A double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, flexible-dose study to evaluate the tolerability, efficacy and effects of treatment discontinuation with escitalopram and paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorder
by
Baldwin DS, Cooper JA, Huusom AK, Hindmarch I.
Clinical Neuroscience Division, University of Southampton, Royal South Hants Hospital, Southampton, UK
H. Lundbeck A/S, Valby, Copenhagen, Denmark
HPRU Medical Research Centre, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006 May;21(3):159-69.


ABSTRACT

This multinational, randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose study evaluated the short- and long-term antidepressant tolerability and efficacy of escitalopram and paroxetine. Tolerability was assessed by monitoring adverse events throughout the study, and discontinuation events during brief treatment interruption and tapered withdrawal. Discontinuation-emergent effects were evaluated in two separate double-blind periods. First, to mimic the consequences of non-compliance, patients were randomized to one of two treatment interruption periods (placebo-substitution for 3-5 days). Second, patients were randomized to a 1-2-week tapered withdrawal period randomly scheduled between weeks 28 and 31. The pre-specified primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from baseline in total Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at week 8, using the principle of last observation carried forward. A total of 323 patients entered 8 weeks of double-blind treatment and received at least one flexible dose of escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) or paroxetine (20-40 mg/day). Patients who demonstrated evidence of a significant clinical improvement (Clinical Global Impression-Improvement of 1 or 2) at week 8 entered a 19-week, double-blind maintenance period during which they were treated with the same dose they received at week 8, followed by a 1-2-week tapered withdrawal period. A total of 89 patients (28%) withdrew during the study; significantly (P<0.01) more patients withdrew from the paroxetine group (34%) than from the escitalopram group (21%), and significantly (P<0.05) more paroxetine patients withdrew due to lack of efficacy. The mean MADRS total score improved for both treatment groups from baseline to week 8, with no statistical difference between groups. In severely depressed patients (baseline MADRS total score >/=30), escitalopram was superior (P<0.05) to paroxetine at week 27 (end of maintenance treatment). There was a high prevalence of sexual dysfunction at baseline: the mean Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX) score was approximately 20 points in both treatment groups. Mean total ASEX scores increased slightly above baseline values during the acute period and declined slightly below baseline values towards the end of the maintenance period. During taper and cessation of treatment, patients in the paroxetine group demonstrated significantly more discontinuation symptoms relative to escitalopram based on the Discontinuation Emergent Signs and Symptoms scores.
Paroxetine update
Stopping paroxetine
Paroxetine: structure
Paroxetine and suicide
Paroxetine v bupropion
Paroxetine v fluoxetine
Paroxetine v tianeptine
Escitalopram (Lexapro)
Paroxetine v maprotiline
SSRIs and panic disorder
Antidepressant metabolism
Paroxetine and noradrenaline
Paroxetine for pathological gamblers
Tianeptine (Stablon) v paroxetine (Paxil)
Paroxetine: controlled- v immediate-release


Refs
and further reading

HOME
HedWeb
Nootropics
erythroxylum-coca.com
Future Opioids
BLTC Research
MDMA/Ecstasy
Superhapiness?
Utopian Surgery?
The Abolitionist Project
The Hedonistic Imperative
The Reproductive Revolution
Critique of Huxley's Brave New World

The Good Drug Guide
The Good Drug Guide

The Responsible Parent's Guide
To Healthy Mood Boosters For All The Family