Efficacy of controlled-release paroxetine in the treatment of late-life depression

BACKGROUND: Depression is the second most common neuropsychiatric disorder in older Americans, with significant clinical and public health costs. Despite advances in treatment, late-life depression remains a clinical challenge. Although the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the most common pharmacologic intervention for late-life depression, few placebo-controlled trials have assessed the efficacy of SSRIs for this condition. METHOD: In this 12-week, multicenter, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose, double-blind, randomized trial, 319 elderly patients (mean age = 70 years) were treated with controlled-release paroxetine (paroxetine CR) up to 50 mg/day (N = 104), immediate-release paroxetine (paroxetine IR) up to 40 mg/day (N = 106), or placebo (N = 109). Patients met DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder and had a total score of 18 or more on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D). The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to endpoint in HAM-D total score. RESULTS: The primary efficacy analysis showed an adjusted difference between change from baseline in HAM-D score for paroxetine CR and placebo of -2.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -4.47 to -0.73, p = .007) at the week 12 last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) endpoint. The adjusted difference between paroxetine IR and placebo was -2.8 (95% CI = -4.65 to -0.99, p = .003) at week 12. Paroxetine CR and IR were more effective than placebo, with mean +/- SD endpoint HAM-D total scores of 10.0 +/- 7.41 and 10.0 +/- 7.10, respectively, for the active treatments compared with 12.6 +/- 7.34 for placebo. Response, defined as a score of 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impressions-global improvement scale, was achieved by 72% of paroxetine CR patients (LOCF; p < .002 vs. placebo), 65% of paroxetine IR patients (p = .06 vs. placebo), and 52% of placebo patients. Remission, defined as a HAM-D total score < or = 7, was achieved by 43% of paroxetine CR patients (LOCF; p = .009 vs. placebo), 44% of paroxetine IR patients (p = .01 vs. placebo), and 26% of placebo patients. In a post hoc analysis, mean HAM-D improvement for paroxetine CR and paroxetine IR was greater than for placebo in both chronically depressed patients (duration > 2 years) and those with short-term (< or = 2 years) depression. Dropout rates due to adverse events were 12.5% for paroxetine CR, 16.0% for paroxetine IR, and 8.3% for placebo. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine CR and paroxetine IR are effective and well tolerated treatments for major depressive disorder in elderly patients, including those with chronic depression.     

Effectiveness of low doses of paroxetine controlled release in the treatment of major depressive disorder

CONTEXT: Paroxetine controlled release (CR) is approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in the dosage range of 25 to 62.5 mg daily. However, lower daily doses (12.5 mg and 25 mg) of this formulation have not been investigated in the treatment of MDD. If the 12.5-mg and 25-mg doses are found to be efficacious, these lower doses may well convey a superior tolerability profile for paroxetine CR in the treatment of MDD. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antidepressant efficacy and tolerability profile of daily doses of paroxetine CR 12.5 mg and 25 mg versus placebo in the treatment of MDD. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted in 40 clinical investigation centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 447 adult (> or = 18 years of age) outpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for MDD and with a baseline 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score of at least 20 comprised the intent-to-treat study population (mean age = 38.8 years; 58.4% female; 75.6% white). INTERVENTION: Eligible patients completing a 1-week single-blind placebo run-in period were randomly assigned to receive once-a-day study medication (paroxetine CR 12.5 mg [N = 156], paroxetine CR 25 mg [N = 154], or placebo [N = 149]) in an 8-week, double-blind, parallel cell comparison. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to study endpoint (week 8) as measured by the HAM-D. Secondary efficacy measures included change from baseline to study endpoint as assessed by both the depressed mood item on the HAM-D and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S). The proportion of patients considered at study endpoint to be in response (CGI-Improvement score of 1 or 2) or in remission (HAM-D < or = 7) in the 3 treatment groups was also compared. Quality of life was assessed by the change from baseline in total score of the short form of the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q). Safety observations were made by assessing the proportion of patients who had adverse experiences, including laboratory and electrocardiographic abnormalities, during the treatment period. RESULTS: The primary efficacy analysis revealed that both the 12.5-mg and the 25-mg paroxetine CR treatment groups were associated with significant therapeutic effects (change in HAM-D score) from baseline to study endpoint (LOCF: p = .038, 95% CI = -3.38 to -0.09 and p = .005, 95% CI = -4.06 to -0.74, respectively). Results from the Wilcoxon rank sum test of the depressed mood item of the HAM-D (p = .011, 95% CI = -0.57 to -0.07) demonstrated significant efficacy in the 25-mg treatment group but not in the 12.5-mg group. However, LOCF analysis of the CGI-S revealed significant therapeutic effects for both the 12.5-mg (p = .018, 95% CI = -0.61 to -0.06) and 25-mg (p < .001, 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.22) treatment groups. Significantly more patients in the 25-mg paroxetine CR-treated group than in the placebo-treated group met criteria for response (CGI-Improvement score of 1 or 2, p = .035, OR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.04 to 2.73) as well as for remission (HAM-D score 相似文献   

