Early improvement as a predictor of response to amitriptyline and nortriptyline: a comparison of 2 patient samples

Coryell, William; Coppen, Alec; Zeigler, Vickie; Biggs, John T.

doi:10.1017/s0033291700043385

Cited by 33 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent study [5] reported the usefulness of the improve ment after the first week as a predictor of the final response to antidepressant treatment. These findings con firmed previous reports by Coryell et al [6], indicating that the first-two-weeks improvement rate is predictive of the treatment outcome.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Perspectives in Clinical Psychopharmacology of Amitriptyline and Fluvoxamine

Gasperini¹,

Gatti²,

Bellini³

et al. 1992

Neuropsychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The efficacy of fluvoxamine was compared to that of amitriptyline in a double-blind 6-week fixed-dose trial of 56 inpatients with major depressive episode. The two drugs were comparable in their antidepressant efficacy. We tested the percentage of improvement in Hamilton-D scores during the first and the second weeks of treatment as predictors of efficacy for the last week. Improvement rates during the second week significantly predicted the outcome. We also investigated whether or not some symptomatological characteristics would permit prior prediction of the outcome with amitriptyline or fluvoxamine, dividing our sample into responders and nonresponders to the two drugs. The four groups showed differences in their symptomatological profiles.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Perspectives in Clinical Psychopharmacology of Amitriptyline and Fluvoxamine

Gasperini¹,

Gatti²,

Bellini³

et al. 1992

Neuropsychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our earlier study (Katz et al, 1987), the clinical effects detected within the first 2 weeks were large and were predictive of eventual positive clinical outcome. Findings from a number of other studies (Small et al, 1981;Coryell et al, 1982;Khan et al, 1989;Nagayama et al, 1991;Stassen et al, 1993;Boyer and Feighner, 1994) have also confirmed the positive role of early clinical actions in predicting treatment outcome. The capacity to predict outcome early in treatment would not only shorten the length of a treatment trial but should also decrease morbidity and the risk of suicide from prolonged depressive symptoms (Kiloh et al, 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…There have been, however, a number of studies over the years (Small et al, 1981;Coryell et al, 1982;Katz et al, 1987;Khan et al, 1989;Nagayama et al, 1991;Boyer and Feighner, 1994) that have demonstrated a relationship between early response to ADs, mainly tricyclics, and treatment outcome. It is clear from the current study, however, that drug-specific types of behavioral responses in the first 1 or 2 weeks of treatment with DMI or paroxetine are highly predictive of later outcome.…”

Section: Prediction Of Drug Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Onset and Early Behavioral Effects of Pharmacologically Different Antidepressants and Placebo in Depression

Katz

Tekell

Bowden

et al. 2003

Neuropsychopharmacol

234

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was aimed at resolving the time course of clinical action of antidepressants (ADs) and the type of early behavioral changes that precede recovery in treatment-responsive depressed patients. The first goal was to identify, during the first 2 weeks of treatment, the onset of clinical actions of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), paroxetine, and the selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitor, desipramine (DMI). The second aim was to test the hypothesis that the two pharmacologic subtypes would induce different early behavioral changes in treatment-responsive patients. The design was a randomized, parallel group, placebo-controlled, double-blind study for 6 weeks of treatment following a 1-week washout period. The study utilized measures of the major behavioral components of the depressive disorder as well as overall severity. The results indicated that the onset of clinical actions of DMI ranged from 3 to 13 days, averaged 13 days for paroxetine, and was 16-42 days for placebo. Furthermore, as hypothesized, the different types of ADs initially impacted different behavioral aspects of the disorder. After 1 week of treatment, DMI produced greater reductions in motor retardation and depressed mood than did paroxetine and placebo, and this difference persisted at the second week of treatment. Early improvement in depressed mood-motor retardation differentiated patients who responded to DMI after 6 weeks of treatment from those that did not. Paroxetine initially reduced anxiety more in responders than in nonresponders, and by the second week, significantly improved depressed mood and distressed expression in responders to a greater extent. Depressed patients who responded to placebo showed no consistent early pattern of behavior improvement. Early drug-specific behavioral changes were highly predictive of ultimate clinical response to the different ADs, results that could eventually be applied directly to clinical practice.

show abstract

“…In contrast, survival-analytical methods suggest that among responders, onset of action occurs in more than 70% of cases within the first two weeks of treatment, with an early onset of action being highly predictive of later response. (Angst and Stassen, personal communication;Stassen et al 1993Stassen et al , 1997Coryell et al 1982;Boyer and Feighner 1994).…”

Section: Onset and Speed Of Action Of Antidepressantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancing the Technology of Clinical Trials and the Trials Model to Evaluate Newly Developed, Targeted Antidepressants

Katz

Halbreich

Bowden

et al. 2002

Neuropsychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concern about disappointing results from recent multicenter trials of new antidepressants prompted several ACNP workshops on "improving the technology of clinical trials." The workshops focused on technical problems, such as patient screening, reliability of clinical ratings, and the role of the placebo control. They aimed to determine how to 27 , NO . 3 ducing adverse events, and lessening the complexity of dosing regimens. In addition, attention is currently focused on accelerating the onset of drug action to generate more rapidly acting antidepressants. Unfortunately, recently conducted multi-center clinical trials of some of these agents encountered serious technical problems and did not produce the results anticipated from preclinical studies. Although this may be partly due to limitations in extrapolating pre-clinical data to patients, it may also be that there are significant constraints in the current clinical trials model that make it difficult to demonstrate efficacy.The current clinical trials model is now 30 years old. The essential principles of randomization, double blind evaluation, and a placebo control remain sound. But other important aspects of the research design and the methodology are no longer sufficient or well suited to the testing of these new drugs. In effect, such deficiencies in current trial methodologies make it increasingly difficult to demonstrate antidepressant efficacy of these new drugs.One important reason the current model has proved inadequate is that it was initially applied to hospitalized depressed patients. Today new drugs are tested almost exclusively on outpatient samples, many of whom are symptomatic volunteers, responding to advertisements. Depressed outpatients have milder depressive symptomatology than the predominantly inpatient samples used to test the first established drugs. Patients with milder severity provide a narrower range of possible change, and produce a greater number of placebo responders (Fisher et al. 1965;Bowden et al. 2000;Khan et al. 2002).As a consequence of the smaller difference between active treatment and placebo treatment, larger patient samples and/or more sensitive clinical methods are needed to detect differences between drug and placebo. The most commonly utilized scales, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) (Hamilton 1960) and the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) (Guy 1976), were designed to measure changes in overall severity of the disorder. These scales are not sufficiently sensitive to assess the specific behavioral changes brought about by the newer drugs (Montgomery and Asberg 1979). Further, intensive evaluation of symptomatology and behavioral change are carried out infrequently with outpatients, making evaluation of rapidity of response problematic. Consequently, it appears important to improve the technology applied to assessing the specific actions, onset, and efficacy of the newer drugs.Acknowledging the increased complexity of the goals of clinical trials and the need to improve trial procedures, the desi...

show abstract

Early improvement as a predictor of response to amitriptyline and nortriptyline: a comparison of 2 patient samples

Cited by 33 publications

References 13 publications

Perspectives in Clinical Psychopharmacology of Amitriptyline and Fluvoxamine

Perspectives in Clinical Psychopharmacology of Amitriptyline and Fluvoxamine

Onset and Early Behavioral Effects of Pharmacologically Different Antidepressants and Placebo in Depression

Enhancing the Technology of Clinical Trials and the Trials Model to Evaluate Newly Developed, Targeted Antidepressants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About