A double blind comparison of alprazolam and amitriptyline hydrochloride in the treatment of nonpsychotic depression

In a six week, double-blind, parallel study of alprazolam and amitriptyline hydrochloride in 130 outpatients suffering from moderate to severe nonpsychotic depression, alprazolam was as effective as amitriptyline hydrochloride in relieving depressive symptoms and significantly more effective in relieving symptoms of anxiety and somatization. Alprazolam showed an earlier onset of activity in most measurements of efficacy and produced fewer side effects than amitriptyline hydrochloride. Anticholinergic side effects were reported more frequently by patients taking amitriptyline hydrochloride, while drowsiness was reported more frequently by patients taking alprazolam. At the end of the study, the average daily doses were 2.4 mg alprazolam and 135 mg amitriptyline hydrochloride. The Hamilton Psychiatric Rating Scale for Depression, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Physician's Global Impressions, Patients' Global Impressions, Hopkins Self-Rating Symptom Scale, and Symptom and Side Effects Checklist were evaluated at the end of weeks 1, 2, 3 and 6 to determine and compare the efficacy and safety of the two study drugs.     

A double-blind,randomized, placebo-controlled trial of augmentation with lamotrigine or placebo in patients concomitantly treated with fluoxetine for resistant major depressive episodes

BACKGROUND: Evidence of the antidepressant efficacy of lamotrigine is increasing, although there are no placebo-controlled trials of lamotrigine augmentation in depression. The aim of this study was to assess if augmentation with lamotrigine was superior to placebo in patients who were receiving fluoxetine for resistant major depressive episodes. METHOD: Twenty-three patients who had experienced at least 1 major depressive episode that was resistant to at least 1 prior trial of antidepressant therapy were selected. These patients were treated with fluoxetine, 20 mg/day, and concomitantly randomly assigned to receive either lamotrigine (N = 13) or placebo (N = 10) for 6 weeks. The dose of lamotrigine was titrated upward from 25 mg/day to 100 mg/day. Patients suffering from bipolar II disorder (N = 8) or from major depressive disorder (N = 15) (DSM-IV criteria) were enrolled, resulting in heterogeneity of the sample. The primary outcome measure was Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score. Data were collected from 2000-2001. RESULTS: Lamotrigine was statistically superior to placebo on the Clinical Global Impressions scale at endpoint, both in absolute terms (mean +/- SD Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scores: lamotrigine, 2.15 +/- 1.28; placebo, 3.40 +/- 1.17; p =.0308) and using a responder analysis, with response defined as a Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement score of 2 or less (lamotrigine, 84.62% [N = 11]; placebo, 30.00% [N = 3]; p =.013). The effect of lamotrigine on Clinical Global Impressions scale scores was seen in both major depressive disorder and bipolar II disorder. Lamotrigine, however, failed to separate statistically from placebo on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. This failure to differentiate on a primary outcome measure is essentially a negative study result. This result is most likely an artifact of the small sample size used and the resultant limited power of the study. CONCLUSION: The results of this trial add to the literature suggesting potential efficacy of the antidepressant profile of lamotrigine. In addition, this study points to a possible role of lamotrigine as an augmentation agent in depression.     

A fixed-dose (300 mg) efficacy study of bupropion and placebo in depressed outpatients

Two hundred twenty-four outpatients with major depression entered a 6-week, five-center, double-blind trial of bupropion 300 mg/day and placebo. A total of 216 patients were included in the efficacy analysis. In the combined center analysis, greater efficacy for bupropion was found on one or more measures (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and Clinical Global Impressions) at treatment Days 21, 28, 35, and 42. Bupropion was well tolerated; only four adverse events were reported at least 5% more often in the bupropion group than in the placebo group. Six bupropion patients versus 5 placebo patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. This study extends earlier findings of efficacy for higher-dose treatment in an inpatient population to lower-dose treatment in an outpatient population.     

