A randomised, double-blind comparison of milnacipran and imipramine in the treatment of depression. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor Val66Met polymorphism and 6-month antidepressant remission in depressed Caucasian patients. A comparative study of milnacipran and imipramine in the treatment of major depressive disorder The Alpha 2A-Adrenergic Receptor Gene Polymorphism Modifies Antidepressant Responses to Milnacipran Antidepressants and driving ability: results from a clinical study. Antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of milnacipran, a dual serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor: a comparison with fluvoxamine Does pretreatment testing for serotonin transporter polymorphisms lead to earlier effects of drug treatment in patients with major depression? A decision-analytic model. Efficacy of milnacipran in patients with fibromyalgia. Double-blind study of the efficacy and safety of milnacipran and imipramine in elderly patients with major depressive episode. Safety and Tolerability of Dexmecamylamine (TC-5214) Adjunct to Ongoing Antidepressant Therapy in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder and an Inadequate Response to Antidepressant Therapy: Results of a Long-Term Study Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and lofepramine: randomised controlled trial. Controlled comparison of milnacipran and fluoxetine in major depression Long‐term efficacy and safety of milnacipran compared to clomipramine in patients with major depression Influence of the tyrosine hydroxylase val81met polymorphism and catechol-O-methyltransferase val158met polymorphism on the antidepressant effect of milnacipran. The G196A polymorphism of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor gene and the antidepressant effect of milnacipran and fluvoxamine Combination of inositol and serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the treatment of depression Antidepressant Class, Age, and the Risk of Deliberate Self-Harm: A Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study of SSRI and SNRI Users in the USA Treatment of Post-Myocardial Infarction Depressive Disorder: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial With Mirtazapine Comparison of desipramine and citalopram treatments for depression in Parkinson's disease: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. A randomised controlled trial to compare the cost-effectiveness of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and lofepramine. Reboxetine, the first selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor antidepressant: Efficacy and tolerability in 2613 patients Notes on the use of fluvoxamine as treatment of depression in HIV-1-infected subjects. Efficacy and Tolerability of Reboxetine Compared with Citalopram: A Double-blind Study in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder A double‐blind six months comparative study of milnacipran and clomipramine in major depressive disorder
This multicentre , double-blind , r and omised trial in 109 patients compared the efficacy and tolerance of the novel selective serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor ( SNRI ) antidepressant milnacipran ( 50 mg twice daily , n=53 ) with the established tricyclic agent imipramine ( 75 mg twice daily , n=56 ) over a period of 6 weeks , in patients with major depression ( Montgomery-Asberg depression rating score ( MADRS ) > or = 25 ) . Initiation of antidepressant medication was conducted during a 2-week period of hospitalisation , after a 3- to 7-day washout period . Concomitant psychiatric medication was limited to lorazepam , cyamemazine , chloral hydrate and long-term uncomplicated lithium therapy . Assessment for efficacy using the MADRS and Hamilton rating scales of depression , a visual analogue scale and global evaluation revealed both agents to be highly effective ( P=0.0001 ) in this group of patients . Milnacipran was found to be of similar efficacy to imipramine .  Tolerance , assessed by physiological and biochemical examinations with routine inventory and spontaneous report of adverse events , revealed a clear advantage for milnacipran . The incidence of anticholinergic events with milnacipran was about half that with imipramine and the overall incidence of adverse events by either reporting method was markedly lower with milnacipran than with imipramine . Furthermore , the patient drop-out rate with imipramine was double that experienced with milnacipran . Milnacipran appears to possess equal antidepressant efficacy to imipramine but with markedly superior tolerance . Therefore , milnacipran constitutes an important new treatment option in major depression BACKGROUND Whether the Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor ( BDNF ) Val66Met polymorphism can predict antidepressant drug efficacy in depressed patients remains unclear , suggesting that it may depend on antidepressant classes . We assessed the impact of Val66Met polymorphism on antidepressant response and remission depending on antidepressant classes . METHODS In a 6-month prospect i ve , real-world setting , treatment study , 345 Caucasian depressed patients requiring a new or different drug treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor ( SSRI ) , a serotonin and noradrenalin reuptake inhibitor ( SNRI ) or a tricyclic antidepressant ( TCA )  , were genotyped and assessed for response and remission . RESULTS 231 ( 67 % ) patients were homozygous for the Val66 allele ( Val/Val ) and 114 ( 33 % ) were carriers of Met allele ( Met ) . 