All relevant authors were contacted for supplemental data. No language restriction was applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing milnacipran with any other active antidepressive agents (including non-conventional agents such as herbal products like hypericum) as monotherapy in the acute phase of major depression were selected.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently checked eligibility, assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the eligible trials using a standardised data extraction form. The number of participants who responded to treatment or those who achieved remission were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, combining data from the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 16 randomised controlled trials (n=2277) were included in the meta-analysis.Despite the size of this sample, the pooled 95% confidence intervals were rather wide and there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy, acceptability and tolerability when comparing milnacipran with other antidepressive agents. However, compared with TCAs, patients taking milnacipran were associated with fewer dropouts due to adverse events (OR 0.55; 95%CI 0.35 to 0.85). There was also some weak evidence to suggest that patients taking milnacipran experienced fewer adverse events of sleepiness/ drowsiness, dry mouth or constipation compared with TCAs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is inadequate evidence to conclude whether milnacipran is superior, inferior or the same as other antidepressive agents in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability in the acute phase treatment of major depression. However, there is some evidence in favour of milnacipran over TCAs in terms of dropouts due to adverse events (acceptability) and the rates of experiencing adverse events (tolerability). Information about other clinically meaningful outcomes such as cost-effectiveness and social functioning, including the ability to return to work, is lacking. Further study is needed to answer whether milnacipran would be the better choice of antidepressant for acute major depression.

Milnacipran

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing inservices. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation (DUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are sent in print and are also available online. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service also receive access to a pharmacy bulletin board, The Formulary Information Exchange (The F.I.X.). All topics pertinent to clinical and hospital pharmacy are discussed on The F.I.X.

Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service or The F.I.X., call The Formulary at 800–322–4349. The July 2009 monograph topics are golimumab injection, tapentadol immediate-release tablets, iloperidone, benzyl alcohol 5% lotion, and artemether/lumefantrine. The DUE is on golimumab injection.

Efficacy and tolerability of milnacipran in the treatment of major depression in comparison with other antidepressants : a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Milnacipran, a dual serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, is one of the newer antidepressants that clinicians use for the routine care of patients with major depression. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy and tolerability of milnacipran with other antidepressants.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of milnacipran in comparison with TCAs, SSRIs and other drugs in the acute phase of treatment for major depression.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials registers, journals, conference proceedings, trial databases of the drug-approving agencies and ongoing clinical trial registers for all published and unpublished randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy and adverse events of milnacipran versus any other antidepressant. The search was conducted in December 2006 and updated in May 2007. No language restrictions were applied. All relevant authors were contacted to supplement any incomplete reporting in the original papers. Randomized controlled trials comparing milnacipran with any other active antidepressants as monotherapy in the acute phase of treatment for major depression were selected. Participants were aged > or =18 years, of both sexes and with a primary diagnosis of unipolar major depression. Studies were excluded when the participants had specific psychiatric and medical co-morbidities. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality of trials for inclusion, and subsequently extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Meta-analyses were conducted for efficacy and tolerability outcomes. Sixteen randomized controlled trials (n = 2277) were included in the meta-analyses.

RESULTS

No differences were found in achieving clinical improvement, remission or overall tolerability when comparing milnacipran with other antidepressants. However, compared with the TCAs, fewer patients taking milnacipran were early treatment withdrawals due to adverse events (number needed to harm (NNH) = 15; 95% CI 10, 48). Significantly more patients taking TCAs experienced adverse events compared with milnacipran (NNH = 4; 95% CI 3, 7).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall effectiveness and tolerability of milnacipran versus other antidepressants does not seem to differ in the acute phase of treatment for major depression. However, there is some evidence in favour of milnacipran over TCAs in terms of premature withdrawal due to adverse events and the rates of patients experiencing adverse events. Milnacipran may benefit some patient populations who experience adverse effects from other antidepressants in the acute phase of treatment for major depression.

