Mirtazapine treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a fixed dose, open label study

We investigated the efficacy of mirtazapine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Forty-four adult outpatients with GAD were treated openly with a fixed dose of mirtazapine (30 mg) for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the change from baseline in total score on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A). The Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) was rated at the endpoint. Patients with a reduction of 50% or more on the HAM-A total score and a CGI-I score of 1 or 2 at endpoint were considered responders to treatment; remission was defined as a HAM-A score 相似文献   

A double-blind placebo-controlled study of controlled release fluvoxamine for the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder

This was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled multicenter study to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fluvoxamine in a controlled release (CR) formulation for treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD). A total of 300 subjects with GSAD were randomly assigned to receive either fluvoxamine CR (N = 149) or placebo (N = 151) for 12 weeks. Mean changes from baseline to end point in Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS), Clinical Global Impression Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-S), Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), as well as the mean end point scores in Clinical Global Impression Improvement Scale (CGI-I) and Patient Global Impression of Improvement Scale (PGI) were compared between the fluvoxamine CR and placebo treatment groups. Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX), adverse event, and other safety parameters were also assessed. The results demonstrated that fluvoxamine CR was significantly superior to placebo in decreasing LSAS total score (primary measure) starting at week 4. At end point, there was a mean change from baseline of -36.1 +/- 2.7 (37% reduction) in the LSAS total score in the fluvoxamine CR group compared with -27.3 +/- 2.4 (28% reduction) in the placebo group (P = 0.020 for mean change). Fluvoxamine CR was also significantly superior to placebo in SDS, CGI-S, CGI-I at end point (secondary measures). When compared with placebo, fluvoxamine CR did not cause any significant weight gain or clinically significant sexual dysfunction as measured by ASEX. In summary, fluvoxamine CR is an efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder.     

Valproic acid for the treatment of social anxiety disorder

The aim of the study was to examine the efficacy of valproic acid in participants with social anxiety disorder. Following a 2-week single-blind, placebo run-in period, 17 participants were enrolled in a 12-week open flexible-dose trial of valproic acid (500-2500 mg). The primary outcome measures were the mean change from baseline in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score and responder status [defined as a Clinical Global Impression of Improvement score (CGI-I) < or =2]. Social anxiety symptoms as measured by the LSAS and CGI-I scores significantly improved with treatment. The mean reduction in the LSAS was 21.3 points in the last visit carried forward analysis and 19.1 points for the completer analysis, with 41.1% and 46.6% participants, respectively, achieving responder status. The results from this open-label trial suggest the potential efficacy of valproic acid for the treatment of social anxiety disorder. Placebo-controlled trials are indicated to confirm these findings.     

米氮平治疗广泛性焦虑症的开放性研究

目的 观察米氮平治疗广泛性焦虑的疗效和安全性.方法 对符合CCMD-3广泛性焦虑诊断标准的患者26例使用30mg/日米氮平治疗6周,在0、2、4、6周评定汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA,14项),并评定疗效、记录出现的不良反应.结果 米氮平能显著改善GAD患者的精神性焦虑和躯体性焦虑,治疗结束时的显效率达67.9%,有效率达92.9%.最常见的不良反应为嗜睡和体重增加.结论 米氮平对广泛性焦虑症疗效肯定,不良反应少.     

Fluvoxamine CR in the long-term treatment of social anxiety disorder: the 12- to 24-week extension phase of a multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Fluvoxamine CR has been reported effective in the short-term (12-wk) treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder (social phobia). Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is, however, a chronic disorder thought to require maintenance treatment. We report on data from the extension phase of a short-term study, in order to explore the efficacy and safety profile of fluvoxamine CR (100-300 mg/d) in the longer-term treatment of this disorder. Adult outpatients with generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD) at 35 centres in Europe, South Africa, and USA were included in an acute phase study (12 wk). Subjects who demonstrated at least minimal improvement by endpoint (n=112), were offered participation in an extension phase, in which medication was continued for a further 12 wk under double-blind conditions. Efficacy was assessed using the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Disorder Scale (LSAS), the Clinical Global Impression Global Improvement score (CGI-I), the Clinical Global Impressions Severity of Illness score (CGI-S), and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Safety and tolerability assessments were also performed at regular intervals. Subjects treated with fluvoxamine CR had a numerically greater decrease in LSAS total scores than subjects treated with placebo at endpoint. Analysis of data from baseline (day 1) to endpoint (last observation carried forward) demonstrated that this difference tended towards significance, while severity of illness on the CGI-S and disability on the SDS were significantly lower in the fluvoxamine CR group than in the placebo group. The same trends were observed when only data from weeks 12-24 were included in the analysis; although the magnitude of changes was smaller in the extension phase than in the acute phase, fluvoxamine CR-treated subjects continued to show improvement compared to placebo-treated subjects. Most treatment-emergent signs and symptoms (TESS) were mild to moderate in severity. No unexpected abnormalities were reported on vital signs, electrocardiagrams, or laboratory investigations. These data support the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fluvoxamine CR in the treatment of GSAD. Given the prevalence, persistence, and disability associated with GSAD, and the relative paucity of long-term treatment studies of SAD, the current dataset provides empirical support for the current clinical consensus that pharmacotherapy of this disorder should be continued beyond the acute phase.     