152 ( 44.1 % ) patients were treated with SSRI , the others with SNRI/TCA . Both response and remission were explained by interactions between the Val66Met polymorphism and antidepressant drug classes ( multivariate models adjusted for propensity-scores : p=0.02 and p=0.03 respectively ) . With SSRI , Val/Val patients had a higher response rate 3 months post-treatment than Met patients ( 68.1 % versus 44 % ; adjusted-OR : 3.04 , IC95 % [ 1.05 ; 9.37 ] , p=0.04 ) . With SNRI/TCA , Val/Val patients had a lower remission rate 6 months post-treatment than Met patients ( 33.3 % versus 60.9 % , adjusted-OR : 0.27 , IC95 % [ 0.09 ; 0.76 ] , p=0.02 ) . LIMITATIONS Limited sample size . CONCLUSIONS This study argues for a personalized prescription of antidepressants in Caucasian patients with major depressive disorder , based on the BDNF Val66Met polymorphism : SSRI should be preferred for Val/Val patients and SNRI/TCA for Met patients . Further studies are required to confirm these data SUMMARY The antidepressant efficacy and safety of milnacipran , a dual action antidepressant drug which inhibits the reuptake of serotonin and noradrenaline , was compared with that of the tricyclic antidepressant , imipramine , in a multi-centre , double-blind , r and omised , parallel group , comparative trial in 5 hospital centres in Spain . One hundred patients hospitalised with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatry Association ( third revision ) , with a minimum score of 25 on the Montgomery and Åsberg Depression Rating Scale were treated for 6 weeks with milnacipran ( 100 mg/day ) or imipramine ( 150 mg/day ) . Both treatments showed similar efficacy in reducing depressive symptoms . The frequency of most adverse events in the milnacipran-treated patients was lower than that observed in the imipramine group , particularly those related to anticholinergic symptoms . Dysuria and shivering , however , were more common with milnacipran . The results of this study support others which have demonstrated that milnacipran has equivalent efficacy but superior tolerability to a tricyclic antidepressant such as imipramine Objective : The alpha 2A-adrenergic receptor ( ADRA2A ) plays a central role in the regulation of systemic sympathetic activity . Recently , the functional defect of ADRA2A has been implicated as a cause of depression , attention deficit hyperactivity disorder , and Tourette syndrome . In this study , the effect of genetic variants of the ADRA2A gene on the response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors ( SNRIs ) was examined in depressed patients . Method : Ninety-three Japanese depressed patients were recruited in the present study , assigned r and omly to paroxetine or milnacipran , and assessed by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( HAM-D ) scoring every 2 weeks before and after drug administration . The ADRA2A C-1297 G polymorphism was considered in the association analysis with the efficacy of antidepressants . Results : There were significant differences in the HAM-D percent score change over time ( P = 0.019 ) among C/C , C/G , and G/G of the ADRA2A C-1297 G polymorphism in the total subjects . The C allele carriers of the ADRA2A C-1297 G polymorphism showed a significantly better improvement than G/G subjects at weeks 2 , 4 , and over time ( P = 0.037 ) in the milnacipran group . Discussion : Our findings suggest that ADRA2A plays an important role in depression therapy . The level of ADRA2A expression could be associated with the efficacy of SSRIs/SNRIs , especially milnacipran , although the functional change brought about by C-1297 G polymorphism has not yet been fully identified in vivo and in vitro . Conclusions : The ADRA2A polymorphism could be a reasonable c and i date to predict the response to milnacipran . Our results are still preliminary , and a large sample size will be required to confirm our findings . However , to the best of our knowledge , this study is the first to suggest a possible association of ADRA2A variants with the SNRI response OBJECTIVE Psychomotor disturbances can frequently be found in depressed patients and may have an important influence on the ability to drive . Additionally , effects of sedation , as seen with some antidepressants , probably impair driving performance . The present study was design ed to evaluate the effects of antidepressant monotherapy on psychomotor functions related to car-driving skills in depressive patients in a routine clinical setting . METHOD In patients ( N = 100 ) who met the ICD-10 and DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder were tested under steady-state plasma level conditions prior to being discharged to out-patient treatment . The study ran from January 2004 through March 2005 . All patients participated voluntarily and gave informed consent . According to the German guidelines for road and traffic safety , data were collected with the computerized Act & React Testsystem ART-90 and the Wiener Testsystem , measuring visual perception , reaction time , selective attention , vigilance , and stress tolerance . Psychopathologic symptoms were rated with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression . RESULTS Before discharge to outpatient treatment , 24 % of the patients tested were without clinical ly relevant psychomotor disturbances . In 60 % of the cases , mild to moderate impairments could be seen , and about 16 % of the patients were considered as severely impaired in psychomotor functions related to car-driving abilities . Data show that patients treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) or the noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant ( NaSSA ) mirtazapine had an altogether better test performance in comparison with patients receiving tricyclic antidepressants ( TCAs ) . Differences were most pronounced in measures of reactivity , stress tolerance , and selective attention . Statistically significant differences between patients treated with TCAs or the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor ( SNRI ) venlafaxine could not be found . Among the newer antidepressants there is an advantage for patients treated with mirtazapine , especially in tasks with high multi-channel perception and output dem and s. CONCLUSION About 16 % of depressive patients discharged from hospital to outpatient treatment must be considered unfit to drive . In 60 % of the cases , patients performed at a question able level of fitness for driving , and it seems justified to counsel patients individually , taking into account compensational factors . Data point to an advantage for patients treated with SSRIs or mirtazapine when compared with TCAs or venlafaxine . However , causal relationships can not be drawn from our data The antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of milnacipran , a dual action serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor , were compared with those of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor , fluvoxamine , in 113 patients with moderate to severe major depression . Treatment with milnacipran , 50 mg b.d . for 6 weeks , produced a significantly greater reduction in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) scores than fluvoxamine , 100 mg b.d . ( P = 0.007 ; 65.4 % versus 49.9 % , respectively ) ; significantly