Clinical multicentre study of citalopram compared double-blindly with mianserin in depressed patients in Finland

Ahlfors, U. G.; Elovaara, Seppo; Harma, Pirjo; Suoniemi, Ilpo; Heikkilä, L.; Nummi, Kari; Vartiainen, Aino; Vartiainen, Henriikka; Tamminen, Tapani; Elgen, K.; Sundman, Kristina

doi:10.3109/08039488809094957

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The present large study generally con®rms the indications from two previous double-blind studies in smaller groups of younger patients (Ahlfors et al, 1988;de Wilde et al, 1985).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

“…Unlike the results of previous studies in younger patients (Ahlfors et al, 1988;de Wilde et al, 1985), an analysis of CGI in the present study showed a slight advantage for mianserin. This was also seen in the results of the WHO Well-being scale for anxiety/depression in the elderly.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

“…Two previous double-blind studies in young depressed patients have shown comparable ecacy of citalopram and mianserin (Ahlfors et al, 1988;de Wilde et al, 1985). The primary aim of this study was to compare the ecacy and tolerability of citalopram (20±40 mg) and mianserin (30±60 mg) over 12 weeks of treatment in elderly depressed patients with or without dementia.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…During weeks 5±12 (¯exible-dose phase) the dose could be increased to two tablets per day (citalopram 40 mg/ day or mianserin 60 mg/day), according to the investigator's judgement. These dose ranges were based on the recommended dosages for elderly patients in the participating countries and on previous studies that compared the two drugs at similar dose ranges (de Wilde et al, 1985;Ahlfors et al, 1988). To ensure blinding, the citalopram and mianserin tablets were identical in appearance and were taken once daily, preferably in the evening.…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A randomised, double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of citalopram compared to mianserin in elderly, depressed patients with or without mild to moderate dementia

Karlsson

Godderis²,

Lima

et al. 2000

Int. J. Geriat. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The present large study generally con®rms the indications from two previous double-blind studies in smaller groups of younger patients (Ahlfors et al, 1988;de Wilde et al, 1985).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 56%

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A randomised, double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of citalopram compared to mianserin in elderly, depressed patients with or without mild to moderate dementia

Karlsson

Godderis²,

Lima

et al. 2000

Int. J. Geriat. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The translation process is still ongoing, so in the present review we considered all Chinese studies as awaiting assessment studies (we will include them in the next update of the review, which is expected to be in a two years time). An additional four studies were considered as awaiting assessment because the papers reported insufficient information to decide about inclusion or exclusion (Ahlfors 1988; Galecki 2004; Moeller 1986; Thomas 2008). We contacted corresponding authors and at the time the review has been submitted we are still waiting for their reply and further information.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

Cipriani

Purgato

Furukawa

et al. 2012

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Systematic reviews have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants. Citalopram, one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) introduced in the market, is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care. Objectives To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics, heterocyclics, other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression. Search methods We searched The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to February 2012. No language restriction was applied. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field for supplemental data. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to citalopram versus any other antidepressants. Data collection and analysis Two reviewers independently extracted data. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), patient acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects). Main results Thirty-seven trials compared citalopram with other antidepressants (such as tricyclics, heterocyclics, SSRIs and other antidepressants, either conventional ones, such as mirtazapine, venlafaxine and reboxetine, or non-conventional, like hypericum). Citalopram was shown to be significantly less effective than escitalopram in achieving acute response (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 2.02), but more effective than paroxetine (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.96) and reboxetine (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91). Significantly fewer patients allocated to citalopram withdrew from trials due to adverse events compared with patients allocated to tricyclics (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.78) and fewer patients allocated to citalopram reported at least one side effect than reboxetine or venlafaxine (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.97 and OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.88, respectively). Authors’ conclusions Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy, tolerability and acceptability. Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics, reboxetine and venlafaxine, however, it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram. As with most systematic reviews in psychopharmacology, the potential for overestimation of treatment effect due ...

show abstract

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus other antidepressants for depression

Geddes

Freemantle

Mason

et al. 1999

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical multicentre study of citalopram compared double-blindly with mianserin in depressed patients in Finland

Cited by 18 publications

References 10 publications

A randomised, double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of citalopram compared to mianserin in elderly, depressed patients with or without mild to moderate dementia

A randomised, double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of citalopram compared to mianserin in elderly, depressed patients with or without mild to moderate dementia

Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus other antidepressants for depression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About