Efficacy of the novel anxiolytic pregabalin in social anxiety disorder: a placebo-controlled, multicenter study

Pregabalin is a novel compound in development for the treatment of anxiety disorders. The safety and efficacy of pregabalin for the treatment of social anxiety disorder was evaluated in a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial in which 135 patients were randomized to 10 weeks of double-blind treatment with either pregabalin 150 mg/d. pregabalin 600 mg/d, or placebo. The primary efficacy parameter was change from baseline to end point in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score. Safety was assessed through clinical and laboratory monitoring, and recording spontaneously reported adverse events. Ninety-four patients (70%) completed the 11-week double-blind treatment phase. LSAS total score was significantly decreased by pregabalin 600 mg/d treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.024, analysis of covariance). Significant differences (P < or = 0.05) between pregabalin 600 mg/d and placebo were seen on several secondary measures including the LSAS subscales of total fear, total avoidance, social fear, and social avoidance, and the Brief Social Phobia Scale fear subscale. Pregabalin 150 mg/d was not significantly better than placebo on any measures. Somnolence and dizziness were the most frequently occurring adverse events among patients receiving pregabalin 600 mg/d. In conclusion, pregabalin 600 mg/d was an effective and well-tolerated treatment of social anxiety disorder.     

Recognizing the patient with social anxiety disorder

Social anxiety disorder is a prevalent and highly disabling condition, affecting 7-13% of the population at some point in their lives. Most sufferers are not diagnosed however, even after visiting a healthcare professional. Social anxiety disorder need not be a difficult condition to diagnose. Characteristic features of the disorder include blushing as the principal symptom and an early age of onset. Social anxiety disorder is also easily distinguished from other anxiety disorders by the situations in which patients experience fear and avoidance; for the patient with social anxiety disorder, these situations always involve social interaction or scrutiny by other people. The consequences of untreated social anxiety disorder include social isolation, impaired educational attainment and career progression, depression, and alcohol abuse. Rating scales such as the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) give a consistent measure of severity of social anxiety disorder and so help physicians assess their patients' need for treatment and their improvement. Social anxiety disorder is an eminently treatable condition, as demonstrated by treatment-induced reduction in LSAS scores in clinical trials and by individual case histories. Appropriate therapy can give patients relief from their distressing and disabling symptoms and allows them to make substantial improvements to their quality of life.     

Mirtazapine treatment of social phobia in women: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Social phobia is an anxiety disorder characterized by extreme fear and phobic avoidance of social and performance situations and by a relatively poor health-related quality of life. The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy of mirtazapine versus placebo in the treatment of patients with social phobia. In 2004, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of mirtazapine in 66 female subjects from the general population meeting the criteria for social phobia. The subjects were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to mirtazapine (n = 33) or placebo (n = 33). The treatment lasted 10 weeks. Seven patients dropped out. Primary outcome measures were self-reported changes on the Social Phobia Inventory, Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, and Health Survey (SF-36). In comparison with the placebo group and according to the intent-to-treat principle, significant differences on the Social Phobia Inventory and Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale scales (all P < 0.001), as well as on most (5 from 8) scales of SF-36 (all P < 0.001), were observed in the mirtazapine-treated subjects. All patients tolerated mirtazapine relatively well. Mirtazapine appears to be an effective agent in the treatment of social phobia in women and in the improvement of their health-related quality of life.     

Efficacy of citalopram and moclobemide in patients with social phobia: some preliminary findings

The efficacy of irreversible and reversible monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) in the treatment of social phobia (SP) is well established. Recently, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been used more frequently. In the present study, the efficacy and side-effect profile of citalopram, an SSRI, and moclobemide, the only MAOI used in Turkey, were compared. The 71 patients diagnosed with SP according to DSM-III-R were randomly assigned to two subgroups; citalopram (n = 36) or moclobemide (n = 35). The study was an 8-week, randomized, open-label, rater-blinded, parallel-group trial. All patients were assessed by Hamilton anxiety rating (HAM-A), Liebowitz social anxiety (LSAS), clinical global impression-severity of illness (CGI-SI) and clinical global impression-improvement (CGI-I) scales. There was a similar percentage of responders (citalopram 75%, n = 27 and moclobemide 74.3%, n = 26), with a >50% or greater reduction in LSAS total score and ratings of "very much" or "much improved" on the CGI-I. None of the patients withdrew from the study. The results of the present study suggest that citalopram has shown promising results in patients with SP.     

Efficacy of low and higher dose extended-release venlafaxine in generalized social anxiety disorder: a 6-month randomized controlled trial

Rationale There is a need for new pharmacological treatments for generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD), which is a common, often disabling condition.Objective To compare the efficacy and safety over 6 months duration of two dose ranges of venlafaxine extended-release (ER) with placebo in patients with GSAD.Method Twenty-eight-week, double-blind, multi-center study in 386 adult outpatients with DSM-IV GSAD. Patients were randomized to placebo, venlafaxine ER fixed low dose (75 mg/day), or venlafaxine ER flexible higher dose (150–225 mg/day). Primary efficacy variable was change on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS). Secondary efficacy variables included, among others, the proportion of responders on the CGI Global Improvement Item (score 1 or 2), and the proportion of remitters (defined as an LSAS score of 30).Results Improvement on the LSAS was greater with venlafaxine ER (at 75 mg/day or 150–225 mg/day) than placebo, and was sustained throughout the 6-month trial. Of patients receiving venlafaxine ER (at any dose), 58% responded to treatment compared to 33% of those receiving placebo (P<0.001); corresponding remission rates were 31% and 16% (P<0.01). There were no differences in outcome according to venlafaxine ER dosage.Conclusions Venlafaxine ER was effective in the treatment of GSAD. The comparable efficacy at low and higher doses may indicate that norepinephrine reuptake blockade does not contribute to therapeutic effect in GSAD. This hypothesis should be tested using agents with specific actions on norepinephrine reuptake blockade.     

Serotonin transporter gene promoter polymorphism predicts SSRI response in generalized social anxiety disorder

Objectives To determine whether variation in the serotonin transporter gene promoter (5HTTLPR) influences the efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in generalized social anxiety disorder (GSAD).Methods Consecutive series of N=32 patients with DSM-IV GSAD for whom DNA and standardized outcome data from a 12-week SSRI trial were available. After ensuring that neither clinical response [clinical global impression of change scale (CGI-C)] nor 5HTTLPR genotype was confounded by ethnicity or sex, we determined whether the number of copies (0, 1, or 2) of hi-risk alleles using either the diallelic L–S system or the triallelic La–Lg–S system, predicted response and change in Liebowitz social anxiety scale (LSAS) and brief social phobia scale (BSPS) scores during SSRI treatment.Results Twenty-one patients (66%) were responders to SSRI (i.e., CGI-C much or very much improved). A trend was seen for a linear association between 5HTTLPR genotype and likelihood of response to SSRI: diallelic classification L/L 7/8 (88%), L/S 12/18 (67%), S/S 2/6 (33%), p=0.051; triallelic classification L′/L′ 4/5 (80%), L′/S′ 14/19 (74%), S′/S′ 3/8 (38%), p=0.093. Reduction in LSAS (and BSPS) scores during SSRI treatment was significantly (p<0.02) associated with 5HTTLPR genotype using either the diallelic or triallelic classification.Conclusions Variation in a functional polymorphism known to influence serotonin reuptake is associated with SSRI response in patients with GSAD. Independent replication in larger samples is required before the predictive utility of this information can be confirmed and generalized to clinical settings.     