greater decreases were also seen on days 7 ( P = 0.04 ) and 28 ( P = 0.03 ) . The response rate ( the proportion of patients showing a decrease in MADRS scores of at least 50 % ) was 78.9 % in patients receiving milnacipran , compared with 60.7 % in fluvoxamine-treated patients ( P = 0.04 ) . Milnacipran also produced greater improvements in 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores ( P = 0.05 ) . On the Clinical Global Impression Improvement scale , 77.2 % of milnacipran-treated patients were rated as considerably or markedly improved , compared with 60.7 % of patients receiving fluvoxamine ( P = 0.06 chi-squared ) . Both treatments were well tolerated ; the only significant difference between the two groups was a higher incidence of tremor and drowsiness in patients treated with fluvoxamine . It is concluded that milnacipran may offer some advantages over selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors , such as fluvoxamine , in the treatment of moderate to severe major depression BACKGROUND An estimated 30 % to 40 % of patients with depression do not sufficiently respond to treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) and the period in which treatment efficacy can be assessed is relatively long . Therefore , a test to identify potential nonresponders could be useful in the treatment of depression . Serotonin transporter gene ( SLC6A4 ) variations have been reported to account for differences in the way individuals respond to SSRI treatment . OBJECTIVE A decision-analytic model was used to assess whether pretreatment genetic testing for 5-HTTLPR , a polymorphism of the SLC6A4 genotype , could be an efficient tool in the treatment of depression . METHODS A theoretical clinical decision-analytic model was constructed to compare the current treatment strategy in The Netherl and s with an alternative strategy for the treatment of depression . Under treatment guidelines in The Netherl and s , all patients with depression receive SSRI treatment ( nontesting strategy ) . Under the alternative strategy , genetic testing would be performed to identify which class of antidepressant would be the best choice for initiation of treatment ( genetic testing strategy ) . Probabilities ( predicted results ) for this model were based on data from previous studies and the opinions of experts in the field of psychopharmacology . To test the robustness of the model , 6- and 12-week remission rates for patients treated with SSRIs were varied in a sensitivity analysis using a predetermined range that was established based on expert opinion . Threshold analyses were performed on the parameters of serotonin transporter genotype frequency and response and nonresponse rates for patients receiving SSRIs , serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors ( SNRIs ) , and tricyclic antidepressants ( TCAs ) to determine the value for a variable at which it could be concluded that a change in treatment strategy would be preferred . RESULTS When genetic testing was performed before an antidepressant was prescribed , 64.6 % of patients were predicted to be in remission after 6 weeks of treatment compared with 60.0 % of patients who did not receive genetic testing . After 12 weeks , 79.5 % of patients in the testing group who received an SNRI as initial treatment and 83.2 % of those who received a TCA initially were predicted to be in remission compared with 76.7 % of patients in the nontesting group . Sensitivity analyses indicated that the model was robust to variation of probability estimates within their plausible ranges . However , these findings were based on a theoretic model and did not include cost assessment . Pretreatment genetic testing must be evaluated further in r and omized clinical trials and costs must be assessed before implementing this strategy in routine psychiatric practice can be recommended . CONCLUSIONS The findings of this study suggest that performing genetic testing before prescribing antidepressant treatment may lead to greater numbers of patients experiencing remission early in treatment OBJECTIVE Fibromyalgia ( FM ) is a common musculoskeletal condition characterized by widespread pain , tenderness , and a variety of other somatic symptoms . Current treatments are modestly effective . Arguably , the best studied and most effective compounds are tricyclic antidepressants ( TCA ) . Milnacipran , a nontricyclic compound that inhibits the reuptake of both serotonin and norepinephrine , may provide many of the beneficial effects of TCA with a superior side effect profile . METHODS One hundred twenty-five patients with FM were r and omly assigned in a 3:3:2 ratio to receive milnacipran twice daily , milnacipran once daily , or placebo for 3 months in a double-blind dose-escalation trial ; 92 % of twice-daily and 81 % of once-daily participants achieved dose escalation to the target milnacipran dose of 200 mg . RESULTS The primary endpoint was reduction of pain . Both the once- and twice-daily groups showed statistically significant improvements in pain , as well as improvements in global well being , fatigue , and other domains . Response rates for patients receiving milnacipran were equal in patients with and without comorbid depression , but placebo response rates were considerably higher in depressed patients , leading to significantly greater overall efficacy in the nondepressed group . CONCLUSION In this Phase II study , milnacipran led to statistically significant improvements in pain and other symptoms of FM . The effect sizes were equal to those previously found with TCA , and the drug was generally well tolerated The novel antidepressant agent milnacipran is a dual and equipotent serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor . The aim of this double-blind study was to compare the efficacy and safety of milnacipran ( 50 mg twice daily ) with that of imipramine ( 50 mg twice daily ) in elderly patients with major depressive episode . A total of 219 patients were r and omly assigned to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with either milnacipran or imipramine ;  72 patients withdrew from the study . At the end of treatment no significant differences were found between milnacipran and imipramine in antidepressant efficacy . A significantly greater number of side-effects , particularly anticholinergic effects , was observed in the imipramine group . Milnacipran may be preferable to imipramine in elderly depressed patients , as it provides the same antidepressant activity as imipramine with a lower incidence of side-effects , and does not impair cognitive ability Abstract Safety and tolerability are important considerations when selecting patients ’ treatment for major depressive disorder . We report the long-term safety and tolerability of the nicotinic channel modulator dexmecamylamine ( TC-5214 ) , adjunct to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors ( SNRIs ) in patients with major depressive disorder and who had an inadequate response to antidepressants . This 52-week , double-blind , placebo-controlled study explored the long-term safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine .  Patients were r and omized 3:1 to receive flexibly dosed dexmecamylamine 1 to 4 mg adjunct to SSRI/SNRI or placebo plus SSRI/SNRI . The patient population comprised inadequate responders from 2 Phase III acute  dexmecamylamine  studies ( NCT01157078 [ study 002 ] , NCT01153347 [ study 004 ] ) and de novo patients who responded inadequately during a 6-week open-label antidepressant treatment period preceding r and omization .  Safety and tolerability were assessed by monitoring adverse events , vital signs , and physical and laboratory parameters . Descriptive statistical analyses were performed on most efficacy-related end points . Sustained efficacy was analyzed using logistic regression . Overall , 813 patients were r and omized ( 610 received dexmecamylamine , 203 received placebo ) . In total , 82.4 % and 84.6 % of patients , respectively , experienced an adverse event . Adverse events occurring more frequently with dexmecamylamine vs placebo were constipation ( 19.6 % vs 6.0 % ) , dizziness ( 12.0 % vs 7.0 % ) , and dry mouth ( 9.7 % vs 5.0 % ) . Back pain ( 2.8 % vs 8.5 % ) , weight increase ( 4.4 % vs 7.0 % ) , and fatigue ( 5.6 % vs 7.5 % ) occurred more frequently in placebo-treated patients . No notable differences were observed between dexmecamylamine and placebo for any secondary end point . In this long-term study , safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine were consistent with that reported in acute Phase III studies of dexmecamylamine BACKGROUND The cost-effectiveness of tricyclic antidepressants ( TCAs ) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) has not been compared in a prospect i ve study in primary care . AIMS To determine the relative cost-effectiveness of TCAs , SSRIs and lofepramine in UK primary care . METHOD An open-label , three-arm r and omised trial with a preference arm . Practitioners referred 327 patients with incident depression . RESULTS No significant differences were found in effectiveness or cost-effectiveness . The numbers of depression-free weeks over 12 months ( on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale ) were 25.3 ( 95 % CI 21.3 - 29.0 ) for TCAs , 28.3 ( 95 % CI 24.3 - 32.2 ) for SSRIs and 24.6 ( 95 % CI 20.6 - 28.9 ) for lofepramine .  Mean health service costs per patient were pound 762 ( 95 % CI 553 - 1059 ) for TCAs , pound 875 ( 95 % CI 675 - 1355 ) for SSRIs and pound 867 ( 95 % CI 634 - 1521 ) for lofepramine .  Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves suggested SSRIs were most cost-effective ( with a probability of up to 0.6 ) . CONCLUSIONS The findings support a policy of recommending SSRIs as first-choice antidepressants in primary care The efficacy and the tolerance of milnacipran ( 100 mg/day ) , a second generation antidepressant which equipotently inhibits both noradrenaline and serotonin reuptake , was compared to fluoxetine ( 20 mg/day ) , a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor , in two parallel groups of , respectively , 97 and 93 major depressive out patients . The duration of the study was 6 weeks , with assessment s every 2 weeks by means of the Montgomery and Asberg depression scale ( MADRS ) , the Hamilton depression scale , the clinical global impressions ( CGI ) , and a checklist of symptoms and side-effects . Results showed significant superiority of fluoxetine over milnacipran on most rating instruments : MADRS ( P=0.01 ) including five individual items , Hamilton depression scale ( P=0.002 ) including ten individual items , CGI of severity ( P=0.01 ) and therapeutical index ( P=0.002 ) . On visual analogue scales assessing the clinical profile of the compounds , fluoxetine was rated as exhibiting more psychostimulating activity than milnacipran ( P=0.0008 ) . The tolerance of the two antidepressants was very similar , with the exception of symptoms of dizziness which were more frequently reported with milnacipran ( P=0.01 ) . These differences in efficacy favoring fluoxetine could result from the selection of a dose of milnacipran below the optimal therapeutic dose for this type of psychiatric patients or to the administration of the compounds in single daily intakes , whereas milnacipran possesses a plasma elimination half-life of only 7 Milnacipran is a new antidepressive drug , a combined noradrenaline/serotonin ( NA/5‐HT ) reuptake inhibitor , which has been suggested to be as effective as and better tolerated than tricyclic antidepressants . Since long‐term studies are lacking , we compared the efficacy , safety and tolerability of milnacipran and clomipramine in a double‐blind , r and omized , parallel‐group study setting during 26 weeks of treatment in patients with major depression . A total of 107 patients were treated with either milnacipran  ( n=52 ) or clomipramine ( n=55 ) . Due to active treatment of duration less than 12 days in four patients and protocol deviation in one patient , in total 47 milnacipran‐treated patients were eligible for efficacy analysis . Nine patients in the clomipramine group continued on active treatment for less than 12 days . Thus 46 clomipramine‐treated patients were finally included in the efficacy analysis . After 1 week of dose escalation , there was a fixed dosage regimen of either milnacipran ( 200 mg daily ) or clomipramine ( 150 mg daily ) during weeks 2 to 10 , followed by flexible dosing of milnacipran ( 100,150 or 200 mg daily ) or clomipramine ( 75 , 100 or 150 mg daily ) during weeks 11 to 26 . A total of 53 patients ( 49 % ) completed the 26‐week study period ; 21 % ( 11/52 ) of the patients in the milnacipran group and 38 % ( 21/55 ) of the patients in the clomipramine group discontinued their medication prematurely due to adverse events , whereas 19 % ( 10/52 ) of those