Controlled-release paroxetine in the treatment of patients with social anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study was conducted to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of the controlled-release (CR) formulation of paroxetine in adults with social anxiety disorder. METHOD: Outpatients with a primary diagnosis of social anxiety disorder according to DSM-IV criteria entered a 1-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive paroxetine CR (flexible dose of 12.5-37.5 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks of treatment. The primary efficacy measures were the change from baseline in Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) score and the proportion of responders based on Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Global Improvement scale score. Data were gathered from September 2001 to July 2002. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population consisted of 186 patients randomly assigned to paroxetine CR and 184 patients randomly assigned to placebo. Statistically significant differences in favor of paroxetine CR compared with placebo were observed in the change from baseline to week 12 last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) dataset in LSAS total score (difference = -13.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -18.25 to -8.41, p <.001). In the CGI-Global Improvement responder analysis, 57.0% of patients treated with paroxetine CR achieved response (very much improved or much improved), compared with 30.4% of patients treated with placebo at week 12 LOCF (odds ratio = 3.12, 95% CI = 2.01 to 4.83, p <.001). Dropout rates due to adverse events were low and comparable in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine CR effectively treated the symptoms associated with social anxiety disorder and was well tolerated, with few patients stopping treatment due to adverse events. This favorable tolerability profile may enable more patients to experience the benefits of effective therapy.     

Efficacy and tolerability of controlled-release and immediate-release paroxetine in the treatment of depression

BACKGROUND: Antidepressant efficacy may be compromised by early discontinuation of treatment secondary to common, treatment-emergent side effects, including nausea, agitation, and somnolence. Paroxetine controlled-release (CR) was developed to improve general tolerability and, in particular, gastrointestinal tolerability. OBJECTIVE: To determine the antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine CR in adult patients 18 to 65 years of age with DSM-IV major depressive disorder. METHOD: Paroxetine CR (25-62.5 mg/day; N = 212) and paroxetine immediate-release (IR; 20-50 mg/day; N = 217) were compared with placebo (N = 211) in the pooled dataset from 2 identical, double-blind, 12-week clinical trials. RESULTS: Both paroxetine CR and paroxetine IR exhibited efficacy in major depressive disorder as assessed by the reduction in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score compared with placebo. Moreover, depressed mood and psychic anxiety symptoms improved as early as treatment week 1 in the paroxetine CR group compared with the placebo group. After 6 weeks of treatment, response and remission rates were 41.5% and 20.5% for placebo, 52.8% and 29.6% for paroxetine IR, and 58.9% and 34.4% for paroxetine CR, respectively. After 12 weeks of treatment, response and remission rates were 61.2% and 44.0% for placebo, 72.9% and 52.5% for paroxetine IR, and 73.7% and 56.2% for paroxetine CR, respectively. Rates of nausea were significantly lower for paroxetine CR (14%) than for paroxetine IR (23%; p < or = .05) during week 1. Rates of dropout due to adverse events were comparable between paroxetine CR and placebo, while significantly (p = .0008) more patients treated with paroxetine IR withdrew from the study prematurely compared with those treated with placebo. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine CR is an effective and well-tolerated antidepressant exhibiting symptomatic improvement as early as week 1. Paroxetine CR is associated with low rates of early-onset nausea and dropout rates due to adverse events comparable to those of placebo. The clinical improvement seen with paroxetine CR, coupled with its favorable adverse event profile, suggests a benefit for therapeutic outcome with paroxetine CR.     

Efficacy and tolerability of controlled-release paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of controlled-release paroxetine (paroxetine CR) in the treatment of adults with panic disorder. METHOD: Paroxetine CR (25-75 mg/day; N = 444) was compared with placebo (N = 445) in patients with DSM-IV panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in 3 identical, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 10-week clinical trials that were pooled for analysis. RESULTS: Paroxetine CR was statistically superior to placebo in the primary outcome measure, percentage of patients who were free of panic attacks in the 2 weeks prior to endpoint. Of the total population that completed or prematurely terminated treatment, 63% and 53% of paroxetine CR-and placebo-treated patients, respectively, were panic-free during the final 2 weeks (p < .005; odds ratio [OR] = 1.63; 95% CI = 1.21 to 2.19). For week 10 completers (72% of total), 73% and 60% of paroxetine CR- and placebo-treated patients, respectively, were panic-free at week 10 (p < .005; OR = 2.11; 95% CI = 1.45 to 3.07). Paroxetine CR was also statistically superior to placebo on the global improvement and severity items of the Clinical Global Impressions scale and in reducing anxiety symptoms as measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety total score and total fear and avoidance on the Marks-Sheehan Phobia Scale. Adverse events leading to study withdrawal were minimal and occurred in 11% of the paroxetine CR group and 6% of the placebo group. Most of the treatment-emergent adverse events were rated as mild to moderate in severity and occurred early in the study. There were no unexpected adverse events, and serious adverse events were uncommon (10 [2.3%] of the 444 patients treated with paroxetine CR vs. 8 [1.8%] of the 445 patients treated with placebo). CONCLUSION: Paroxetine CR is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for panic disorder. Paroxetine CR is associated with low rates of treatment-emergent anxiety as well as low dropout rates from adverse events.     

Paroxetine treatment in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in pediatric major depressive disorder. METHOD: Subjects 7 to 17 years old with major depressive disorder received paroxetine (10-50 mg/day) or placebo for 8 weeks from 2000 to 2001. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised total score at week 8 last observation carried forward). Safety was primarily assessed by spontaneous reporting of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients (intent to treat) were randomized to paroxetine (n = 104) or placebo (n = 102). Week 8 Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised total score adjusted mean changes from baseline for patients receiving paroxetine and placebo were -22.58 (SE 1.47) and -23.38 points (SE 1.60), respectively (0.80, 95% confidence interval -3.09 to 4.69, p = 0.684). Increased cough (5.9% versus 2.9%), dyspepsia (5.9% versus 2.9%), vomiting (5.9% versus 2.0%), and dizziness (5.0% versus 1.0%) occurred in >or=5% of the paroxetine group and at least twice that of the placebo group. Six of 104 (5.8%) paroxetine patients reported serious adverse events compared to 1 placebo patient (1.0%). The incidence of adverse events of suicidal behavior and/or ideation while taking study medication (excluding taper) was 1.92% (2/104) for paroxetine versus 0.98% (1/102) for placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine was not shown to be more efficacious than placebo for treating pediatric major depressive disorder.     

An international, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial of paroxetine in adolescents with major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of paroxetine in adolescents with unipolar major depression. METHOD: Two hundred eighty-six (286) adolescents with unipolar major depression were randomly assigned to receive either paroxetine or placebo for 12 weeks. RESULTS: The proportion of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) responders (at least 50% reduction from baseline) for paroxetine and placebo were similar and not statistically different at endpoint (p = 0.702). A similar result was obtained for change from baseline on the Kiddie-Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School- Age Children (K-SADS-L) depression subscale. Among secondary endpoints, only a significantly higher Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) response rate was reported in paroxetine-treated patients versus placebo (69.2% versus 57.3%; p = 0.045). In general, results differed by age, with patients older than 16 years demonstrating a greater response to active treatment. This age group also reported more adverse experiences (AEs) relative to placebo than younger adolescents. Overall, paroxetine was generally well tolerated (11% discontinued owing to an AE versus 7% of placebo-treated patients). A post hoc analysis of AEs related to suicidal behavior suggested a greater incidence of these events for paroxetine than for placebo (4.4% versus 2.1%); however, this difference was not statistically significant (odds ratio, 2.15, 95% Confidence Interval 0.45, 10.33; p = 0.502). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were observed for paroxetine compared with placebo on the two prospectively defined primary efficacy variables. Paroxetine at 20-40 mg/day administered over a period of up to 12 weeks was generally well tolerated.     

Paroxetine controlled-release formulation in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in Japan and Korea

Aim: The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of paroxetine controlled‐release (CR) formulation compared to placebo. A secondary objective was to test the hypothesis that the CR decreases selective‐serotonin‐reuptake‐inhibitors‐induced nausea as its formulation allows more distal gastrointestinal absorption than the paroxetine immediate‐release (IR) formulation. Methods: We conducted this study in Japanese and Korean patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) in order to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of paroxetine CR compared with placebo. The primary efficacy end‐point was the adjusted mean change from baseline in the 17‐item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score at Week 8. Results: A total of 416 patients with MDD were randomly assigned to the CR, IR and placebo groups. The mean change from baseline in the 17‐item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was ?12.8 in the CR group, ?12.5 in the IR group, and ?10.4 in the placebo group, which showed a statistically significant difference compared to placebo in CR (P < 0.001) and IR (P = 0.015). The incidence of adverse events was 65% in CR, 69% in IR and 55% in placebo. The adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in severity. In the early treatment period, when initiated from 12.5 mg, the incidence of nausea in the CR group was 6%, which was comparable with that of placebo (5%). Conclusion: Paroxetine CR is efficacious in the acute treatment of MDD and may have the potential benefit of decreasing the incidence of nausea in the early treatment period.     

Paroxetine treatment in children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of paroxetine for the treatment of pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder. METHOD: Children (7-11 years of age) and adolescents (12-17 years of age) meeting DSM-IV criteria for obsessive-compulsive disorder were randomized to paroxetine (10-50 mg/day) or placebo for 10 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS) total score at week 10 last observation carried forward end point. Safety was assessed primarily through adverse event monitoring. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients were randomized to treatment. Of these, 203 were included in the intention-to-treat population. Adjusted mean changes from baseline at week 10 observation carried forward end point in CY-BOCS total score for patients receiving paroxetine and placebo were -8.78 (SE=0.82) and -5.34 points (SE=0.77), respectively. The adjusted mean difference, -3.45 in favor of paroxetine, was statistically significant (95% confidence interval=-5.60 to -1.29, p=.002). Adverse events were generally mild to moderate in intensity. A total of 10.2% (10/98) of patients in the paroxetine group and 2.9% (3 of 105) in the placebo group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder in children and adolescents.     