Modafinil treatment of fatigue in patients with ALS: A placebo‐controlled study

Our objective was to determine whether modafinil alleviates fatigue in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). A placebo controlled trial with a 3:1 modafinil:placebo randomization in doses up to 300 mg/day for 4 weeks was followed by 8 weeks of open maintenance treatment. The primary endpoint was the Clinical Global Impressions‐Improvement Scale. Secondary endpoints were the Fatigue Severity Scale, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Role Function Scale, and visual analog scales. Analysis of covariance was used to assess change at Week 4. Thirty‐two patients were randomized; 29 completed the 4‐week trial. In intention to treat (ITT) analysis, the response was 76% for modafinil versus 14% for placebo. In a completer analysis, the modafinil response rate was 86%, and the placebo response rate remained 14%. The number needed to treat was 1.6 (ITT). No medically serious adverse events were reported. Modafinil may be a promising intervention for fatigue in ALS patients. Replication in a larger study is needed. Muscle Nerve 39: 297–303, 2009     

A placebo-controlled double-blind randomized study of venlafaxine in the treatment of depression in dementia

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine in the treatment of major depression in dementia. METHODS: Thirty-one outpatients who had dementia and major depression participated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week, flexible dose clinical trial. The screening measures were Cornell Scale for depression in dementia, DSM-IV for depression and dementia and Mini-Mental State Examination. The outcome measures were response rate, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating scale and Clinical Global Impressions. RESULTS: The percentage of patients defined as Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating scale responders was approximately the same in the placebo and in the venlafaxine groups. Clinical Global Impressions showed no significant difference between the groups. The reasons for dropouts show borderline significance between the two groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the venlafaxine and placebo-treated groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support the hypothesis that venlafaxine improves mood in elderly demented patients.     

Pattern analysis of antidepressant response to fluoxetine

Seventy patients with unipolar major depressive disorder were treated with fluoxetine or placebo in a 6-week double-blind trial and were evaluated by changes in scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and the global improvement measure of the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale. High correlations were found between the changes in HAM-D scores from baseline to endpoint and the final CGI improvement ratings. In patients with moderate depression (baseline HAM-D score of 20 or more), the differences in endpoint analysis between active treatment and placebo groups were significant. A persistent pattern of improvement was noted in 27% of those receiving fluoxetine but in none of those receiving placebo. Physician and patient evaluations as determined by the improvement measure of the CGI were closely correlated.     

Effectiveness of the selective D4 antagonist sonepiprazole in schizophrenia: a placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Selective localization of dopamine D(4) receptors in the prefrontal cortex and preferential affinity of clozapine for the dopamine D(4) receptor over the D(2) receptor led to the hypothesis that the superior efficacy of clozapine may be mediated via blockade of the D(4) receptor. This hypothesis was tested by evaluating sonepiprazole, a selective D(4) dopamine antagonist, in schizophrenia patients. METHODS: We treated 467 hospitalized schizophrenia patients with scores of > or = 60 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) with sonepiprazole, olanzapine, or placebo once daily for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the mean change from baseline in the PANSS total score at 6 weeks. Secondary efficacy end points were the mean change from baseline in the PANSS factor scores, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score, the Clinical Global Impressions Severity of Illness score, and the Calgary Depression Scale score. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between placebo and any sonepiprazole dose on the primary or any secondary end point after 6 weeks of treatment. Statistically significant differences, favoring olanzapine over placebo, were observed on all efficacy end points but the Calgary Depression Scale. CONCLUSIONS: Sonepiprazole was ineffective for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia.     

Efficacy and safety of morning versus evening fluoxetine administration

A total of 120 patients who met DSM-III criteria for unipolar major depressive episode were equally randomized to fluoxetine a.m. or fluoxetine p.m. treatment groups, such that 30 patients were in each group at each of two sites. Patients received 20 to 80 mg of fluoxetine every day for 5 weeks; the dose was based on clinical response. Highly significant within-treatment improvement was reflected by changes in mean scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (total score and factors), the Raskin Depression Scale, the Covi Anxiety Scale, the Clinical Global Impressions Scale for Severity, and the Clinical Global Impressions Scale for Improvement. No significant differences occurred between the a.m. and p.m. groups for any efficacy variable. Evaluation of adverse events and vital signs indicated no clinically significant differences between the two treatment groups. The data indicate that fluoxetine is equally efficacious and well tolerated regardless of the time of day it is administered and suggest that fluoxetine may be administered at either time of day without affecting clinical course.     