on milnacipran and 7 % ( 4/55 ) of those on clomipramine treatment withdrew due to either lack of efficacy or clinical deterioration . The mean change ( ±SD ) in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAMD ) score between the baseline and the last rating ranged from 23.7±3.1 to 12.0±9.5 in the milnacipran‐treated patients and from 23.1±3.5 to 8.0±8.5 in the clomipramine‐treated patients , revealing a significant difference in favour of clomipramine . In total 58 % of the milnacipran‐treated patients vs. 72 % of the clomipramine‐treated patients showed a ≥50 % reduction in their baseline HAMD scores and 45 % vs. 63 % had an HAMD score of ≤7 at the last rating , respectively . Moreover , the time to the onset of the antidepressant action ( defined as ≥50 % reduction of the baseline HAMD score ) showed a significant difference in favour of clomipramine . In addition , clomipramine was significantly more efficacious in patients with a baseline HAMD score of ≥24 as evidence d by the analysis of the HAMD score at week 6 and at the last rating . The Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) and the Clinical Global Impression ( CGI ) scale did not show significant differences between the treatment groups . The safety analysis did not reveal any differences of clinical significance in cardiovascular variables between the study drugs . Dry mouth was significantly less frequently reported by the milnacipran‐treated patients during the early and later phases ( weeks 6 to 26 ) of the study , while insomnia was more common in the milnacipran group during weeks 1 to 6 . In conclusion , milnacipran appeared to be less effective  than clomipramine in the long‐term treatment of depression . The side‐effects of the drugs differed to a certain extent , and milnacipran tended to be somewhat better tolerated  than clomipramine OBJECTIVE Genetic polymorphisms of the noradrenergic pathway can be factors to predict the effect of antidepressants when their pharmacological mechanisms of action include the noradrenergic system . The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the tyrosine hydroxylase ( TH ) val81met and catechol-O-methyltransferase ( COMT ) val158met polymorphisms are associated with the antidepressant effect of milnacipran , a serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor . METHOD Eighty-one Japanese patients with major depressive disorder were treated with milnacipran for 6 weeks . Severity of depression was assessed with the Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) . Assessment s were carried out at baseline and at 1 , 2 , 4 and 6 weeks of treatment . The method of polymerase chain reaction was used to determine allelic variants . RESULTS The met/met genotype of the COMT val158met polymorphism was associated with a significantly faster therapeutic effect of milnacipran in the MADRS score during this study . No influence of the TH val81met polymorphism on the antidepressant effect of milnacipran was detected . CONCLUSION These results suggest that the COMT val158met polymorphism in part determines the antidepressant effect of milnacipran Prediction of the response to different classes of antidepressants has been an important matter of concern in the field of psychopharmacology . The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether the G196A polymorphism of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor ( BDNF ) gene is associated with the antidepressant effect of milnacipran , a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor , and fluvoxamine , a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor .  The subjects of our previous study of milnacipran ( n = 80 ) and fluvoxamine ( n = 54 ) were included in the present study . Severity of depression was assessed with the Montgomery Åsberg depression rating scale ( MADRS ) . Assessment s were carried out at baseline and at 1 , 2 , 4 and 6 weeks of treatment . Polymerase chain reaction was used to determine allelic variants . In all subjects receiving milnacipran or fluvoxamine , the G/A genotype of the BDNF G196A polymorphism was associated with a significantly better therapeutic effect in the MADRS scores during this study . When milnacipran and fluvoxamine-treated subjects were analysed independently , the G/A genotype group showed greater reduction of MADRS scores than other genotype groups , irrespective of which antidepressant was administered . These results suggest that the BDNF G196A polymorphism in part determines the antidepressant effect of both milnacipran and fluvoxamine BACKGROUND Inositol has been reported to be an effective treatment in depression , and we hypothesized that inositol addition might enhance or speed up response to  serotonin selective reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) . METHODS Twenty-seven depressed patients completed a double-blind controlled 4-week trial of SSRI plus placebo or SSRI plus inositol .  Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used as an assessment tool at baseline , and 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4 weeks . RESULTS No significant difference was found between the two treatment groups . CONCLUSIONS Previous studies combining different effective antidepressant therapies similarly found no evidence for additive effects [ e.g. , monoamine oxidase inhibitors ( MAOI ) plus tricyclic antidepressants ( TCA ) , TCA plus lithium ] . By contrast , augmentation by lithium or MAOI after a failed course of antidepressant treatment is effective and should be studied with inositol Background The US Food and Drug Administration ’s meta-analyses of placebo-controlled antidepressant trials found approximately twice the rate of suicidal behaviors among children and adults aged 24 years and younger who were r and omized to receive antidepressant medication  than among those who were r and omized to placebo .  