Relative efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine versus selected antidepressants by indirect comparisons of similar clinical studies

Efficacy and Safety of Escitalopram, Desvenlafaxine, and Vortioxetine in the Acute Treatment of Anxious Depression: A Randomized Rater-blinded 6-week Clinical Trial

Objective

Anxious depression is associated with greater chronicity, higher severity of symptoms, more severe functional impairment, and poor response to drug treatment. However, evidence for first-choice antidepressants in patients with anxious depression is limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of escitalopram, desvenlafaxine, and vortioxetine in the acute treatment of anxious depression.

Methods

Patients (n = 124) with major depressive disorder and high levels of anxiety were randomly assigned to an escitalopram treatment group (n = 42), desvenlafaxine treatment group (n = 40), or vortioxetine treatment group (n = 42) in a 6-week randomized rater-blinded head-to-head comparative trial. Changes in overall depressive and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), respectively.

Results

Patients demonstrated similar baseline-to-endpoint improvement in scores and similar response and remission rates for HAMD and HAMA. Analysis of the individual HAMD items revealed that desvenlafaxine significantly reduced anxiety somatic scores (p = 0.013) and hypochondriasis scores (p = 0.014) compared to escitalopram. With respect to the individual HAMA items, desvenlafaxine treatment showed significantly lower scores for respiratory symptoms (p = 0.013) than escitalopram treatment and cardiovascular symptoms (p = 0.005) than vortioxetine treatment. The treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences.

Conclusion

Our results indicated no significant differences in the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram, desvenlafaxine, and vortioxetine in this subtype of patients with anxious depression during the acute phase of treatment.

Dose-response effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor monotherapy for the treatment of depression: systematic review of reviews and meta-narrative synthesis

Objective

To assess and clarify the relations between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) dose efficacy, acceptability (early treatment discontinuation (dropouts)), and tolerability (reported adverse drug effects), and critically evaluate methods previously used to examine SSRI dose-response effects for the treatment of depression in adults.

Design

Systematic review of reviews and meta-narrative synthesis.

Data sources

Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration library, from 1975 to December 2021. Reference lists of national depression treatment guidelines were systemically searched by hand.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

Reviews assessing SSRI monotherapy dose-response effects for the treatment of depression in adults (age ≥18 years) reporting efficacy, acceptability, or tolerability. Reviews meeting inclusion criteria had a high degree of heterogeneity, due to methodological diversity; therefore, a meta-narrative synthesis approach was applied. Standard daily doses were defined as 20 mg citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine; 50 mg sertraline; and 10 mg escitalopram. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool, in line with Cochrane recommendations.

Results

The search identified 9138 records; 387 full text reports were assessed for eligibility, 42 of which matched the inclusion criteria. The majority, 83% (n=35), of reviews included data for studies with a duration of ≤12 weeks (ie, the acute phase of depression treatment). Of 39 reviews assessing efficacy, the majority (n=26) indicated that individual SSRIs and SSRI class demonstrated flat dose-response effects; standard doses were optimal for efficacy. Acceptability or tolerability were assessed in 28 reviews. Higher than standard daily doses were associated with higher dropout rates and a greater incidence of adverse drug effects (eg, nausea, sexual dysfunction, fatigue, anxiety). Despite a range of methods being reported, there was an overall consensus regarding SSRI dose related efficacy, dropouts, and adverse drug effects.

Conclusion

Standard daily doses of SSRIs for the treatment of depression in adults provide a favourable balance between efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability. Patients are encouraged to talk to their prescriber or community pharmacist if they experience adverse effects or have any concerns about their drug treatments.

Vortioxetine as a new frontier in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain: a review and update

Chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) is a disabling medical condition that impairs the health-related quality-of-life of affected patients. A high prevalence of anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance and cognitive impairment has frequently been reported in association with CNP, making the management of this disease complex and often multidisciplinary. Dual-acting agents such as selective serotonin and noradrenalin reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are considered particularly useful in the modulation of pain and in treatment of the mood disorders frequently associated with CNP. Recent evidence suggests that the top-down inhibitory control of pain involves the engagement and enhancement of descending endogenous opioidergic, cannabinoid and serotonergic systems, with the effect of serotonin being particularly related to the receptor subtypes that are preferentially activated; indeed serotonin induces analgesia via activation of 5-HT7 receptors and hyperalgesia via activation of 5-HT3 receptors. Vortioxetine (VO) is a novel multimodal serotonergic antidepressant with a unique mechanism of action. It has been demonstrated recently in experimental and clinical studies to have efficacy on pain hypersensitivity and on mood disorders. This drug inhibits the serotonin transporter with a high affinity, antagonises the 5-HT3, 5-HT1D and 5HT7 serotonin receptors, and activates the 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B receptors. In clinical studies, VO has proved effective at a dose of 10-20 mg/daily in short- and long-term treatment of patients with chronic orofacial pain, demonstrating a higher rate of clinical response and remission, a better acceptability, safety rate and tolerability, and a lower latency of action compared with other antidepressants. In the light of these recent findings, VO may be considered as a new pharmacological treatment also in relation to various types of CNP, particularly in elderly patients with concomitant mood disorders and cognitive impairment. The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date overview of the pharmacology and clinical applications of VO and to highlight its potential therapeutic properties and advantages in the management of CNP.

Successfully treated patients with vortioxetine versus venlafaxine: a simplified cost-effectiveness analysis based on a head-to-head study in Asian patients with major depressive disorder

Objective: To compare the rates of successfully treated patients (STPs) with vortioxetine versus venlafaxine in major depressive disorder (MDD), using dual endpoints that combine improvement of mood symptoms with optimal tolerability or functional remission, and conduct a simplified cost-effectiveness analysis.Methods: The 8-week SOLUTION study (NCT01571453) assessed the efficacy and safety of vortioxetine (10 mg/day) versus venlafaxine XR (150 mg/day) in adult Asian patients with MDD. Rates were calculated post-hoc of STP Mood and Tolerability (≥50% reduction from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] total score and no treatment-emergent adverse events) and STP Mood and Functioning (≥50% reduction from baseline in MADRS total score and Sheehan Disability Scale total score ≤6). The incremental costs per STP were assessed using the 2018 pharmacy purchase prices for branded vortioxetine/branded venlafaxine in China as the base case.Results: STP Mood and Tolerability rates were 28.9% for vortioxetine and 19.9% for venlafaxine (p = .028); the corresponding STP Mood and Functioning rates were 28.0% and 23.5% (p = .281). Drug costs for the 8-week treatment period were CN¥1954 for vortioxetine and CN¥700 for venlafaxine. The incremental cost per STP for vortioxetine versus venlafaxine was CN¥13,938 for Mood and Tolerability and CN¥27,876 for Mood and Functioning.Conclusions: Higher rates of dual treatment success were seen with vortioxetine versus venlafaxine. Although vortioxetine was not dominant in the base case, the incremental cost per STP for vortioxetine versus venlafaxine were overall within acceptable ranges. These results support the benefits previously reported with vortioxetine versus other antidepressants in broad efficacy, tolerability profile and cost-effectiveness.

Vortioxetine versus sertraline in metabolic control, distress and depression in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes

Background

Depression in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is often undiagnosed and remains untreated, leading to poor therapy adherence and ill health-related outcomes. We evaluated the effect of vortioxetine versus sertraline in the treatment of depression, distress and metabolic control in subjects with T2D and depression.

Methods

Participants were selected from the Clinic for Diabetes, diagnosed with depression when the score was ≥14 in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and verified by a psychiatrist in agreement with the DSM-5 instrument (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition). The criteria for recruitment also included glycosylated hemoglobin ≥7.5%, 18 to 60 years of age, and written informed consent. Pharmacological treatment for depression was assigned randomly: vortioxetine (10 mg/day) or sertraline (75 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Biochemical parameters, anthropometric measures and depression symptoms were evaluated after antidepressant treatment. This was a randomized singled-blind study.

Results

Subjects that met the inclusion criteria were 50, of which only 21 patients with T2D and depression finished the treatment. Vortioxetine and sertraline showed partial remission of depression. Vortioxetine showed a major effect size in glycosylated hemoglobin and a moderate effect size on weight loss, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), cholesterol and triacylglycerol levels. On the other hand, patients treated with sertraline presented a slight increase in body weight, body mass index (BMI), and in all biochemical markers.

Conclusions

Vortioxetine may ameliorate depressive symptoms and metabolic control in patients with T2D and depression. Trial registration number: NCT03978286.

Efficacy and safety of levomilnacipran, vilazodone and vortioxetine compared with other second-generation antidepressants for major depressive disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Second-generation antidepressants dominate the medical management of major depressive disorder (MDD). Levomilnacipran, vilazodone and vortioxetine are the latest therapeutic options approved for the treatment of MDD. This systematic review aims to compare the benefits and harms of vilazodone, levomilnacipran, and vortioxetine with one another and other second-generation antidepressants.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases up to September 2017 and reviewed reference lists and pharmaceutical dossiers to detect published and unpublished studies. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full text articles, and rated the risk of bias of included studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled observational studies including adult outpatients with MDD were eligible for inclusion. We conducted network meta-analyses on response to treatment using frequentist multivariate meta-analyses models. Placebo- and active-controlled trials were eligible for network meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies met our inclusion criteria. Direct comparisons were limited to vilazodone versus citalopram, and vortioxetine versus duloxetine, paroxetine, or venlafaxine XR (extended release). Results of head-to-head trials and network meta-analyses, overall, indicated similar efficacy among levomilnacipran, vilazodone, or vortioxetine and other second-generation antidepressants. Although rates of overall adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events were similar, RCTs reported several differences in specific adverse events. For most outcomes the strength of evidence was low.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations are the focus of literature searches on studies published in English, possible reporting biases, and general methodological limitations of network meta-analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the available evidence does not indicate greater benefits or fewer harms of levomilnacipran, vilazodone, and vortioxetine compared with other second-generation antidepressants.

Relative short-term efficacy and acceptability of agomelatine versus vortioxetine in adult patients suffering from major depressive disorder

Agomelatine and vortioxetine are antidepressants with different mechanisms of action compared to other pharmaceutical treatment options. The objective of this present analysis is to determine the relative efficacy and acceptability of agomelatine (25-50 mg) compared to vortioxetine (10-15-20 mg) in adult patients with major depressive disorder. We performed an adjusted indirect comparison using placebo as a common control. The main outcomes were efficacy (response to treatment by Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale/Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) and acceptability (withdrawal rate for any reason or due to adverse events). 10 agomelatine and 11 vortioxetine studies were included in the analysis. For efficacy, no difference was shown between agomelatine and vortioxetine (E[95% CI] = -0.03 [-0.12;0.05]). For acceptability, no significant difference was found between both antidepressants. These findings substantiate current understanding that most antidepressants are of similar average efficacy and tolerability. Such equivalent therapeutic benefit of both compounds, measured by a quantitative clinical research approach, has to be discussed with the knowledge of a qualitative estimation in routine practice.

Cost-utility evaluation of vortioxetine in patients with Major Depressive Disorder experiencing inadequate response to alternative antidepressants in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Patients frequently require several lines of therapy for treatment of major depressive episodes. This economic analysis details the management of patients who responded inadequately due to lack of efficacy or intolerability to two previous antidepressants in the UK.

METHODS

The model included a decision tree and a Markov component. Health states considered in the decision tree were remission, response, no response, withdrawal due to adverse events, relapse, recovery, and recurrence. The time horizon was 24 months. Patients were on third-line treatment for up to a 3-month acute phase and a 6-month maintenance phase. As third-line efficacy data were not available, inputs were calculated by adjusting original second-line data to third-line based on proportionate reductions observed in STAR*D. Equivalent efficacy was assumed for all comparators. Healthcare resource use and utilities were based on UK estimates.

RESULTS

Vortioxetine was a cost-effective treatment option at a threshold of £20,000/QALY vs. escitalopram, citalopram, sertraline, and was associated with more health benefits, less costs (was dominant) versus relevant third-line comparators venlafaxine and duloxetine. Agomelatine was found not to be a cost-effective option. The 22-month maintenance phase treatment scenario results were similar to the 6-month base case.

LIMITATIONS

Third-line efficacy data were not available. This highlights the need for studies in patients receiving third-line treatment.

CONCLUSION

This model provides an overview for the management of patients receiving third-line treatment where limited evidence currently exists. Vortioxetine, with its novel mechanism of action, is expected to be a dominant treatment option versus relevant comparators in the UK.

Vortioxetine: A new alternative for the treatment of major depressive disorder

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a serious psychiatric condition. Its treatment remains a challenge nowadays. Vortioxetine is a novel antidepressant with a unique profile, as it acts as a multimodal serotoninergic agent. Its efficacy in MDD has been established in many short- and long-term studies, with 7 positive, 4 negative and 1 failed randomized controlled trials. Moreover, its ability to modulate a wide range of neurotransmitters (serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine, histamine, glutamate or GABA) confers vortioxetine pro-cognitive effects. Side effects are also different from conventional antidepressants, according to its low incidence of sexual dysfunction, weight gain or cardiovascular alterations. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety profile of vortioxetine, as well as its potential effectiveness in improving cognitive symptoms.

Effects of sertraline, duloxetine, vortioxetine, and idazoxan in the rat affective bias test

RATIONALE

Affective biases seemingly play a crucial role for the onset and development of depression. Acute treatment with monoamine-based antidepressants positively influences emotional processing, and an early correction of biases likely results in repeated positive experiences that ultimately lead to improved mood.

OBJECTIVES

Using two conventional antidepressants, sertraline and duloxetine, we aimed to forward the characterization of a newly developed affective bias test (ABT) for rats. Further, we examined the effect of vortioxetine, a recently approved antidepressant, and the α₂ adrenoceptor antagonist idazoxan on affective biases.

METHODS

Sprague Dawley rats were tested in an affective bias test using a fully balanced within-subject study design. Rats learned to associate two different digging substrates with a reward during six reward-pairing days. The absolute value of the rewards was identical, but the affective state at the time of learning induces a positive or negative bias towards the treatment-paired digging substrate at recall. The choice bias between the two digging substrates at recall represents the affective bias. Sertraline (1, 3 and 10 mg/kg), duloxetine (1, 3 and 10 mg/kg), vortioxetine (1, 3 and 10 mg/kg) and idazoxan (3 and 10 mg/kg) were tested in the ABT.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

All four drugs, regardless of their mechanism of action, induced a positive affective bias in the ABT, although the overall effect of treatment was not statistically significant for sertraline and duloxetine. The largest effects were induced by vortioxetine and idazoxan, both of which caused significant positive biases at all tested doses.

The Clinical and Cost Effectiveness of Vortioxetine for the Treatment of a Major Depressive Episode in Patients With Failed Prior Antidepressant Therapy: A Critique of the Evidence

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of vortioxetine (Lundbeck) to submit clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence for vortioxetine for the treatment of major depressive episodes (MDEs), as part of the Institute's Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and Centre for Health Economics at the University of York were commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article provides a description of the company submission, the ERG review and the resulting NICE guidance TA367 issued in November 2015. The ERG critically reviewed the evidence presented in the manufacturer's submission and identified areas requiring clarification, for which the manufacturer provided additional evidence. Two phase III randomised controlled trials for a second-line population involving vortioxetine were identified-REVIVE and TAK318. These two trials represent only 972 of over 7000 patients included in trials of vortioxetine. In REVIVE, there was a statistically significant difference in depression scores favouring vortioxetine compared with agomelatine [mean Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score difference of 2.16 points; 95 % confidence interval 0.81-3.51]. The ERG concluded that, based on all the evidence, rather than the substantially restricted subset of evidence originally considered by the manufacturer, vortioxetine is likely to be similar in efficacy to other analysed antidepressants [citalopram, sertraline, escitalopram and venlafaxine extended release (XR)], and may be more efficacious than agomelatine and inferior to duloxetine. The ERG concluded that vortioxetine may be more tolerable than other analysed antidepressants (sertraline, venlafaxine XR and bupropion), although the limited data prevent firm conclusions. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of vortioxetine reported by the manufacturer was £378 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) compared with venlafaxine. Given considerable concerns about the indirect treatment comparison undertaken by the manufacturer, the use of only a restrictive subset of the available evidence, and concerns regarding comparators and structural model assumptions, the ERG believes that this is not a valid estimate of the cost effectiveness of vortioxetine. Following corrections made to the model made by the ERG, the estimated cost effectiveness of vortioxetine was sensitive to the source of evidence used, in addition to whether certain comparators were excluded. The NICE thus asked the manufacturer to provide a revised economic model, which incorporated the broader evidence base and considered the cost effectiveness of vortioxetine as a third-line treatment. Assuming equal efficacy, vortioxetine was shown to be less costly and generate a higher QALY gain than relevant comparators at the third-line of treatment owing to its tolerability and adverse event profile. The NICE Appraisal Committee recommended vortioxetine as an option for treating MDEs in adults whose condition has responded inadequately to two antidepressants within the current episode.

Vortioxetine for major depressive disorder: An indirect comparison with duloxetine, escitalopram, levomilnacipran, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vilazodone, using number needed to treat, number needed to harm, and likelihood to be helped or harmed

BACKGROUND

Vortioxetine is approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder and differs from other antidepressants in terms of its pharmacodynamic profile. Given the limited number of head-to-head studies comparing vortioxetine with other antidepressants, indirect comparisons using effect sizes observed in other trials can be helpful to discern potential differences in clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Data sources were the clinical trial reports for the pivotal short-term double-blind trials for vortioxetine and from publicly available sources for the pivotal short-term double-blind trials for two commonly used generic serotonin specific reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (sertraline, escitalopram), two commonly used generic serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (venlafaxine, duloxetine), and two recently introduced branded antidepressants (vilazodone, levomilnacipran). Response was the efficacy outcome of interest, defined as a≥50% reduction from baseline on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale or Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. The tolerability outcome of interest was discontinuation because of an adverse event. Number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) for these outcomes vs. placebo were calculated, as well as likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH) to contrast efficacy vs. tolerability.

RESULTS

The analysis included 8 studies for duloxetine, 3 studies for escitalopram, 5 studies for levomilnacipran, 1 study for sertraline, 4 studies for venlafaxine, 2 studies for vilazodone, and 11 studies for vortioxetine. NNTs for response vs. placebo were 6 (95% CI 5-8), 7 (5-11), 10 (8-16), 6 (4-13), 6 (5-9), 8 (6-16), and 9 (7-11), respectively. NNHs for discontinuation because of an adverse event vs. placebo were 25 (17-51), 31 (19-92), 19 (14-27), 7 (5-12), 8 (7-11), 27 (15-104), and 43 (28-91), respectively. LHH values contrasting response vs. discontinuation because of an adverse event were 4.3, 4.6, 1.8, 1.2, 1.4, 3.3, and 5.1 respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Subjects were all participants in carefully designed and executed clinical trials and may not necessarily reflect patients in clinical settings who may have complex psychiatric and non-psychiatric comorbidities. The measured outcomes come from different studies and thus comparisons are indirect.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine demonstrates similar efficacy to that observed for duloxetine, escitalopram, levomilnacipran, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vilazodone, however overall tolerability as measured by discontinuation because of an adverse event differs. Vortioxetine is 5.1 times more likely to be associated with response than discontinuation because of an adverse event when compared to placebo.

What role for ▼vortioxetine?

▼Vortioxetine (Brintellix-Lundbeck) is licensed for treating adults with major depressive episodes.(1) It acts on the serotonin system and is described as having a 'novel multimodal mechanism of action'.(2) The company claims that it is the first antidepressant in the EU to include an effect on certain aspects of cognitive function in patients with depression in its Summary of Product Characteristics.(3) The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended it as an option for patients whose current episode has responded inadequately to two antidepressants. Here we consider the evidence for vortioxetine and its place in treating major depression in adults.

Antidepressant efficacy and side-effect burden: a quick guide for clinicians

Prescribing of antidepressant treatment (ADT) for major depressive disorder (MDD) has increased in quantity and popularity over the last two decades. This is likely due to the approval of safer medications, better education of clinicians and their patients, direct-to-consumer marketing practices, and less stigma associated with those taking ADT. This trend has also been met with some controversy, however, as the ongoing safety and effectiveness of these treatments have at times been called into question. This paper discusses the differing levels of evidence that support the use of ADT based on (A) Food and Drug Administration approvals, (B) data from randomized controlled trials or meta-analyses and, where these are not available, the authors discuss and apply, (C) theoretical pharmacodynamic principles to justify antidepressant choice in the treatment of MDD patients. The final section discusses standard psychopharmacology guideline approaches to better alert the reader as to which practices are commonplace compared with those which are more outside of the standard of care.

Profile of vortioxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: an overview of the primary and secondary literature

This article reviews the pharmacological profile and available efficacy and tolerability/safety data for vortioxetine, one of the most recent antidepressant drugs to be approved in the USA for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults. The efficacy of vortioxetine for treating MDD in adults is supported by eight positive short-term (6- to 12-weeks) randomized, placebo-controlled trials, and one positive randomized, double-blind, 52-week relapse prevention trial. Based on pooled data from short-term randomized trials and from longer-term studies, vortioxetine appears to be well tolerated and to have a low incidence of adverse effects on sexual functioning. Vortioxetine also appears to be effective for treating symptoms of MDD in the elderly based on the results of one randomized trial for which recruitment was focused on this specific population. Nevertheless, effectiveness studies that directly compare the clinical effects of vortioxetine with other established antidepressant drugs are lacking, and there is no evidence as yet that vortioxetine is more clinically effective than other types of antidepressants. Some preliminary suggestions concerning the place of vortioxetine among the broad range of pharmacological treatments for adults with MDD are provided.

Vortioxetine : a review of efficacy, safety and tolerability with a focus on cognitive symptoms in major depressive disorder

INTRODUCTION

Vortioxetine is a pharmacodynamically novel antidepressant that exerts effects on various neurotransmitters including serotonin, noradrenaline, dopamine, glutamate, histamine and acetylcholine. Its efficacy in the symptomatic management of major depressive disorder (MDD) has been established in several short- and long-term trials. Vortioxetine has also demonstrated independent pro-cognitive effects in adults with MDD.

AREAS COVERED

This report provides a concise review of the pharmacology, efficacy and safety of vortioxetine as they pertain to cognition.

EXPERT OPINION

The significant impact of cognitive dysfunction in MDD has achieved increased consideration among researchers over the past decade. Vortioxetine is the first antidepressant agent to demonstrate meaningful clinical efficacy in the improvement of cognition in adults with MDD, independent of improvement in affective symptomatology. These results provide the impetus for further study into the potential pro-cognitive effects of vortioxetine in other conditions wherein cognitive dysfunction is prominent.

Vortioxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder

ABSTRACT 

Vortioxetine is a novel psychotropic drug, with evidence of efficacy in acute treatment of major depressive episodes and in prevention of relapse in major depressive disorder. It has been described as having a ‘multimodal’ serotonergic mechanism of action, involving reuptake inhibition and a range of effects on presynaptic and postsynaptic receptors. It also has important effects on other neurotransmitters thought to be important in the neurobiology of depression and response to antidepressant treatment. It is efficacious in reducing anxiety symptom severity in depressed patients. The tolerability profile of vortioxetine appears predictable from its pharmacological properties. It may have beneficial effects in improving ‘cognition’ in depression, and a lower incidence of treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction, but these potential benefits require further investigation.