Venlafaxine versus mirtazapine in the treatment of undifferentiated somatoform disorder: a 12-week prospective, open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial

OBJECTIVE: We set out to compare the efficacy and tolerability of mirtazapine versus venlafaxine in patients with undifferentiated somatoform disorder (USD) using the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15). METHODS: This was a 12-week prospective, open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial. The trial consisted of six visits that included baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 8 and 12. The primary effectiveness measure was the mean change in PHQ-15 total score from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary effectiveness measures included the mean changes in total scores on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) from baseline to the end of treatment. Ninety-five subjects were randomized to either mirtazapine (n = 50) or venlafaxine (n = 45); 71 subjects completed the study (mirtazapine: n = 39/50 [78%]; venlafaxine: n = 32/45 [71%]). RESULTS: The mean total score on the PHQ-15 decreased by 34.7% (-8.4, p < 0.0001) from baseline to endpoint in the mirtazapine group and by 26.6% (-6.1, p < 0.0001) in the venlafaxine group. A marginally significant between-group difference was observed for the mean change in total score on the PHQ-15 from baseline to endpoint (F = 4.126, p = 0.046). The mean total scores on the GHQ-12 and BDI from baseline to endpoint decreased by -4.9 (29.4%, p < 0.0001) and -13.5 (55.9%, p < 0.0001), respectively, in the mirtazapine group, and by -4.3 (26.2%, p = 0.001) and -9.02 (46.0%, p < 0.0001), respectively, in the venlafaxine group. No between-group difference was observed for the mean changes in total scores on the secondary effectiveness measures from baseline to endpoint. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that both mirtazapine and venlafaxine may be effective and well tolerated in the treatment of patients with USD. Double-blind, placebo-controlled and/or head-to-head comparison studies are required to allow definite conclusions to be drawn.     

米氮平与氟西汀治疗伴有广泛焦虑障碍的抑郁症各35例的疗效比较

目的 :比较米氮平与氟西汀治疗伴有广泛焦虑障碍的抑郁症的疗效。方法 :70例同时符合DSM Ⅳ重症抑郁障碍及广泛焦虑障碍诊断标准的抑郁症病人随机分为 2组 ,米氮平组 35例 [男性 12例 ,女性 2 3例 ,年龄 (4 3±s 14 )a],予米氮平 15～4 5mg ,po ,qd。氟西汀组 35例 [男性 10例 ,女性 2 5例 ,年龄 (4 4± 12 )a],予氟西汀 2 0～ 6 0mg ,po ,qd ;均 8wk为一个疗程。结果 :米氮平组有效率为94 % (33/35 ) ,氟西汀组有效率为 89% (31/35 ) ,2组有效率比较差异无显著意义 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论 :米氮平治疗伴有广泛焦虑障碍的抑郁症 ,起效快、疗效与氟西汀相似     

Efficacy of Venlafaxine ER in patients with social anxiety disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group comparison with paroxetine

This study evaluated the anxiolytic efficacy, safety and tolerability of a flexible dose of venlafaxine extended release (ER) compared with placebo and paroxetine in the short-term treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder (SAD). Adult outpatients with generalized SAD (n = 434) were randomized to receive capsules of venlafaxine ER 75 mg to 225 mg/day, paroxetine 20 mg to 50 mg/day, or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the Liebowitz social anxiety scale total score. Secondary efficacy variables included the patient-rated social phobia inventory and the proportion of responders in each group (a responder was defined as having a clinical global impression-improvement score of 1 or 2). Treatment with venlafaxine ER was associated with significantly greater improvement than treatment with placebo for all primary and secondary efficacy variables (p < 0.05). No significant differences in primary or secondary efficacy variables were observed between the venlafaxine ER and paroxetine groups. The week 12 response rates were 69%, 66% and 36% for the venlafaxine ER, paroxetine and placebo groups, respectively. Both active treatments were generally well tolerated and were associated with a similar incidence of adverse events. This study shows that venlafaxine ER is an effective, safe and well-tolerated drug treatment for SAD.     

Effect of mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets on health-related quality of life in elderly depressed patients with comorbid medical disorders: a pilot study

BACKGROUND: There is a need for additional studies on the quality of life (QOL) of elderly depressed subjects with medical comorbidity. METHOD:We conducted a 10-week, open trial of mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets in 16 elderly subjects with major depressive disorder and one or more serious medical illnesses. Quality of life was measured by the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 Health Status Survey (SF- 36). RESULTS: Treatment with mirtazapine was associated with significant reductions in clinical global impressions-severity of illness scale (CGI-S) score, the Hamilton rating scale for anxiety (HAM-A) total score, the 17-item Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAM-D) total score and the Beck depression inventory (BDI) total scores. The SF-36 "physical functioning", "role limitation physical", "vitality", "social functioning", "role limitation emotional", and "mental health" domains improved significantly. The mean mirtazapine dose at endpoint was 35 mg per day. The drug was relatively well tolerated except for three subjects who dropped out because of side effects. No drug-drug interactions or significant changes in blood pressure or heart rate occurred. CONCLUSION: Mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets may improve depression, insomnia, anxiety, somatic symptoms, and certain quality-of-life measures in elderly depressed subjects with medical disorders. A randomized, placebo-controlled study is warranted to confirm these promising findings.     

Fluvoxamine-controlled release formulation for the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND: Generalized social anxiety disorder is a highly prevalent anxiety disorder with deleterious effects on social and family relationships, as well as work performance. We report the results of a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fluvoxamine controlled release (CR) to placebo in patients with generalized social anxiety disorder. METHODS: A total of 279 adult patients meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria was recruited at 23 United States sites and randomly assigned to receive either fluvoxamine CR (100-300 mg/d) or placebo for 12 weeks. The dose could be increased, based on efficacy and tolerability, in increments of 50 mg/d at weekly intervals. The dosage remained constant during weeks 6 to 12. RESULTS: Treatment with fluvoxamine CR resulted in statistically and clinically significant improvements in symptoms associated with generalized social anxiety disorder as early as week 4 on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale and the Clinical Global Impression Scale Global Improvement, and at week 6 on the Sheehan Disability Scale, Clinical Global Impression Scale Severity of Illness and the Patient Global Impression of Improvement Scale. The most frequent adverse events reported by patients on fluvoxamine CR were headache, nausea, somnolence, and insomnia. No weight gain was observed for either treatment group, and at end point, there were no differences between treatments on overall sexual function, as measured by the Arizona Sexual Experience Scale. CONCLUSIONS: Both physician and patient-rated scales indicate that fluvoxamine CR is effective and safe for the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder.     

A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of a flexible dose of venlafaxine ER in adult outpatients with generalized social anxiety disorder

Venlafaxine extended release (ER) is a dual serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor previously shown to be effective in the treatment of major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. This placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial examined the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine ER in outpatients with generalized social anxiety disorder. Two hundred seventy-two outpatients were randomly assigned to receive either a flexible dose of venlafaxine ER (75 to 225 mg/d) or placebo for 12 weeks. Venlafaxine ER was statistically significantly more effective than placebo as demonstrated by the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale total scores at weeks 4 to 12. Scores of both the Clinical Global Impression-Severity and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scales showed that venlafaxine ER was significantly more effective than placebo at weeks 4 to 12. In addition, more venlafaxine ER-treated patients achieved CGI-Improvement scores of 1 or 2 than placebo-treated patients at weeks 4 to 12, demonstrating a greater percentage of responders to venlafaxine ER treatment. Assessment using the fear/anxiety and avoidance subscales of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale and the Social Phobia Inventory Scale also showed venlafaxine ER to be more effective than placebo at weeks 4 to 12 and 6 to 12, respectively. The Sheehan Disability Inventory showed that patients in the venlafaxine ER-treated group had significantly better outcomes in social life at weeks 4 and 12, and in work at week 12. Adverse events were similar to those reported in studies of venlafaxine ER in depression and generalized anxiety disorder. Venlafaxine ER was safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in the short-term treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder.     

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine is effective in more generalized and in less generalized social anxiety disorder

RATIONALE: The DSM-IV includes the specifier "generalized" to refer to social anxiety disorder (social phobia) patients if the fears include "most social situations". The focus on interventions such as the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for generalized social anxiety disorder arguably runs the risk that inadequate treatment will be provided to patients with the non-generalized or discrete subtypes. There are, however, few data to address whether more generalized and less generalized subgroups of social anxiety disorder differ in response to medication. OBJECTIVE: To compare response of more generalized and less generalized social anxiety disorder to pharmacotherapy. METHODS: Data from three randomized placebo-controlled double-blind multicenter trials of the SSRI paroxetine in social anxiety disorder were pooled. Response on the Clinical Global Impression Global Improvement item was analyzed using logistic regression, and change in total Liebowitz Social Anxiety Score was analyzed using analysis of variance, with both models incorporating treatment (paroxetine vs placebo), subgroup (more generalized vs less generalized), demographic, and clinical variables. RESULTS: The prevalence of more generalized social anxiety disorder was higher in females than in males. However, there was no significant difference in terms of age or clinical characteristics (duration of condition, baseline pulse, mean arterial blood pressure). At treatment endpoint there were significant treatment effects (for paroxetine vs placebo), but no significant subgroup effects (for more generalized vs less generalized). CONCLUSIONS: Although the current database is limited insofar as few patients with discrete social anxiety disorder would have been included, it is helpful in addressing the value of medication for patients lying on the spectrum from generalized to non-generalized and discrete social anxiety disorder. Paroxetine was effective in both more generalized and in less generalized social anxiety disorder.     

Treatment of depression with comorbid anxiety disorders: differential efficacy of paroxetine versus moclobemide

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of moclobemide versus paroxetine for the treatment of depression with comorbid anxiety disorders. Outpatients fulfilling DSM-III-R criteria for major depression or dysthymia and for a co-occurring comorbid anxiety disorder (panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder) after a 1-week run-in phase were randomly assigned to open-label moclobemide (300-600 mg/day) or paroxetine (20-40 mg/day) for 4 months. Primary criterion for response was a 50% score reduction from baseline on Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale scores. Mean changes in Clinical Global Impressions Severity of Illness and Improvement Scales (CGI-I) were also used to evaluate treatment response. Of the 123 patients included in the study, 65 were randomly assigned to moclobemide and 58 to paroxetine. At study end, the two treatment groups did not differ significantly in terms of proportion of responders. Treatment group differences emerged when comorbid anxiety diagnoses were considered. In patients with comorbid panic disorder, paroxetine was superior to moclobemide in improving both anxiety and depression (five patients out of 18 in the moclobemide group and nine out of 14 in the paroxetine group were rated as responders according to CGI-I, P = 0.04). Neither medication was superior in treating comorbid generalized anxiety disorder. These findings indicate that both moclobemide and paroxetine are effective for treatment of depression with comorbid anxiety disorders. However, in the subgroup with comorbid panic disorder, paroxetine is more effective than moclobemide in reducing both depressive and anxiety symptoms.     

Mirtazapine versus venlafaxine in hospitalized severely depressed patients with melancholic features

The aim of this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 8-week study was to compare the antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of mirtazapine and venlafaxine in the treatment of hospitalized patients with DSM-IV diagnosis of severe depressive episode with melancholic features. Patients with a baseline score of > or = 25 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) were randomly assigned to receive treatment with either mirtazapine (N = 78, 15-60 mg/day) or venlafaxine (N = 79, 75-375 mg/day, twice a day) in a rapid up-titration schedule. Efficacy was assessed with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), HAM-D-17, and Clinical Global Impression scale, and quality of life was assessed with the Quality of Life, Enjoyment, and Satisfaction Questionnaire and Quality of Life in Depression Scale. Tolerability was assessed with the Utvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser (UKU) side effect scale and by reporting adverse events. Both drugs were effective in reducing overall symptoms of depression, showing substantial reductions in group mean MADRS scores (-20.1 for mirtazapine and -17.5 for venlafaxine) and HAM-D-17 scores (-17.1 for mirtazapine and -14.6 for venlafaxine) at the end of the treatment. Although not statistically significant, at all assessment times higher percentages of patients treated with mirtazapine were classified as responders (> or =50% reduction) on the HAM-D (at endpoint, 62% vs. 52%) and MADRS (at endpoint: 64% vs. 58%). Likewise were the percentages of remitters (HAM-D score < or =7; MADRS score < or =12) also higher in the mirtazapine group. A statistically significant difference favoring mirtazapine was found on the HAM-D Sleep Disturbance factor at all assessment points (p < or = 0.03). Both treatments were well tolerated. Although slightly more subjects treated with mirtazapine reported at least one adverse event, a statistically significantly higher percentage of patients treated with venlafaxine (15.3%) than mirtazapine (5.1%) dropped out because of adverse events (p = 0.037). Quality of life improved in both treatment groups. In this study, treatment with mirtazapine resulted in a trend toward more responders and remitters than treatment with venlafaxine and in significantly fewer dropouts as a result of adverse events.