Rates of suicidal behavior were similar for subjects aged 25–64 years whether they received antidepressants or placebo , and subjects aged 65 years or older r and omized to antidepressants were found to have lower rates of suicidal behavior . The age-stratified FDA meta-analyses did not have adequate power to investigate rates of suicidal behaviors by antidepressant drug class . Objective Our objective was to assess the risk of deliberate self-harm associated with the two most commonly prescribed classes of antidepressant agents . Design Propensity score matched cohort study of incident users of antidepressant agents . Setting Population -based healthcare utilization data of US residents . Patients US residents aged 10–64 years with a recorded diagnosis of depression who initiated use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) or serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors ( SNRIs ) between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2010.Main Outcome Measures ICD-9 external cause of injury codes E950.x – E958.x ( deliberate self-harm ) . Results A total of 102,647 patients aged between 10 and 24 years , and 338,021 aged between 25 and 64 years , initiated therapy with antidepressants . Among 10–24 year olds , prior to propensity score matching , 75,675 initiated therapy with SSRIs and 5,344 initiated SNRIs . After matching , there were 5,344 SNRI users and 10,688 SSRI users . Among the older cohort , 36,037 SNRI users were matched to 72,028 SSRI users ( from an unmatched cohort of 225,952 SSRI initiators ) . Regardless of age cohort , patients initiating SSRIs and patients initiating SNRIs had similar rates of deliberate self-harm . Restriction to patients with no antidepressant use in the past 3 years did not alter our findings . Conclusions Our findings of similar rates of deliberate self-harm for depressed patients who initiate treatment with either an SSRI or an SNRI suggests that physicians who have decided that their patients would benefit from initiating antidepressant therapy need not weigh differential suicide risk when deciding which class of antidepressant to prescribe Objective : To examine the antidepressant efficacy of a dual-acting antidepressant ( mirtazapine ) in patients with post-myocardial infa rct ion ( MI ) depressive disorder . Antidepressants used in post MI trials with a r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled design have been restricted to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) . Antidepressant effects have been limited . Methods : In a prospect i ve multicenter study , 2177 patients with MI were evaluated for depressive disorder during the first year post MI . Ninety-one patients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , 4th Edition ( DSM-IV ) criteria for major or minor depressive disorder were r and omized to a 24-week , double-blind , placebo-controlled trial . Antidepressant efficacy was tested using last-observation-carried-forward procedure and repeated measurements analysis using the SPPS mixed models approach , with as primary outcome reduction in depressive symptomatology on the 17-item Hamilton-Depression Rating Scale ( Ham-D ) , and secondary outcomes the Beck Depression Inventory ( BDI ) and depression subscale of the Symptom Check List 90 items ( dSCL-90 ) as well as the Clinical Global Impression ( CGI ) scale . Results : Using the “ last observation carried forward ” ( LOCF ) method , mirtazapine did not show to be superior to placebo on the Ham-D , but did on the BDI , dSCL-90 , and CGI scale over the acute treatment phase of 8 weeks ( n = 91 ) . Using mixed models analysis over the entire 24 weeks of treatment ( n = 40 ) , we did find a significant difference favoring mirtazapine to placebo on the Ham-D , BDI , and CGI , but on the dSCL-90 , this difference was not significant . Conclusions : This trial shows efficacy of mirtazapine on primary and secondary depression measures . Mirtazapine seems to be safe in the treatment of post-MI depression . MI = myocardial infa rct ion ; RCT = r and omized controlled trial ; DSM-IV = Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ; CAD = coronary artery disease ; SSRI = selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ; TCA = tricyclic antidepressant ; Ham-D = Hamilton-Depression Rating Scale ; BDI = Beck Depression Inventory ; CGI = Clinical Global Impression ; dSCL-90 = Symptom Check List 90 items , depression subscale ; SES = st and ardized effect size Depression is one of the most common psychiatric disturbances in Parkinson 's disease ( PD ) . Recent review s have highlighted the lack of controlled trials and the ensuing difficulty in formulating recommendations for antidepressant use in PD . We sought to establish whether antidepressants provide real benefits and whether tricyclic and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor ( SSRI ) antidepressants differ in their short-term efficacy , because the time to onset of therapeutic benefit remains an important criterion in depression . The short-term efficacy ( after 14 and 30 days ) of two antidepressants ( desipramine , a predominantly noradrenergic reuptake inhibitor tricyclic and citalopram , a SSRI ) was assessed in a double-blind , r and omized , placebo- controlled study of 48 nondemented PD patients suffering from major depression . After 14 days , desipramine prompted an improvement in the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) score , compared with citalopram and placebo . Both antidepressants produced significant improvements in the MADRS score after 30 days . Mild adverse events were twice as frequent in the desipramine group as in the other groups . A predominantly noradrenergic tricyclic antidepressant induced a more intense short-term effect on parkinsonian depression than did an SSRI . However , desipramine 's lower tolerability may outweigh its slight short-term clinical advantage OBJECTIVE To determine the relative cost-effectiveness of three classes of antidepressants : tricyclic antidepressants ( TCAs ) , selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) , and the modified TCA lofepramine , as first choice treatments for depression in primary care . DESIGN Open , pragmatic , controlled trial with three r and omised arms and one preference arm . Patients were followed up for 12 months . SETTING UK primary care : 73 practice s in urban and rural areas in Engl and . PARTICIPANTS Patients with a new episode of depressive illness according to GP diagnosis . INTERVENTIONS Patients were r and omised to receive a TCA ( amitriptyline , dothiepin or imipramine ) , an SSRI ( fluoxetine , sertraline or paroxetine ) or lofepramine . Patients or GPs were able to choose an alternative treatment if preferred . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES At baseline the Clinical Interview Schedule , Revised ( CIS-R PROQSY computerised version ) was administered to establish symptom profiles . Outcome measures over the 12-month follow-up included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale self-rating of depression ( HAD-D ) , CIS-R , EuroQol ( EQ-5D ) for quality of life , Short Form ( SF-36 ) for generic health status , and patient and practice records of use of health and social services . The primary effectiveness outcome was the number of depression-free weeks ( HAD-D less than 8 , with interpolation of intervening values ) and the primary cost outcome total direct NHS costs . Quality -adjusted life-years ( QALYs ) were used as the outcome measure in a secondary analysis . Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were computed . Estimates were bootstrapped with 5000 replications . RESULTS In total , 327 patients were r and omised . Follow-up rates were 68 % at 3 months and 52 % at 1 year . Linear regression analysis revealed no significant differences between groups in number of depression-free weeks when adjusted for baseline HAD-D. A higher proportion of patients r and omised to TCAs entered the preference arm than those allocated to the other choices . Switching to another class of antidepressant in the first few weeks of treatment occurred significantly more often in the lofepramine arm and less in the preference arm . There were no significant differences between arms in mean cost per depression-free week . For values placed on an additional QALY of over 5000 pounds , treatment with SSRIs was likely to be the most cost-effective strategy .  TCAs were the least likely to be cost-effective as first choice of antidepressant for most values of a depression-free week or QALY respectively , but these differences were relatively modest . CONCLUSIONS When comparing the different treatment options , no significant differences were found in outcomes or costs within the sample , but when outcomes and costs were analysed together , the result ing cost-effectiveness acceptability curves suggested that SSRIs were likely to be the most cost-effective option , although the probability of this did not rise above 0.6 . Choosing lofepramine is likely to lead to a greater proportion of patients switching treatment in the first few weeks . Further research is still needed on the management of depressive illness in primary care . This should address areas such as the optimum severity threshold at which medication should be used ; the feasibility and effectiveness of adopting structured depression management programmes in the UK context ; the importance of factors such as physical co-morbidity and recent life events in GPs ' prescribing decisions ; alternative ways of collecting data ; and the factors that give rise to many patients being reluctant to accept medication and discontinue treatment early INTRODUCTION : Reboxetine is the first available selective noradrenaline re-uptake inhibitor ( selective NRI ) . This paper gives an overview of its antidepressant efficacy and tolerability in eight r and omized double-blind , multicentre clinical trials . The clinical profile of reboxetine is also compared with that of the tricyclic antidepressants ( TCAs ) desipramine and imipramine and the selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor ( SSRI ) fluoxetine . METHODS : Pooled data were analysed from seven short-term ( 4 - 8 weeks ) and one long-term ( up to 1 year ) trials comparing reboxetine with placebo , imipramine , desipramine or fluoxetine . The tolerability of reboxetine was evaluated in 2613 patients with major depression or dysthymia . Data from 1959 patients with major depressive disorder were included to assess drug efficacy . Efficacy was principally assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAM-D ) . RESULTS : Reboxetine was more effective than placebo in three of four short-term trials , and it was as effective as fluoxetine , imipramine and desipramine . In long-term treatment , reboxetine was more effective than placebo in preventing relapse ( S 50 % increase in HAM-D ) and recurrence ( HAM-D total score h 10 ) . In a subset of severely depressed patients , reboxetine was as effective as imipramine and significantly more effective than fluoxetine . Reboxetine was as effective as imipramine in the elderly , but better tolerated . The most common adverse events among the 1503 patients ( adults and elderly ) who received reboxetine were dry mouth ( 22 % ) , constipation ( 15 % ) , sweating ( 12 % ) and insomnia ( 11 % ) . Overall , reboxetine was well tolerated , as well as the SSRI fluoxetine and better than the TCAs imipramine and desipramine . CONCLUSIONS : Reboxetine is effective and well tolerated in the short and long-term treatment of depression . It is as well tolerated as fluoxetine and better than imipramine and desipramine . ( Int J Psych Clin Pract 2000 ; 4 : 201 - 208 Fluvoxamine belongs to the class of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) which have recently gained large popularity as antidepressant agents essentially because they lack the most troublesome adverse effects of older antidepressants ( i.e. tricyclic antidepressants ) such as anticholinergic effects and cardiotoxicity . Recent studies in the literature suggest that HIV-1 infected subjects are affected by depressive episodes with a relatively high frequency , often requiring an antidepressant treatment . Due to its favorable adverse effects profile , we used fluvoxamine as first line treatment for sixteen depressed HIV-1 infected subjects . They were administered the drug at a daily dosage of 100 mg in the evening . Fluvoxamine provided a good clinical efficacy for six of these patients , whereas the other ten had to discontinue the drug because of the presence of severe adverse effects such as acute total insomnia , gastro-intestinal disturbances together with anorexia , aggressive and impulsive behavior and excessive sedation . The observed fluvoxamine side-effects are not typical or specific for this particular patient group since they are also described in seronegative subjects taking fluvoxamine ; however , our findings seem to indicate that they become more frequent and more severe when the drug is administered to HIV-1 infected patients The objective of this study was to compare efficacy and tolerability of the selective noradrenalin reuptake inhibitor reboxetine with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor citalopram , in the treatment of major depressive disorder ( MDD ) . In total , 357 out patients with MDD were r and omized to treatment with reboxetine 8 - 10 mg or citalopram 