Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor efficacy in severe and melancholic depression

The clinical characterization of the adult patient with depression aimed at personalization of management

Depression is widely acknowledged to be a heterogeneous entity, and the need to further characterize the individual patient who has received this diagnosis in order to personalize the management plan has been repeatedly emphasized. However, the research evidence that should guide this personalization is at present fragmentary, and the selection of treatment is usually based on the clinician's and/or the patient's preference and on safety issues, in a trial-and-error fashion, paying little attention to the particular features of the specific case. This may be one of the reasons why the majority of patients with a diagnosis of depression do not achieve remission with the first treatment they receive. The predominant pessimism about the actual feasibility of the personalization of treatment of depression in routine clinical practice has recently been tempered by some secondary analyses of databases from clinical trials, using approaches such as individual patient data meta-analysis and machine learning, which indicate that some variables may indeed contribute to the identification of patients who are likely to respond differently to various antidepressant drugs or to antidepressant medication vs. specific psychotherapies. The need to develop decision support tools guiding the personalization of treatment of depression has been recently reaffirmed, and the point made that these tools should be developed through large observational studies using a comprehensive battery of self-report and clinical measures. The present paper aims to describe systematically the salient domains that should be considered in this effort to personalize depression treatment. For each domain, the available research evidence is summarized, and the relevant assessment instruments are reviewed, with special attention to their suitability for use in routine clinical practice, also in view of their possible inclusion in the above-mentioned comprehensive battery of measures. The main unmet needs that research should address in this area are emphasized. Where the available evidence allows providing the clinician with specific advice that can already be used today to make the management of depression more personalized, this advice is highlighted. Indeed, some sections of the paper, such as those on neurocognition and on physical comorbidities, indicate that the modern management of depression is becoming increasingly complex, with several components other than simply the choice of an antidepressant and/or a psychotherapy, some of which can already be reliably personalized.

A quantitative review on outcome-to-antidepressants in melancholic unipolar depression

The aim of this study was to explore outcome to antidepressants profile in melancholic unipolar depression. We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases and meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized trials comparing: 1) outcome to antidepressants and placebo between melancholic and non-melancholic depression; 2) outcome to different antidepressant classes in melancholic depression. Two outcomes were considered: clinical remission and response. Significant lower odds of remission to antidepressants in melancholic than in non-melancholic depressions were found. Although no significant differences were observed in the response to antidepressants between both subtypes of depression, those with melancholic features had lower odds of response to placebo. Finally, treatment of melancholic depression with serotonin reuptake inhibitors was associated with lower odds of remission compared with tricyclic antidepressants, and similar outcome compared with venlafaxine. Melancholia seems to show a differential pattern of outcome to antidepressants, which could be clinically valuable for a better implementation of personalized medicine of depression. Due to several limitations, further research is needed to support these preliminary findings.

Melancholic features in inpatients with major depressive disorder associate with differential clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes

To determine whether the presence of melancholic features in hospitalized patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) was associated with specific clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes, supporting melancholic depression as a distinct subtype within MDD. 126 acutely ill inpatients with MDD were enrolled in an open, 6-week trial with fixed-dose fluoxetine 20mg daily. Symptom severity was assessed regularly, using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) and Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S). Melancholic features were defined according to the DSM-IV criteria. Clinical variables were compared between patients with and without melancholic features. Generalized estimating equations method was used to explore the differences in HAMD-17 and CGI-S scores between the 2 groups over time. Clinical response was defined as having a 50% or greater reduction in HAMD-17 scores. 96 (76.2%) of the 126 patients with at least one post-baseline assessment met the criteria for melancholic depression. Melancholic depression differed from non-melancholic depression in clinical characteristics and predicted a better response to fluoxetine treatment. The differentiation between melancholic and non-melancholic depression within MDD hence is clinically significant and valid.

TPH1, MAOA, serotonin receptor 2A and 2C genes in citalopram response: possible effect in melancholic and psychotic depression

BACKGROUND

Serotonergic genes have been widely investigated regarding antidepressant response in major depressive disorder (MDD) but results are still not univocal.

METHODS

159 MDD patients treated with citalopram were genotyped and evaluated by the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale at the beginning and every 4 weeks during the 12-week follow-up. Four serotonin-related genetic variants were tested for association with treatment outcome: tryptophane hydroxylase 1 (TPH1) rs1800532, monoamine oxidase A µVNTR, serotonin 2A receptor rs6311 and serotonin 2C receptor rs6318. The effect of these polymorphisms was tested both in the whole sample and in depressive subtypes with usually higher clinical severity: psychotic and melancholic MDD.

RESULTS

No effect on response, remission and symptom improvement was found for the four polymorphisms. However, rs1800532 was found to affect the outcome depending on the MDD subtype: the A allele predicted worse response both in MDD with psychotic (F₆,₃₇₈ = 2.90; p = 0.009) and melancholic (F₆,₃₈₁ = 2.86; p = 0.0097) features.

CONCLUSIONS

The A allele at TPH1 rs1800532 may be associated with citalopram efficacy only in melancholic and psychotic MDD. These results suggest the usefulness of investigating the effect of genetic variants in conjunction with specific clinical features.

Randomized comparison of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (escitalopram) monotherapy and antidepressant combination pharmacotherapy for major depressive disorder with melancholic features: a CO-MED report

BACKGROUND

The clinical effects of antidepressant combinations vs. monotherapy as initial treatment for major depression with melancholic features (MDD-MF) are unknown.

METHODS

Outpatients with chronic or recurrent major depression (MDD) were randomized to initial treatment with escitalopram+placebo (the MONO condition), bupropion-sustained release+escitalopram, or venlafaxine-extended release+mirtazapine (the COMB conditions) in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial. Secondary data analyses were conducted to compare demographic and clinical characteristics, and contrast clinical responses according to drug treatment, in patients with MDD-MF (n=124) and non-melancholic MDD (n=481).

RESULTS

While numerically lower, remission rates in MDD-MF did not differ significantly from those with non-melancholic MDD either at 12 (33.1% vs. 41.0%, aOR 1.16, p=0.58) or 28 (39.5% vs. 46.8%, aOR=1.02, p=0.93) weeks of treatment. Remission rates did not differ significantly between combination and monotherapy groups in either MDD-MF or non-melancholic MDD patients at either time point. Similar conclusions were reached for response rates, premature study discontinuation, and self-rated depression symptom severity.

LIMITATIONS

This is a secondary analysis of data from the CO-MED trial, which was not designed to address differential treatment response in melancholic and non-melancholic MDD.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of differential remission or response rates to antidepressant combination or monotherapy between melancholic/non-melancholic MDD patients, or according to antidepressant treatment group, after 12 and 28 weeks. Melancholic features may not be a valid predictor of more favorable response to antidepressant combination therapy as initial treatment.

Psychomotor retardation in depression: biological underpinnings, measurement, and treatment

Psychomotor retardation is a long established component of depression that can have significant clinical and therapeutic implications for treatment. Due to its negative impact on overall function in depressed patients, we review its biological correlates, optimal methods of measurement, and relevance in the context of therapeutic interventions. The aim of the paper is to provide a synthesis of the literature on psychomotor retardation in depression with the goal of enhanced awareness for clinicians and researchers. Increased knowledge and understanding of psychomotor retardation in major depressive disorder may lead to further research and better informed diagnosis in regards to psychomotor retardation. Manifestations of psychomotor retardation include slowed speech, decreased movement, and impaired cognitive function. It is common in patients with melancholic depression and those with psychotic features. Biological correlates may include abnormalities in the basal ganglia and dopaminergic pathways. Neurophysiologic tools such as neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation may play a role in the study of this symptom in the future. At present, there are three objective scales to evaluate psychomotor retardation severity. Studies examining the impact of psychomotor retardation on clinical outcome have found differential results. However, available evidence suggests that depressed patients with psychomotor retardation may respond well to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Current literature regarding antidepressants is inconclusive, though tricyclic antidepressants may be considered for treatment of patients with psychomotor retardation. Future work examining this objective aspect of major depressive disorder (MDD) is essential. This could further elucidate the biological underpinnings of depression and optimize its treatment.

Monoamine transporters: vulnerable and vital doorkeepers

Transporters of dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine have been empirically used as medication targets for several mental illnesses in the last decades. These protein-targeted medications are effective only for subpopulations of patients with transporter-related brain disorders. Since the cDNA clonings in early 1990s, molecular studies of these transporters have revealed a wealth of information about the transporters' structure-activity relationship (SAR), neuropharmacology, cell biology, biochemistry, pharmacogenetics, and the diseases related to the human genes encoding these transporters among related regulators. Such new information creates a unique opportunity to develop transporter-specific medications based on SAR, mRNA, DNA, and perhaps transporter trafficking regulation for a number of highly relevant diseases including substance abuse, depression, schizophrenia, and Parkinson's disease.

Open questions in current models of antidepressant action

Research on depression and antidepressant drugs is necessary, as many patients display poor response to therapy. Different symptomatic and pathophysiological features have been proposed as end points of the depressive phenotype and of the antidepressant action, including anhedonia, depressed mood, alterations in morphology and activity of some brain areas (amygdala, nucleus accumbens, hippocampus, prefrontal cortex and cingulate cortex), modifications in the connectivity between brain structures, changes in neurotransmitters (serotonin, noradrenaline, glutamate and neuropeptides), brain plasticity (neurogenesis, neurotrophins) and abnormal function of the hypothalamic-pituitary adrenal axis. However, few models have been proposed to describe how these end points could induce the depressive phenotype and are involved in the mechanism of action of antidepressants. Here we propose a connectionist-inspired network of depression and antidepressant action, in which the different aetiological factors participating in the release of a depressive episode are represented by input nodes, the different symptomatic as well as pathophysiological end points are represented by an intermediate layer, and the onset of depression or of comorbid disease is represented by the output node. The occurrence of depression and the mechanism of the antidepressant action thus depend upon the weight of the interactions between the different end points, none of them being per se crucial to the onset of a depressive phenotype or to the antidepressant action. This model is heuristic to draw future lines of research concerning new antidepressant therapies, designing new animal models of depression and for a better understanding of the depressive pathology and of its comorbid pathology such as anxiety disorders.

Augmentation with olanzapine in TCA-refractory depression with melancholic features: a consecutive case series

Using an 8-week, open label study design, we report the effect of augmentation strategy with olanzapine in hospitalized depressive patients with melancholic features who had insufficient response to a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA), amitriptyline. Subjects were hospitalized patients meeting the criteria of DSM-IV major depressive disorder with melancholic features who had been suffering from residual symptoms after treatment of amitriptyline. After study entry, olanzapine was added to amitriptyline and the dose was adjusted according to patients' clinical condition. Data were analyzed using an intent-to-treat methodology, with last observation carried forward. Paired t-test was adopted to assess the data from baseline to endpoint. Of 26 patients who enrolled in this study, 23 patients completed the trial and 3 patients dropped out. The mean dose of olanzapine was 6.5 (SD = 2.4) mg/day. The mean score of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was significantly decreased from 33.6 (SD = 3.5) to 20.8 (SD = 9.1) during this study (37.9% from baseline) (p < 0.001). Ten patients (38.5%) were considered as responders (50% or greater reduction in MADRS scores from baseline). These results suggest that augmentation with olanzapine in TCAs-resistant melancholia may be effective and well tolerated. We cannot draw any conclusion with certainty from the open-label, uncontrolled clinical trial. Double blind, controlled trial is needed to confirm this preliminary finding.

The burden of severe depression: a review of diagnostic challenges and treatment alternatives

Among the factors making recognition of severe depression problematic for clinicians are the heterogeneous nature of the condition, lack of standardized definitions, and concomitant comorbidities that confound differential diagnosis of symptoms. The spectrum of severity in depressive disorders is extraordinarily broad, and severity assessment is comprised of several metrics including symptom intensity, diagnostic subtypes, suicidality risk, and hospitalization status. The overall diagnosis is achieved through consideration of symptom types and severities together with the degree of functional impairment as assessed by the psychiatric interview. It is likely that no single fundamental neurobiological defect underlies severe depression. The chronicity and heterogeneity of this disorder lead to frequent clinic visits and a longer course of treatment; therefore, successful approaches may require an arsenal of treatments with numerous mechanisms of action. The categories of drugs used to treat severe depression are detailed herein, as are several non-pharmacologic options including a number of experimental treatments. Pharmacotherapies include tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, atypical antidepressants such as serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and combination and augmentation therapies. Drugs within each class are not equivalent, and efficacy may vary with symptom severity. Patient adherence makes tolerability another critical consideration in antidepressant choice. The role of non-pharmacological treatments such as electroconvulsive therapy, vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and deep brain stimulation remain active avenues of investigation. Improved knowledge and treatment approaches for severe depression are necessary to facilitate remission, the ideal treatment goal.