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of fluoxetine in body dysmorphic disorder

BACKGROUND: Research on the pharmacotherapy of body dysmorphic disorder (BDD), a common and often disabling disorder, is limited. Available data suggest that this disorder may respond to serotonin reuptake inhibitors. However, no placebo-controlled treatment studies of BDD have been published. METHODS: Seventy-four patients with DSM-IV BDD or its delusional variant were enrolled and 67 were randomized into a placebo-controlled parallel-group study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine hydrochloride. After 1 week of single-blind placebo treatment, patients were randomized to receive 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with fluoxetine or placebo. Outcome measures included the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale Modified for Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD-YBOCS) (the primary outcome measure), the Clinical Global Impressions Scale, the Brown Assessment of Beliefs Scale, and other measures. RESULTS: Results of the BDD-YBOCS indicated that fluoxetine was significantly more effective than placebo for BDD beginning at week 8 and continuing at weeks 10 and 12 (F(1,64) = 16.5; P<.001). The response rate was 18 (53%) of 34 to fluoxetine and 6 (18%) of 33 to the placebo (chi(2)(1) = 8.8; P=.003). The BDD symptoms of delusional patients were as likely as those of nondelusional patients to respond to fluoxetine, and no delusional patients responded to the placebo. In the sample as a whole, treatment response was independent of the duration and severity of BDD and the presence of major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or a personality disorder. Fluoxetine was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Fluoxetine is safe and more effective than placebo in delusional and nondelusional patients with BDD.     

Lack of effect of intravenous immunoglobulins on tics: a double-blind placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND: Case studies and a placebo-controlled study previously suggested the effectiveness of immunomodulatory therapy in patients with tic or related disorders whose symptoms show a relationship with streptococcal infections. No data are available on the effectiveness of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) on tic severity in unselected tic disorder patients. METHOD: Thirty patients with a DSM-IV tic disorder were randomly assigned to IVIG (1 g/kg on 2 consecutive days; mean age = 28.71 years; range, 14-53 years) or placebo (mean age = 30.73 years; range, 14-63 years). Symptoms were rated with the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale, the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, and the Clinical Global Impressions scale of symptom change with regard to tic severity. These were used at baseline and on weeks 2, 4, 6, 10, and 14 posttreatment, after which blinding was broken. The study was conducted from March through August 2002. RESULTS: We observed no significant differences between both treatment groups regarding posttreatment changes in tic severity. Severity of obsessions and compulsions, which was in the subclinical range, decreased significantly in the IVIG group compared with the placebo group at week 6 (p =.02). Then, there was a 32.3% improvement in the IVIG group compared with baseline. Though this improvement was maintained over the following 8 weeks, no statistically significant differences between the IVIG and the placebo group with regard to improvements in obsessions and compulsions were detected at subsequent assessments. IVIG treatment was associated with significantly more side effects than placebo, most notably headache. CONCLUSION: Based on the present results, IVIG cannot be recommended in tic disorders.     

Levetiracetam in stiff-person syndrome

Abstract   We studied the effects of oral levetiracetam (LEV) (500 mg twice daily) in three women with stiff-person syndrome in a single-blind, placebo-controlled study. The severity of muscle rigidity and of paroxysmal symptoms was assessed by EMG and clinically by a rating scale of 0–4 and by the Patients Global Impressions Scale. LEV was well tolerated. On active treatment all patients improved as assessed by any of the objective or subjective outcome measures. No response was noticed on placebo. Our data indicate that in patients with SPS, LEV is well tolerated and has a therapeutic role in the management of both muscle stiffness and life-threatening paroxysmal respiratory spasms.     

Escitalopram in the treatment of panic disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Escitalopram, the therapeutically active isomer of the racemic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant citalopram, has shown significant anxiolytic effects in placebo-controlled clinical trials of social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and anxiety symptoms associated with major depression. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of escitalopram in outpatients diagnosed with panic disorder. METHOD: Male and female outpatients between 18 and 80 years of age meeting DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, were randomly assigned to 10 weeks of double-blind treatment with escitalopram, citalopram, or placebo in a study conducted from September 1999 to July 2001. The primary measure of efficacy was panic attack frequency at week 10 relative to baseline, as assessed by the Modified Sheehan Panic and Anticipatory Anxiety Scale. RESULTS: A total of 366 subjects (128 escitalopram patients, 119 citalopram patients, and 119 placebo patients) received at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment. The frequency of panic attacks was statistically significantly improved (p =.04), and the increase in percentage of patients with zero panic attacks reached borderline significance (p =.051), in the escitalopram-treated group relative to the placebo-treated group. Both escitalopram and citalopram statistically significantly reduced panic disorder symptoms and severity versus placebo at endpoint (p 相似文献   

Alprazolam in the treatment of panic attack patients with and without major depression

Sixteen patients with panic attacks were treated with alprazolam at an anxiety clinic between March 1982 and April 1983. For all patients charts were reviewed for baseline data and treatment results at 1 and 6 months. Quantitated self-rating scales and the Clinical Global Impressions scale were used to assess progress. Alprazolam appeared effective for panic, agoraphobia, and depressive symptoms in 7 of 11 patients with either panic disorder or agoraphobia with panic attacks (DSM-III-defined diagnoses); side effects occurred in 4 of the 11 patients, were limited to oversedation, and resulted in no discontinuations of drug. However, alprazolam was ineffective in controlling panic, agoraphobia, and depression in 5 patients with panic attacks and secondary major depressive episode; for this group of patients, side effects were apparently paradoxical and required drug discontinuation in 3 of these 5 patients.     

Donepezil as add-on treatment of psychotic symptoms in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer's type

Traditionally, the neuropsychiatric symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been managed with neuroleptics or benzodiazepines, which have serious side effects. Preliminary observations suggest the possible value of cholinesterase inhibitors in the amelioration of psychotic symptoms in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer's type, dementia with Lewy bodies, and in patients with Parkinson's disease. Twelve inpatients with AD with psychotic symptoms and lack of improvement of their delusions/hallucinations during perphenazine treatment (8 mg/day) for 3 weeks received random open-label donepezil 5 mg daily in addition to an ongoing treatment of 8 mg/day perphenazine or 16 mg/day perphenazine. Assessments conducted at baseline and after weeks 2 and 4 included the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Global Deterioration Scale, the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale, and the Clinical Global Impressions scale. Frequency of extrapyramidal symptoms was measured according to the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale. The donepezil-perphenazine group exhibited substantially greater and clinical improvements in mental state. At the end of the trial (4 weeks), Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale scores revealed significant differences between both groups (p = 0.006). The Clinical Global Impressions scale and the Mini-Mental State Examination scores also showed significant differences between the donepezil-perphenazine group and the perphenazine group (p = 0.028 and p = 0.027 respectively). No significant differences were found in the Global Deterioration Scale scores. Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale scores showed a significant deterioration in extrapyramidal symptoms in the perphenazine group compared with the donepezil-perphenazine group (p = 0.016). Donepezil augmentation of neuroleptics may be appropriate for those patients for whom neuroleptic monotherapy either does not lead to symptom remission or is associated with intolerable adverse effects. This was an open-label study and there is need for larger studies with double-blind control and a long-term study design to define the efficacy of donepezil for patients with AD and psychotic symptoms.     

Double-blind randomized trial of the benzodiazepine derivative metaclazepam as compared with placebo treatment of outpatients with anxiety syndromes

In a double-blind randomized study the therapeutic anxiolytic efficacy and the tolerance of metaclazepam were tested in comparison with placebo. The study was performed according to the model of the "Study Group - Psychotropic Drugs in Medical Practice" (Laakmann and Hippius, 1981; Laakmann et al., 1982). A total of 121 male and female patients aged between 18 and 50 years were treated either with placebo, or with 15 mg or with 30 mg metaclazepam/day for two weeks, during which period they were examined on Day 0, Day 7 and Day 14. The patients suffered from a neurotic anxiety syndrome. In the physician's rating metaclazepam showed a therapeutic effect significantly superior to that of placebo, both in the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) and in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). This effect was already noticeable at the end of the first week. Similarly, a significantly superior anxiolytic activity of metaclazepam as compared with placebo was observed in the patients' ratings in the course of treatment. This was true for the Erlangen Anxiety Scale (EKSA) as well as for the Scale of Well-being (Befindlichkeits-Skala [Bf-S]) and the List of Complaints (Beschwerden-Liste [B-L]) by von Zerssen. No difference in efficacy could be found between the doses of 15 mg and 30 mg metaclazepam/day, neither in the physicians' nor in the patient's ratings. Compared with placebo, twice as many undesirable side effects were recorded with 15 mg metaclazepam and three times as many with 30 mg metaclazepam. This was clearly demonstrated by the significantly higher frequency of daytime fatigue after 30 mg metaclazepam.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

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.     

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of alprazolam and desipramine in depressed outpatients

Fifty-two adult depressed outpatients fulfilling Research Diagnostic Criteria for Definite Major Depressive Disorder were enrolled in a double-blind study comparing the antidepressant effects of alprazolam versus desipramine. Twenty-nine patients completed the seven week (one week placebo followed by six weeks of active drug) study. The mean daily dose of alprazolam and desipramine at study termination was 3.34 mg and 192 mg respectively. Based on psychometric ratings of depression (Hamilton Scale) and severity of illness (Clinical Global Impressions) there was no significant difference between alprazolam and desipramine at the end of six weeks of active drug treatment. Both medications were well tolerated with drowsiness being the most common side effect of alprazolam, and insomnia, dry mouth, and constipation, the complaints most associated with desipramine.     

Duloxetine, 60 mg once daily,for major depressive disorder: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment advances, major depressive disorder (MDD) is still a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Current therapies frequently fall short of providing full remission. In addition, physical symptoms are commonly seen in MDD patients, increasing overall morbidity and health care utilization. Duloxetine hydrochloride, a dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, was evaluated for efficacy and tolerability/safety in the treatment of MDD and associated physical symptoms. METHOD: In this multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study, adult patients with DSM-IV MDD were randomly assigned to receive placebo (N = 122) or duloxetine (60 mg/day, N = 123) for 9 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) total score. Painful physical symptoms were assessed using visual analog scales, and global illness and quality of life were evaluated using the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scale, the Patient Global Impressions-Improvement scale, and the Quality of Life in Depression Scale. Safety and tolerability were determined by monitoring discontinuation rates, adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory results. RESULTS: Duloxetine was significantly superior to placebo (p < .001) in reducing HAM-D-17 total scores, starting at week 2. The estimated probability of remission for duloxetine-treated patients (44%) was almost 3 times that of placebo patients (16%). Duloxetine significantly reduced painful physical symptoms in comparison with placebo. Discontinuation due to adverse events for duloxetine-treated patients (13.8%) compared favorably with the rates reported for SSRIs in other studies. Nausea, dry mouth, and somnolence were the most common adverse events; no significant incidence of hypertension was seen. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine, 60 mg/day, is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for MDD that reduces painful physical symptoms. These findings suggest that duloxetine may be a first-line treatment for patients with MDD and associated painful physical symptoms.     

Double-blind,placebo-controlled study of L-carnosine supplementation in children with autistic spectrum disorders

L-Carnosine, a dipeptide, can enhance frontal lobe function or be neuroprotective. It can also correlate with gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-homocarnosine interaction, with possible anticonvulsive effects. We investigated 31 children with autistic spectrum disorders in an 8-week, double-blinded study to determine if 800 mg L-carnosine daily would result in observable changes versus placebo. Outcome measures were the Childhood Autism Rating Scale, the Gilliam Autism Rating Scale, the Expressive and Receptive One-Word Picture Vocabulary tests, and Clinical Global Impressions of Change. Children on placebo did not show statistically significant changes. After 8 weeks on L-carnosine, children showed statistically significant improvements on the Gilliam Autism Rating Scale (total score and the Behavior, Socialization, and Communication subscales) and the Receptive One-Word Picture Vocabulary test (all P < .05). Improved trends were noted on other outcome measures. Although the mechanism of action of L-carnosine is not well understood, it may enhance neurologic function, perhaps in the enterorhinal or temporal cortex.     

A double-blind placebo-controlled study of lithium in hospitalized aggressive children and adolescents with conduct disorder

BACKGROUND: A subgroup of children and adolescents with conduct disorder are characterized by severe and persistent aggression. Although there is no agreed on treatment for such aggression, lithium carbonate has shown promise in some studies involving children. Our study was designed to critically assess the efficacy of lithium in the treatment of aggression in children and adolescents using a measure specific for aggression. METHODS: Subjects were inpatients with conduct disorder hospitalized because of severe and chronic aggression. A parallel-groups design was used in this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with randomization to lithium or placebo. Only those who met the aggression criterion during the 2-week placebo-baseline period were randomized to 4 weeks of treatment. Outcome measures included Clinical Global Impressions, the Global Clinical Judgements (Consensus) Scale, and the Overt Aggression Scale. RESULTS: Eighty-six inpatients enrolled in the study; 40 (33 male and 7 female; median age, 12.5 years) entered and completed the treatment phase. Lithium was statistically and clinically superior to placebo. Sixteen of 20 subjects in the lithium group were responders on the Consensus ratings vs 6 of 20 in the placebo group (P=.004). Ratings on the Overt Aggression Scale decreased significantly for the lithium group vs the placebo group (P=.04). More than half of the subjects in the lithium group experienced nausea, vomiting, and urinary frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Lithium is a safe and effective short-term treatment for aggression in inpatients with conduct disorder, although its use is associated with adverse effects.