20 - 40 mg per day during 24 weeks . Primary end-point was change from baseline in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAM-D , 21 items ) . Sexual function/dysfunction was measured by the Sexual Function scale ( SF ) . Observed case analysis showed that both treatments yielded a gradual reduction of HAM-D scores : reboxetine with -21.4 and citalopram with -22.1 points ( NS ) . LOCF analysis showed a greater reduction of the HAM-D scores with citalopram compared with reboxetine ( -19.6 vs. -17.8 ; P = 0.034 ) . The response rate was 90.3 % for reboxetine and 92.7 % for citalopram ( NS ) . The most common side effect in the reboxetine group was dry mouth , and in the citalopram group sexual dysfunction . At week 24 , anorgasmia was reported by 5.9 % of the sexually active women in the reboxetine group vs 39 % in the citalopram group . The  dropout number  was 91 in the  reboxetine group , and 54 in the citalopram group . To summarize , both treatments gave a satisfactory antidepressant effect . The side effect profile differed between the groups , with a notably high prevalence of sexual dysfunctions in the citalopram group . The high number of dropouts in the reboxetine group , is considered as a result of the non-titration starting dose of 8 mg reboxetine per day , which gave a high incidence of early side-effects .  Depressive disorders including major depression ( MDD ) is very common , with a lifetime prevalence of at least 15 % in men and 25 % in women.1,2 Depression can be treated effectively by a range of antidepressant agents . Recent review s have suggested that the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) offer equal efficacy to the older antidepressant agents , such as tricyclic antidepressants , with the advantage of greater tolerability.3 - 5 Other review ers have reported that non-SSRI antidepressants , such as clomipramine , have been found to be significantly more effective than fluoxetine for the treatment of patients with severe depression.6  Reboxetine ( reboxetine mesylate , Edronax ; Pfizer , New York ) is a highly selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor , and the efficacy of reboxetine has been independently demonstrated in multiple r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled studies .7 - 9 In addition to improvements in depressive symptoms , treatment-associated improvements in social behavior ( measured using the Social Adaptation Self-evaluation Scale [SASS]),10 were noticed in one of these studies .8 In this study , reboxetine was statistically and clinical ly superior to both placebo and fluoxetine in improving social functioning . The primary objective of the current study was to assess efficacy and tolerability of reboxetine  in comparison with those of citalopram ( Cipramil ; H. Lundbeck , Copenhagen , Denmark ) in patients with MDD .  Citalopram is a highly SSRI . The antidepressant mechanism is presumed to be a result of stimulation of serotonergic neurotransmission in the central nervous system as a consequence of higher serotonin levels result ing from inhibition of the serotonin transporter . The therapeutic efficacy of citalopram in patients with MDD has been investigated in several placebo-controlled studies and in long-term and extension studies .11 The underlying rationale for this comparison was to study 2 different drug profiles , 1 drug being pure " adrenergic " and the other pure " serotonergic . " A secondary objective was to analyze the correlation between the types of depression ( ie , degree of melancholia and the efficacy of the 2 drugs ) Milnacipran is a new antidepressant with similar effects on the reuptake of noradrenaline and serotonin in vivo and in vitro . The present study was design ed to study the efficary and tolerability of long-term treatment of depressed patients with milnacipran in comparison with clomipramine . The study was design ed as a double-blind , r and omized parallel group comparison at 10 different hospitals in The Netherl and s. The duration of treatment was 6 weeks , with an extension period of 20 weeks . The entire study period of 26 weeks was done under double-blind conditions . There was 1 week of dose escalation after which the patients received either treatment with milnacipran 200 mg/day or clomipramine 150 mg/day in fixed doses during weeks 2 to 10 . This was followed by flexible dosing with 200 , 150 , or 100 mg/day milnacipran or 150 , 100 or 75 mg/day clomipramine during weeks 11 to 26 . Both milnacipran and clomipramine showed poor antidepressant activity in this patient sample . There were no significant differences between the two treatment groups with respect to antidepressant efficacy . Several method ological reasons might explain the lack of antidepressant efficacy in the present study . In 45 % of the patients in the present study , the duration of the current episode of depression was longer than 6 months , whereas 48 % of the patients used antidepressants before the study and 73 % of these appeared to be non-responders . This raises the possibility that the present sample consisted of treatment-resistant depressive patients
There was also some weak evidence to suggest that patients taking milnacipran experienced fewer adverse events of sleepiness/ drowsiness , dry mouth or constipation compared with TCAs .
AUTHORS ' CONCLUSIONS Currently , there is inadequate evidence to conclude whether milnacipran is superior , inferior or the same as other antidepressive agents in terms of efficacy , acceptability and tolerability in the acute phase treatment of major depression .
However , there is some evidence in favour of milnacipran over TCAs in terms of dropouts due to adverse events ( acceptability ) and the rates of experiencing adverse events ( tolerability ) .
Further study is needed to answer whether milnacipran would be the better choice of antidepressant for acute major depression
BACKGROUND Although pharmacological and psychological interventions are both effective for major depression , antidepressant drugs are frequently used as first-line treatment in primary and secondary care setting s. Milnacipran , a dual serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor ( SNRI ) , is one of the antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of milnacipran in comparison with tricyclic antidepressants ( TCAs ) , heterocyclics , SSRIs and other newer antidepressive agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .