Brand-Name Antidepressants Outperform Their Generic Counterparts in Preventing Hospitalization for Depression: The Real-World Evidence from Taiwan

BackgroundGeneric antidepressants are approved on the market based on evidence of bioequivalence to their brand-name versions. We aimed to assess whether generic antidepressants exert equal effectiveness as their brand-name counterparts for treating patients with depressive disorders.MethodsIn a nationwide, population-based cohort in Taiwan from 1997 through 2013, patients with a diagnosis of a depressive disorder aged between 18 and 65 years who were new users of antidepressant drugs were classified into either the brand-name group or the generic group. All patients were followed up until medication discontinuation or the end of the study period. We assessed the risk for hospitalization as a primary outcome and augmentation therapy, daily dose, medication discontinuation, or switching to another antidepressant as secondary outcomes.ResultsA total of 277 651 brand-name users (35.8% male; mean age: 41.2 years) and 270 583 generic users (35.8% male; mean age: 41.0 years) were divided into 10 different antidepressant groups (fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine, escitalopram, citalopram, venlafaxine, mirtazapine, moclobemide, imipramine, and bupropion). We found that patients treated with the generic form of sertraline, paroxetine, escitalopram, venlafaxine, mirtazapine, and bupropion demonstrated significantly higher risks of psychiatric hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratios ranged from 1.20–2.34), compared to their brand-name counterparts. The differences between brand-name antidepressants and their generic counterparts in secondary outcomes varied across different drugs.ConclusionsCompared to most generic antidepressants, brand-name drugs exhibited more protective effects on psychiatric hospitalization for depressive patients. These findings could serve as an important reference for clinicians when encountering patients with depressive disorder.     

On estimands arising from misspecified semiparametric rate-based analysis of recurrent episodic conditions

Marginal rate-based analyses are widely used for the analysis of recurrent events in clinical trials. In many areas of application, the events are not instantaneous but rather signal the onset of a symptomatic episode representing a recurrent infection, respiratory exacerbation, or bout of acute depression. In rate-based analyses, it is unclear how to best handle the time during which individuals are experiencing symptoms and hence are not at risk. We derive the limiting value of the Nelson-Aalen estimator and estimators of the regression coefficients under a semiparametric rate-based model in terms of an underlying two-state process. We investigate the impact of the distribution of the episode durations, heterogeneity, and dependence on the asymptotic and finite sample properties of standard estimators. We also consider the impact of these features on power in trials designed to test intervention effects on rate functions. An application to a trial of individuals with herpes simplex virus is given for illustration.