Pharmacotherapy of mood disorders

The mood disorders-primarily major depressive disorder and bipolar affective disorder-constitute one of the world's greatest public health problems and are associated with significant reductions in productivity, health, and longevity. In addition, people who suffer from these common illnesses, along with their families and loved ones, experience an incalculable toll on quality of life. Dating to the introduction of the first effective therapies for mood disorders in the late 1950s and 1960s, various types of pharmacotherapy have become a mainstay for the management of mood disorders, particularly more severe, chronic, and recurrent forms of depression and most forms of bipolar disorder. This review examines recent developments in the pharmacotherapy of both forms of mood disorder, comparing the newer antidepressants such as the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors with their predecessors (the monoamine oxidase inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants) and likewise comparing the older standard for management of bipolar disorder, lithium, with newer classes of medications, such as a selected group of anticonvulsants and the atypical antipsychotics. Although these newer classes of medications have generally improved upon the earlier treatments in terms of better tolerability and safety, there are no universally effective pharmacologic treatments for mood disorders, and careful medical management of these medications is still warranted.

Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: a revision of the 2000 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines

A revision of the 2000 British Association for Psychopharmacology evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants was undertaken to incorporate new evidence and to update the recommendations where appropriate. A consensus meeting involving experts in depressive disorders and their management was held in May 2006. Key areas in treating depression were reviewed, and the strength of evidence and clinical implications were considered. The guidelines were drawn up after extensive feedback from participants and interested parties. A literature review is provided, which identifies the quality of evidence to inform the recommendations, the strength of which are based on the level of evidence. These guidelines cover the nature and detection of depressive disorders, acute treatment with antidepressant drugs, choice of drug versus alternative treatment, practical issues in prescribing and management, next-step treatment, relapse prevention, treatment of relapse, and stopping treatment.

The under-recognized role of dopamine in the treatment of major depressive disorder

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is currently the second most common cause of disability worldwide. Current treatment of MDD with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors is limited by efficacy and tolerability issues, highlighting the unmet need in the treatment of patients with MDD. Deficiencies in dopamine, serotonin and noradrenaline are thought to underpin MDD pathophysiology. Atypical antipsychotics, which modulate these receptor systems, may provide additional treatment options. This article assesses the current treatment options available for patients with MDD and considers possible future therapies. The potential role of atypical antipsychotics such as olanzapine, risperidone and quetiapine in the treatment of MDD is explored based on evidence from bipolar depression trials and preliminary studies in patients with MDD.

A meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing reboxetine, a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of major depressive disorder

The goal of the present work was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing reboxetine and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for major depressive disorder (MDD). Medline/Pubmed was searched for double-blind, randomized trials comparing these two agents for MDD. The makers of reboxetine (Pfizer Inc.) were also contacted to provide missing data and/or unpublished studies. 9 trials (n=2641) were combined using a random effects model. Response rates were comparable between the SSRI (63.9%) and reboxetine (59.2%)-treated groups (p=0.118). There was no significant difference in the degree of improvement in psychosocial functioning, as measured by the social adaptation self-evaluation scale, between the two groups. Overall discontinuation rates (25.1% versus 32.0%; p=0.015), and the rate of discontinuation due to intolerance (8.5% versus 12.6%; p=0.007) favored SSRI treatment. The rate of discontinuation due to lack of efficacy did not differ significantly between the two groups. SSRI-treated patients were more likely to experience nausea, hypersomnia, and fatigue. Reboxetine-treated patients were more likely to experience constipation, difficulty urinating, and insomnia. These results suggest that the NRI reboxetine and the SSRIs differ with respect to their side-effect profile and overall tolerability but not their efficacy in treating MDD.

Depressive Störungen

Das Spektrum depressiver Erkrankungen macht den Hauptteil affektiver Störungen aus und gehört mit einer Inzidenz von ca. 8–20% zu den häufigsten psychischen Erkrankungen. Depressionen werden nach wie vor zu selten einer adäquaten Therapie (Antidepressiva, störungsspezifische Psychotherapie wie z. B. kognitive Verhaltenstherapie) zugeführt.

Are antidepressant drugs that combine serotonergic and noradrenergic mechanisms of action more effective than the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in treating major depressive disorder? A meta-analysis of studies of newer agents

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with newer antidepressant drugs that simultaneously enhance norepinephrine and serotonin neurotransmission might result in higher response and remission rates than the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The goal of our work was to compare response rates among patients with MDD treated with either of these two broad categories of antidepressant drugs.

METHODS

Medline/Pubmed, EMBase, clinical trial registries, program syllabi from major psychiatric meetings held since 1995, and documents from relevant pharmaceutical companies were searched for double-blind, randomized trials comparing a newer serotonergic-noradrenergic antidepressant drug (venlafaxine, duloxetine, milnacipran, mirtazapine, mianserin, or moclobemide) with an SSRI for MDD.

RESULTS

Ninety-three trials (n = 17,036) were combined using a random-effects model. Treatment with serotonergic + noradrenergic antidepressant drugs was more likely to result in clinical response than the SSRIs (risk ratio [RR] = 1.059; response rates 63.6% versus 59.3%; p = .003). There was no evidence for heterogeneity among studies combined (p = 1.0). Excluding each individual agent did not significantly alter the pooled RR. With the exception of duloxetine (.985), RRs for response for each individual serotonergic + noradrenergic antidepressant drug were within the 95% confidence interval of the pooled RR (1.019-1.101).

CONCLUSIONS

Serotonergic-noradrenergic antidepressant drugs seem to have a modest efficacy advantage compared with SSRIs in MDD. With the Number Needed to Treat (NNT) statistic as one indicator of clinical significance, nearly 24 patients would need to be treated with dual-action antidepressant drugs instead of SSRIs in order to obtain one additional responder. This difference falls well below the mark of NNT = 10 suggested by the United Kingdom's National Institute of Clinical Excellence but nonetheless might be of public health relevance given the large number of depressed patients treated with SSRI /serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) antidepressant drugs. Further research is needed to examine whether larger differences between classes of antidepressant drugs might exist in specific MDD sub-populations or for specific MDD symptoms.

Which antidepressants have demonstrated superior efficacy? A review of the evidence

A review of published evidence of superior efficacy of a particular antidepressant in major depressive disorder may assist clinicians in making considered treatment choices. To identify such candidates, an international group of experts met to assess published evidence (identified through searches in Medline and Embase databases and discussions with experts in the field) from randomized, controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing two antidepressants under conditions of fair comparison. Criteria were defined to judge the strength of evidence. Two pivotal studies in moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder that demonstrate superiority on the primary efficacy measure, or alternatively one pivotal study supported by consistent results from meta-analyses, was considered to constitute evidence for definite superiority. Three antidepressants met these criteria: clomipramine, venlafaxine, and escitalopram. Three antidepressants were found to have probable superiority: milnacipran, duloxetine, and mirtazapine. Only escitalopram was found to have definite superiority in the treatment of severe depression; probable superiority was identified for venlafaxine and possible superiority for milnacipran and clomipramine. This review of published data found evidence that only a very few antidepressants are shown to be more effective than others.

Drug treatment of depression in the 2000s: An overview of achievements in the last 10 years and future possibilities

During the past 10 years our knowledge about the pharmacotherapy of depression has been consolidated, and a variety of very interesting new compounds launched onto the market. The pipeline of the pharmaceutical industry is still filled with an assortment of new developments and very promising new approaches towards the pharmacotherapy of depressive disorders. Future pharmacological treatments of depression will not only enhance serotonergic and noradrenergic neurotransmission: other systems, such as the melatonergic receptor system and the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis, are also the targets of newly developed and upcoming substances with putative antidepressant effects. The main advantages of the currently available newer pharmacotherapeutic options are the broadening of the spectrum of possible antidepressant treatments, which is of particular importance for the growing number of patients suffering from difficult-to-treat depression, and a far better tolerability profile in comparison to older compounds such as tricyclic antidepressants. Unresolved issues are the unacceptably high rate of non-responsiveness during antidepressant treatment, a latency of sometimes several weeks until clinical improvement and remission can be achieved, and a variety of possible side effects also present during treatment with modern compounds. This review mainly presents the development of antidepressant pharmacotherapies during the past 10 years, together with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information and a comparison of different pharmacological treatment principles evaluated in randomized controlled clinical trials. In addition, new pharmacological strategies that are not yet available on the market and strategies currently under development are reviewed in detail. The study of new treatment options is of major importance to provide better strategies for the clinical management of depression in the future, and is thus also of great socio-economic importance.