Acute and long-term treatment and prevention of relapse of obsessive-compulsive disorder with paroxetine

BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding optimal dosing or long-term pharmacotherapy with serotonin reuptake inhibitors in obsessive-compulsive disorder. This study evaluated the acute safety and efficacy and long-term efficacy, safety, and impact on relapse prevention of paroxetine in obsessive-compulsive disorder. METHOD: We enrolled 348 outpatients with DSM-III-R obsessive-compulsive disorder in phase 1, a 12-week randomized, double-blind, parallel study of fixed doses of paroxetine (20 mg/day, 40 mg/day, or 60 mg/day) and placebo. In phase 2, 263 phase 1 completers were enrolled in 6 months of flexibly dosed open-label paroxetine treatment. In phase 3, 105 responders to open-label paroxetine were randomized to 6-month double-blind, fixed-dose, parallel paroxetine/placebo treatment to evaluate long-term efficacy, safety, and impact on relapse prevention. The study was conducted from July 1991 to February 1994. RESULTS: Patients in phase 1 acute treatment receiving 40 mg/day or 60 mg/day of paroxetine improved significantly (p < .05) more than those receiving placebo; the mean reduction in Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale score was 25% on 40 mg/day of paroxetine and 29% on 60 mg/day compared with 13% on placebo. During phase 3, long-term treatment, a greater proportion of placebo- (59%) than paroxetine-treated (38%) patients relapsed. Paroxetine was well tolerated at all doses, with no significant increase in frequency of adverse events during long-term compared with short-term therapy. Greater adverse events in the placebo than in the paroxetine group in phase 3 probably represent a discontinuation effect. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine doses of 40 mg/day and 60 mg/day (but not 20 mg/day) are effective in treating acute obsessive-compulsive disorder. Long-term treatment with paroxetine is effective and safe, decreases the rate of relapse, and lengthens the time to relapse.     

Efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine for the long-term treatment of generalized anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND: Paroxetine has demonstrated efficacy in depression and anxiety disorders, including generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This 32-week study evaluated the maintained efficacy and safety of paroxetine in GAD by assessing the potential for relapse after discontinuation of medication. METHOD: Adults (N = 652) with DSM-IV GAD and a Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score > or = 4 received paroxetine (20-50 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Patients whose CGI-S score had decreased by at least 2 points to < or = 3 at week 8 were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with paroxetine (N = 278) or placebo (N = 288) for a further 24 weeks. The primary efficacy parameter was the proportion of patients relapsing (an increase in CGI-S score of at least 2 points to a score < or = 4 or withdrawal resulting from lack of efficacy) during double-blind treatment. RESULTS: Significantly fewer paroxetine than placebo patients relapsed during the 24-week double-blind phase (10.9% vs. 39.9%; p <.001). Placebo patients were almost 5 times more likely to relapse than paroxetine patients (estimated hazard ratio = 0.213 [95% CI = 0.1 to 0.3]; p <.001). Statistical significance in favor of paroxetine was demonstrated for all secondary efficacy parameters, including functional status. Twice as many paroxetine patients as placebo patients (73%) achieved remission. Paroxetine was well tolerated, with no unexpected adverse events reported. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine was found to be effective and well tolerated for both the short- and long-term treatment of DSM-IV GAD. Continued treatment with paroxetine significantly reduced the potential for relapse of GAD symptoms.     

A controlled trial of paroxetine for chronic PTSD, dissociation, and interpersonal problems in mostly minority adults

This study evaluated the efficacy of paroxetine for symptoms and associated features of chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), interpersonal problems, and dissociative symptoms in an urban population of mostly minority adults. Adult outpatients with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of chronic PTSD received 1 week of single-blind placebo (N = 70). Those not rated as significantly improved were then randomly assigned to placebo (N = 27) or paroxetine (N = 25) for 10 weeks, with a flexible dosage design (maximum 60 mg by week 7). Significantly more patients treated with paroxetine were rated as responders (14/21, 66.7%) on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale (CGI-I) compared to patients treated with placebo (6/22, 27.3%). Mixed effects models showed greater reductions on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) total score (primary plus associated features of PTSD) in the paroxetine versus placebo groups. Paroxetine was also superior to placebo on reduction of dissociative symptoms [Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) score] and reduction in self-reported interpersonal problems [Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) score]. In a 12-week maintenance phase, paroxetine response continued to improve, but placebo response did not. Paroxetine was well tolerated and superior to placebo in ameliorating the symptoms of chronic PTSD, associated features of PTSD, dissociative symptoms, and interpersonal problems in the first trial conducted primarily in minority adults.     

A randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose comparison of paroxetine and placebo in the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out to determine the effectiveness and safety of various daily dosages of paroxetine for the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder. METHOD: A 1-week, single-blind, placebo run-in was followed by 12 weeks of double-blind treatment. 384 eligible patients meeting DSM-IV criteria for social anxiety disorder were randomly assigned to receive paroxetine, 20 (N = 97), 40 (N = 95), or 60 mg (N = 97), or placebo (N = 95) once daily in a 1:1:1:1 ratio. Primary efficacy variables included mean change from baseline in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score and proportion of patients exhibiting a therapeutic response (defined as a Clinical Global Impressions-Global Improvement scale [CGI-1] score of 1 or 2). RESULTS: In the last-observation-carried-forward analyses, patients treated with paroxetine, 20 mg/day, had significantly greater improvement on mean LSAS total scores compared with those receiving placebo (p < .001), while the incidence of responders, based on the CGI-I rating, was significantly greater with paroxetine, 40 mg/day, than with placebo (p = .012). Patients treated with paroxetine, 20 and 60 mg, also had significantly better responses on the social item of the Sheehan Disability Scale than did patients treated with placebo (p < .019). The completer analyses showed a significant difference between the placebo group and the 20-mg and 40-mg paroxetine groups on LSAS total score and rate of response (p < or = .006). There were no serious adverse experiences attributed to paroxetine treatment. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine, 20 mg/day, is an effective and safe treatment for patients with generalized social anxiety disorder and significantly improves social anxiety, avoidance of social interactions, social disability, and overall clinical condition. Further data analyses are needed to determine whether more specific guidelines for paroxetine dosage escalation in social anxiety disorder can be drawn.     

Efficacy and safety of paroxetine treatment for chronic PTSD: a fixed-dose, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of paroxetine for the treatment of patients with chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). METHOD: Outpatients with chronic PTSD according to DSM-IV criteria and a score of 50 or more on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, part 2, were randomly assigned to take placebo (N=186), 20 mg/day of paroxetine (N=183), or 40 mg/day of paroxetine (N=182) for 12 weeks. Efficacy was assessed by examining the change in total score from baseline to endpoint on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, part 2, and rates of response ("very much improved" or "much improved") for global improvement on the Clinical Global Impression scale. RESULTS: Paroxetine-treated patients in both dose groups demonstrated significantly greater improvement on primary outcome measures compared to placebo-treated patients in the intent-to-treat analysis. Moreover, paroxetine treatment resulted in statistically significant improvement compared to placebo on all three PTSD symptom clusters (reexperiencing, avoidance/numbing, and hyperarousal), social and occupational impairment, and comorbid depression. Paroxetine was effective for both men and women. Treatment response did not vary by trauma type, time since trauma, or severity of baseline PTSD or depressive symptoms. Both doses were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Doses of 20 and 40 mg/day of paroxetine are effective and well tolerated in the treatment of adults with chronic PTSD.     

Treatment of major depression with nortriptyline and paroxetine in patients with ischemic heart disease.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of paroxetine and nortriptyline in depressed patients with ischemic heart disease. METHOD: After a 2-week, single-blind placebo lead-in phase, 81 outpatients with DSM-III-R-defined nonpsychotic unipolar major depression and ischemic heart disease were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with paroxetine or nortriptyline for 6 weeks. Paroxetine was administered at a fixed-flexible dose of 20-30 mg/day. Nortriptyline dose was adjusted with the use of blood-level monitoring to reach a plasma concentration of 50-150 ng/ml. RESULTS: Twenty-seven of the 41 patients who started treatment with paroxetine and 29 of the 40 patients who started treatment with nortriptyline had an improvement of at least 50% in their Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores. Significantly more patients taking nortriptyline discontinued treatment prematurely (35% versus 10%), and more patients taking nortriptyline had adverse events resulting in termination (25% versus 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments were efficacious. Sixty-three percent of all patients improved at least 50%, and of these, 90% met the criteria for remission. Paroxetine was better tolerated than nortriptyline and less likely to produce cardiovascular side effects.     

Duloxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a placebo- and paroxetine-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Duloxetine doses of 80 and 120 mg/day were assessed for efficacy and safety in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, patients age > or =18 meeting DSM-IV criteria for MDD were randomized to placebo (N=99), duloxetine 80 mg/day (N=93), duloxetine 120 mg/day (N=103), or paroxetine 20 mg/day (N=97). The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline in the 17-item Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAMD(17)) total score after 8 weeks of treatment; a number of secondary efficacy measures also were assessed. Safety and tolerability were assessed via collection and analysis of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, and weight. The Arizona sexual experiences scale was used to assess sexual functioning. Patients who had a > or =30% reduction from baseline in the HAMD(17) total score at the end of the acute phase entered a 6-month continuation phase where they remained on the same treatment as they had taken during the acute phase; efficacy and safety/tolerability outcomes were assessed during continuation treatment. RESULTS: More than 87% of patients completed the acute phase in each treatment group. Duloxetine-treated patients (both doses) showed significantly greater improvement (P<0.05) in the HAMD(17) total score at week 8 compared with placebo. Paroxetine was not significantly different from placebo (P=0.089) on mean change on the HAMD(17). Duloxetine 120 mg/day also showed significant improvement on most secondary efficacy measures (six of nine) compared with placebo while duloxetine 80 mg/day (three of nine) and paroxetine (three of nine) were significantly superior to placebo on fewer secondary measures. HAMD(17) mean change data from this study and an identical sister study were pooled as defined a priori for the purposes of performing a non-inferiority test versus paroxetine. Both duloxetine doses met statistical criteria for non-inferiority to paroxetine. TEAE reporting rates were low in all treatment groups and no deaths occurred in the acute or continuation phases. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of duloxetine at doses of 80 and 120 mg/day in the treatment of MDD was demonstrated. Tolerability, as measured by TEAEs, and safety were similar to paroxetine 20 mg/day and consistent with previous published data on duloxetine in the treatment of MDD.     

Efficacy of paroxetine in the treatment of adolescent major depression: a randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare paroxetine with placebo and imipramine with placebo for the treatment of adolescent depression. METHOD: After a 7- to 14-day screening period, 275 adolescents with major depression began 8 weeks of double-blind paroxetine (20-40 mg), imipramine (gradual upward titration to 200-300 mg), or placebo. The two primary outcome measures were endpoint response (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D] score < or = 8 or > or = 50% reduction in baseline HAM-D) and change from baseline HAM-D score. Other depression-related variables were (1) HAM-D depressed mood item; (2) depression item of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for Adolescents-Lifetime version (K-SADS-L); (3) Clinical Global Impression (CGI) improvement scores of 1 or 2; (4) nine-item depression subscale of K-SADS-L; and (5) mean CGI improvement scores. RESULTS: Paroxetine demonstrated significantly greater improvement compared with placebo in HAM-D total score < or = 8, HAM-D depressed mood item, K-SADS-L depressed mood item, and CGI score of 1 or 2. The response to imipramine was not significantly different from placebo for any measure. Neither paroxetine nor imipramine differed significantly from placebo on parent- or self-rating measures. Withdrawal rates for adverse effects were 9.7% and 6.9% for paroxetine and placebo, respectively. Of 31.5% of subjects stopping imipramine therapy because of adverse effects, nearly one third did so because of adverse cardiovascular effects. CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine is generally well tolerated and effective for major depression in adolescents.     

