Comparative evaluation of efficacy and tolerability of vilazodone, escitalopram, and amitriptyline in patients of major depressive disorder: A randomized, parallel, open-label clinical study

Exploring adverse events of Vilazodone: evidence from the FAERS database

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to conduct an exhaustive evaluation of Vilazodone's safety in clinical application and to unearth the potential adverse event (AE) risks associated with its utilization based on FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database.

METHODS

This research employed data spanning from the first quarter of 2011 to the third quarter of 2023 from the FAERS database. Various signal detection methodologies, including the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), and Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean (EBGM), were utilized to ascertain the correlation between Vilazodone and specific AEs.

RESULTS

The study compiled a total of 17,439,268 reports of drug AEs, out of which 5,375 were related to Vilazodone. Through signal mining, 125 Preferred Terms (PTs) encompassing 27 System Organ Classes (SOCs) were identified. The findings indicated a higher prevalence among females and patients within the 45 to 65 age bracket. The principal categories of AEs included Psychiatric disorders, Nervous system disorders, and Gastrointestinal disorders, with prevalent incidents of Diarrhoea, Nausea, and Insomnia. Moreover, the study identified robust signals of novel potential AEs, notably in areas such as sleep disturbances (Sleep paralysis, Hypnagogic hallucination, Rapid eye movements sleep abnormal, Sleep terror, Terminal insomnia, Tachyphrenia), sexual dysfunctions (Female orgasmic disorder, Orgasm abnormal, Disturbance in sexual arousal, Spontaneous penile erection, Anorgasmia, Sexual dysfunction, Ejaculation delayed), and other symptoms and injuries (Electric shock sensation, Violence-related symptom, Gun shot wound).

CONCLUSION

Although Vilazodone presents a positive prospect in the management of MDD, the discovery of AEs linked to its use, particularly the newly identified potential risks such as sleep and sexual dysfunctions, necessitates heightened vigilance among clinicians.

Escitalopram versus other antidepressive agents for major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Escitalopram is selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and one of the most commonly prescribed newer antidepressants (ADs) worldwide. We aimed to explore the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of escitalopram in comparison with other ADs in the acute-phase treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Clinical Trials.gov were searched from inception to July 10, 2023. Trial databases of drug-approving agencies were hand-searched for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials. All randomized controlled trials comparing escitalopram against any other antidepressant for patients with MDD. Responders and remitters to treatment were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. For dichotomous data, risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous data were analyzed using standardized mean differences (with 95% CI) using the random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies were included in this meta‑analysis, among which sixteen trials compared escitalopram with another SSRI and 14 compared escitalopram with a newer AD. Escitalopram was shown to be significantly more effective than citalopram in achieving acute response (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.87). Escitalopram was also more effective than citalopram in terms of remission (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Escitalopram was superior to other ADs for the acute phase treatment of MDD in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability. However, no significant difference was found between escitalopram and other ADs in early response or follow-up response to treatment of MDD.

An Open-Label Rater-Blinded Randomized Trial of Vilazodone versus Escitalopram in Major Depression

BACKGROUND

Vilazodone, a novel selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and 5-HT1A partial agonist, was approved in 2011 for treatment for major depression. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of vilazodone versus escitalopram in patients with major depression at 4 weeks.

METHODS

Participants (n = 52) were adult major depressive disorder outpatients who were randomized to receive either oral escitalopram (modal endpoint dose 20 mg/day; n = 26) or oral vilazodone (modal endpoint dose 40 mg/day; n = 26). Rater-blinded assessments of depression scores (primary outcome) and clinical severity of illness (secondary outcome) were obtained at baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks. Adverse effects such as weight gain, sexual dysfunction, and diarrhea were recorded at each visit. The primary analysis was performed on the Intention-to-treat sample.

RESULTS

No significant difference was noted between groups on depression scores at study endpoint (F = 2.80, df = 1,50, P = 0.10); however, the vilazodone group had significantly lower endpoint clinical severity of illness (F = 7.69, df = 1,50, P = 0.01). At 2 weeks, there were no significant between-group differences on depression scores (F = 0.006, df = 1,50, P = 0.94). Instances of diarrhea (P = 0.001) were significantly higher in the vilazodone group.

CONCLUSION

Clinical ratings of major depression did not differ significantly between vilazodone and escitalopram groups at the end of 4 weeks. Our findings are limited by lack of statistical power to detect smaller differences between groups, should they exist.

Risks of Digestive System Side-Effects of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Patients with Depression: A Network Meta-Analysis

Purpose

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the preferred treatments for depression. The most common adverse drug reactions are symptoms involving the digestive system, leading to low compliance in patients with depression. Therefore, it is important to assess the safety of SSRIs with respect to the digestive system. Several meta-analyses have compared the risks of digestive side effects of SSRIs and other antidepressants. We aimed to compare the risks of various SSRIs (fluoxetine, escitalopram, citalopram, paroxetine, and sertraline) for adverse reactions of the digestive system.

Methods

Systematic searches returned 30 randomized controlled trials (n = 5004) of five antidepressants and placebos.

Results

Fluoxetine had the lowest probability of digestive side effects, ranking fifth at 0.548. Sertraline had the highest probability of digestive side effects, with a probability of 0.611. For gastrointestinal tolerability, escitalopram was better than paroxetine (odds ratio [OR] =0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43–0.87) and sertraline (OR=0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.99).

Conclusion

Fluoxetine exhibited distinct advantages compared to other SSRIs, while sertraline had the greatest likelihood of digestive system side effects. These findings will help doctors understand the relative advantages of various antidepressants.

Vilazodone for Major Depression in Adults: Pharmacological Profile and an Updated Review for Clinical Practice

This article provides an updated review of the pharmacological profile and available efficacy and tolerability/safety data for vilazodone, 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 vilazodone for MDD in adults is supported by four positive short-term (8-10 weeks), randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Beyond these pivotal trials, we review updated research findings pertaining to the clinical effects of vilazodone for MDD including the results of switch studies, small comparative efficacy trials, key pooled and secondary data analyses focused on important depressive subtypes (anxious depression) and predictors of treatment outcome, and safety studies including direct studies of sexual side-effects. Despite these additional research efforts and use for over a decade, important gaps in the clinical evidence base remain with vilazodone. Hypothesized differences in efficacy and adverse effects between other antidepressants and vilazodone based on its multimodal mechanism of action (combining serotonin reuptake inhibition with serotonin 5-HT1A partial agonist effects) have not been comprehensively demonstrated in clinical studies and its effectiveness as a continuation- or maintenance-phase therapeutic is not yet established. Questions remain regarding its reproductive and lactational safety profiles and its efficacy as a potential next-step therapeutic for patients with MDD who do not respond to first-line antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Suggestions for clinical use of vilazodone and discussion of its place among the broad range of pharmacotherapies for adults with MDD are provided.