Duloxetine in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: a comparison of efficacy in patients with and without melancholic features

BACKGROUND

The most prominent feature of melancholic depression is a near-total loss of the capacity to derive pleasure from activities or other positive stimuli. Additional symptoms can include psychomotor disturbances, anorexia, excessive guilt, and early awakening from sleep. Melancholic patients may exhibit treatment responses and outcomes that differ from those of non-melancholic patients. Pooled data from double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were utilized to compare the efficacy of duloxetine in depressed patients with and without melancholic features.

METHODS

Efficacy data were pooled from 8 double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of duloxetine. The presence of melancholic features (DSM-IV criteria) was determined using results from the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Patients (aged >or= 18 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD) received duloxetine (40-120 mg/d; melancholic, N = 759; non-melancholic, N = 379) or placebo (melancholic, N = 519; non-melancholic, N = 256) for up to 9 weeks. Efficacy measures included the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD17) total score, HAMD17 subscales (Maier, anxiety, retardation, sleep), the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scales, and Visual Analog Scales (VAS) for pain.

RESULTS

In data from all 8 studies, duloxetine's advantage over placebo did not differ significantly between melancholic and non-melancholic patients (treatment-by-melancholic status interactions were not statistically significant). Duloxetine demonstrated significantly greater improvement in depressive symptom severity, compared with placebo, within both melancholic and non-melancholic cohorts (p <or= .001 for HAMD17 total score, CGI-S and PGI-I). When analyzed by gender, the magnitude of improvement in efficacy outcomes did not differ significantly between duloxetine-treated male and female melancholic patients. In the two studies that assessed duloxetine 60 mg once-daily dosing, duloxetine-treated melancholic patients had significantly greater improvement compared with placebo on HAMD17 total score, CGI-S, PGI-I, 3 of 4 subscales of the HAMD17, and VAS overall pain severity (p < .01). Estimated probabilities of response and remission were significantly greater for melancholic patients receiving duloxetine 60 mg QD compared with placebo (response 74.7% vs. 42.2%, respectively, p < .001; remission 44.4% vs. 24.7%, respectively, p = .002.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of pooled data, the efficacy of duloxetine in patients with melancholic features did not differ significantly from that observed in non-melancholic patients.

Sertraline is more effective than imipramine in the treatment of non-melancholic depression: results from a multicentre, randomized study

The acute treatment efficacy, tolerability, and effects on health-related quality of life of sertraline (50-200 mg/day) versus imipramine (75-225 mg/day) were compared in outpatients with non-melancholic depression. The study employed an open-label, parallel-group design. One hundred and sixteen patients were randomized to receive sertraline and 123 to receive imipramine for 8 weeks. In the intent-to-treat (ITT), last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) analysis, sertraline produced statistically significantly greater improvements in depressive (21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAM-D(21)] scores of 24.9 and 24.4 were reduced to 10.3 and 13.1 at endpoint, P<.005) and anxiety symptoms (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [HAM-A] scores of 21.8 and 21.9 were reduced to 9.5 and 13.9, P<.01), as well as in response (69.0% versus 53.7% at endpoint, P=.016) and remission rates (51.3% versus 38.0% at endpoint, P=.041) from week 4 onwards compared with imipramine. The proportion of patients who were 'very much improved' or 'much improved' (Clinical Global Impressions Scale of Improvement [CGI-I] score of 1 or 2) was significantly higher at endpoint in the sertraline group (76.1%) than in the imipramine group (62.8%) (P=.028). At week 8, patients in both treatment groups showed clear improvements in quality of life, although nonstatistically significant differences were evident in the quality of life of sertraline- versus imipramine-treated patients. Sertraline was significantly superior in tolerability with less discontinuations due to adverse events (10.3%) compared with the imipramine group (24.4%) (P=.004). It was concluded that sertraline is more effective than imipramine in the acute treatment of depressive and anxiety symptoms in patients with non-melancholic depression.

The antidepressant efficacy of reboxetine in patients with severe depression

We examined the effectiveness of reboxetine, a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (NRI), compared with placebo for the treatment of patients with severe major depression (defined as a score on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D] >/=25). Data were obtained from four prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of the efficacy of reboxetine (8 to 10 mg/d) over 4 to 8 weeks in patients with major depression. In three of the trials, reboxetine produced a significantly greater reduction than placebo in mean HAM-D scores from baseline to the last clinical assessment (p < 0.001). There were significantly more responders to treatment (defined as a reduction in HAM-D score >50% between baseline and the last follow-up observation) treated with reboxetine than placebo in three trials. The overall mean responder rate with reboxetine was 63% (range: 56-74%) compared with 36% (range: 20-52%) with placebo. These results demonstrate that reboxetine is significantly more effective than placebo in a subgroup of patients with severe depression.

Dual serotonin and noradrenaline uptake inhibitor class of antidepressants potential for greater efficacy or just hype?

Preclinical and clinical studies support the rationale that development of single molecules, which would promote serotonergic and noradrenergic neurotransmission by inhibiting simultaneously the uptake of both monoamines, would potentially result in improved antidepressant drugs. Currently, the dual inhibitors of serotonin and noradrenaline uptake are venlafaxine, milnacipran and duloxetine. Based on the preclinical studies, the three drugs do show properties of inhibiting uptake of both monoamines in vitro and in vivo in the following order of decreasing potency: duloxetine, venlafaxine and milnacipran, and all exhibit low affinity at neuronal receptors of neurotransmitters, suggesting low side-effect potential. In double-blind, controlled studies, venlafaxine and milnacipran were repeatedly shown to be as efficacious as tricyclic antidepressant drugs in treating major depressive disorder, while one double-blind, placebo-controlled trial showed the antidepressant efficacy of duloxetine. Specifically designed comparative trials of dual uptake inhibitors against the other agents are needed to establish whether the dual uptake inhibitors show improvement in efficacy, rate of responders, antidepressive effects and/or remission.

Former chronic methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or ecstasy) users report mild depressive symptoms

Previous work has indicated recreational use of methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or ecstasy) is associated with elevated scores on self-report measures of depression. We sought to examine the long-term effects of consumption on depression in a group of individuals who had consumed large quantities of the drug in the past, but were now leading relatively drug free lives. Respondents to this study (n = 29) had consumed an average of 1.5 ecstasy tablets in the last month, 8.4 in the last 6 months and 23.3 in the last 12 months. The estimated total consumed was 527 tablets, indicating that these respondents were indeed former chronic users of the drug. None of the respondents had consumed ecstasy in the last 14 days. Levels of depression (Beck's Depression Inventory) were significantly (p < 0.01) elevated compared to a matched non-drug using control group. Within the group of former chronic users, these levels of depression were not significantly affected by current use of alcohol, cannabis or amphetamine, but were positively correlated with an external locus of control (p < 0.05), infrequent but severe- (p < 0.05) and frequent but mild- (p < 0.005) self-report measures of life stress. Multiple regression indicated that levels of frequent but mild life stress (p < 0.005) and the quantity of ecstasy tablets respondents consumed over a 12-h period (p < 0.05) were the only variables that were significant predictors of self-reported levels of depression. The results of this study indicate that former chronic ecstasy users report higher levels of depression than their matched controls.

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor sertraline: its profile and use in psychiatric disorders

The naphthylamine derivative sertraline is a potent and selective inhibitor of serotonin reuptake into presynaptic terminals. Sertraline has a linear pharmacokinetic profile and a half-life of about 26 h. Its major metabolite, desmethylsertraline does not appear to inhibit serotonin reuptake. Sertraline mildly inhibits the CYP2D6 isoform of the cytochrome P450 system but has little effect on CYP1A2, CYP3A3/4, CYP2C9, or CYP2C19. It is, however, highly protein bound and may alter blood levels of other highly protein bound agents. Sertraline is a widely used serotonin reuptake inhibitor that has been shown to have both antidepressant and antianxiety effects. Many clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy in depression compared with both placebo and other antidepressant drugs. Its efficacy has also been demonstrated in randomized, controlled trials of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, social phobia, and premenstrual dysphoric disorder. In short-term, open-label studies it has appeared efficacious and tolerable in children and adolescents and in the elderly, and data are positive for its use in pregnant or lactating women. Typical side effects include gastrointestinal and central nervous system effects as well as treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction; withdrawal reactions may be associated with abrupt discontinuation of the agent. The safety profile of sertraline in overdose is very favorable. Sertraline's efficacy for both mood and anxiety disorders, relatively weak effect on the cytochrome P450 system, and tolerability profile and safety in overdose are factors that contribute to make it a first-line agent for treatment in both primary and tertiary care settings.

Serotonin, cerebral blood flow, and cerebral metabolic rate in geriatric major depression and normal aging

While there is substantial evidence for abnormalities in serotonin (5-HT) neurotransmission in major depressive disorder (MDD), almost all of the findings derive from studies of young adults. Moreover, relatively little research has assessed brain 5-HT transmission in vivo. Neuroendocrine studies do not permit evaluation of a range of brain regions, but only the limited circuitry associated with hormone release. Data from autopsy studies are limited by the difficulties of assessment of the acute clinical picture before death, and by post-mortem artifacts. In vivo neuroimaging techniques overcome many of the methodological limitations of both these approaches. There is a large body of imaging data indicating regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) and cerebral metabolic rate (rCMR) decrements both with aging and in patients with MDD. While the physiological bases for these phenomena are largely unknown, changes in brain 5-HT function may be involved. Neuroanatomical studies have revealed an intricate network of 5-HT-containing neurons within the cerebral microvasculature, with physiological evidence for serotonergic control of both rCBF and rCMR. Acute pharmacological challenges are available to probe brain 5-HT function. Such paradigms, using neuroendocrine responses as endpoints, have been of some utility in predicting outcome with antidepressant treatment. The role of 5-HT dysregulation in geriatric MDD takes on more importance given concerns regarding putative reduced efficacy of serotonin-specific reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in this population. If this is due to diminished responsivity of 5-HT systems, then the ability to identify antidepressant nonresponders via 5-HT challenge in combination with neuroimaging measures may have important clinical utility.

Depressive illness

WHO estimate that by the beginning of the next century major unipolar depression will be one of the most important causes of ill health overall. Whereas the cause of depression is still obscure, it is becoming clear that a number of diverse factors are likely to be implicated, both genetic and environmental. Effective treatment of depression similarly involves a variety of methods, from electro-convulsive therapy to inter-personal psychotherapy. The pathophysiology of depression is gradually becoming accessible through research strategies, such as functional neuroimaging paired with mood altering interventions.

Psicofarmacologia de antidepressivos

O advento de medicamentos antidepressivos tornou a depressão um problema médico, passível de tratamento. Nas últimas cinco décadas, a psicofarmacologia da depressão evoluiu muito e rapidamente. Os primeiros antidepressivos - os antidepressivos tricíclicos (ADTs) e os inibidores da monaminooxidase (IMAOs) - foram descobertos através da observação clínica. Os ADTs apresentavam boa eficácia devido à sua ação, aumentando a disponibilidade de norepinefrina e serotonina. Seu uso foi limitado em função do bloqueio de receptores de histamina, colinérgicos e alfa-adrenérgicos que acarretavam efeitos colaterais levando à baixa tolerabilidade e risco de toxicidade. Da mesma forma, o uso dos IMAOs ficava comprometido em função do risco da interação com tiramina e o risco de crises hipertensivas potencialmente fatais. A nova geração de antidepressivos é constituída por medicamentos que agem em um único neurotransmissor (como os inibidores seletivos de recaptação de serotonina ou de noradrenalina) ou em múltiplos neurotransmissores/receptores, como venlafaxina, bupropion, trazodona, nefazodona e mirtazapina, sem ter como alvo outros sítios receptores cerebrais não relacionados com a depressão (tais como histamina e acetilcolina). Este artigo revisa a farmacologia dos antidepressivos, particularmente quanto ao mecanismo de ação, farmacocinética, efeitos colaterais e interações farmacológicas.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in affective disorders--II. Efficacy and quality of life

Since their introduction, the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have become one of the most widely used classes of medication in psychiatry. Their popularity is based on apparent efficacy over a wide range of disorders and a favorable side-effect profile. However, as with any psychotropic medication, considerable data are required to define where a drug works and where it does not. There is now a wealth of evidence demonstrating that SSRIs may differ in their efficacy profiles in certain depressive symptoms, in different subtypes of depression, with respect to their ability to maintain efficacy over time, on broader outcomes such as quality of life, and in the consistency of the usually effective minimum therapeutic dose across the age spectrum and across indications. Although this review includes data on all SSRIs, it focuses on fluoxetine and sertraline, which in addition to being the most widely used SSRIs are also the most widely studied. The relative quantity and quality of data on these two SSRIs means that it is possible to make relatively firm inferences regarding their differential effects on affective symptoms and quality of life.