Therapeutic advances: paroxetine for the treatment of social anxiety disorder

Data from early studies of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have shown that these agents are effective in the treatment of social anxiety disorder (social phobia). This review highlights the outcomes of three large clinical trials of paroxetine in patients with social anxiety disorder. In two of the studies, patients received a flexible dose of paroxetine (20-50 mg/day) or placebo; the third trial was a fixed-dose study, in which patients received paroxetine 20, 40, or 60 mg/day, or placebo. A total of 861 subjects were randomized to treatment for 12 weeks, in centers across the U.S.A., Canada, Europe, and South Africa. The primary outcome measures were the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Global Improvement item and Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) Total Score. In each of the studies, 45-66% of patients receiving paroxetine were rated as responders (very much or much improved on the CGI scale). Paroxetine treatment improved symptoms of social anxiety, as measured by the LSAS, compared with placebo. Differences between paroxetine and placebo groups were statistically significant and were clinically relevant within each study. In general, paroxetine was well tolerated. Paroxetine is effective for the treatment of social anxiety disorder. Based on the findings from these studies, a starting dose of 20 mg/day is recommended. The range of efficacy appears to be 20-50 mg/day for most patients.     

Comparison of dapoxetine versus paroxetine in patients with premature ejaculation: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose, randomized study

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of dapoxetine, paroxetine, and placebo for the oral pharmacotherapy of premature ejaculation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred forty potent men with premature ejaculation were recruited to this study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 60 mg dapoxetine (group 1, n = 115), or 20 mg paroxetine (group 2, n = 113) or placebo (group 3, n = 112) orally daily during a 12-week period for each agent. The efficacy of the 3 treatments was assessed every 2 weeks during treatment and at the end of study using responses to International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) evaluation, mean intercourse satisfaction domain, mean weekly coitus episodes and adverse drug effects. RESULTS: At the end of the 12-week treatment with dapoxetine, paroxetine, and placebo, the mean IELT was increased from 38, 31 and 34 seconds to 179, 370 and 55 seconds, respectively (P = 0.01 in group 1 and P = 0.001 in group 2). Baseline mean intercourse satisfaction domain values of International Index of Erectile Function of 10, 11, and 11 reached 14, 17 and 12 at the end of the 12-week treatment in groups 1, 2, and 3 respectively (P = 0.03 in groups 1, 2). The mean weekly intercourse episodes increased from pretreatment values of 1.4, 1.3, and 1.3 to 2.2, 2.5 and 1.4, for dapoxetine, paroxetine and placebo, respectively (P = 0.04 in groups 1, 2). The incidence of adverse effects with dapoxetine and paroxetine was significantly higher (P = 0.04 in groups 1, 2) compared to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine appears to provide significantly better results in terms of IELT and intercourse satisfaction versus dapoxetine. Each treatment was well tolerated.     

Paroxetine in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in Japanese patients

The efficacy of paroxetine in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder in Western populations is well established. The present study compares the efficacy and safety of paroxetine with placebo in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder in Japanese patients. Patients aged 16 years or older who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn; DSM-IV) criteria for obsessive-compulsive disorder and had a Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) score of >/=16 were randomized to receive 12 weeks' therapy in a double-blind manner. Paroxetine 20-50 mg/day or placebo was administered following a 1 week, placebo run-in phase. One hundred and ninety-one patients were randomized to either paroxetine or placebo, 188 patients were assessed as the full analysis set (FAS) and 144 patients completed the 12 week study. After adjustment for the Y-BOCS total score at baseline, reductions in obsessive-compulsive total score at week 6 and at the end of therapy were significantly greater in the paroxetine group than the placebo group. Most of the adverse events that occurred during the study were of mild to moderate intensity. Paroxetine is effective and well tolerated in Japanese adult patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder.