Effective low dose tricyclic antidepressant treatment for depressed geriatric rehabilitation patients. A double-blind study. Trimipramine in physical illness with depression. Tricyclic antidepressants in the treatment of depressions. A double-blind clinical comparison of clomipramine (Anafranil) and amitriptyline. Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of amitriptyline among depressed patients in general practice. Tricyclic antidepressant education program and its evaluation. Predictors of therapeutic benefit from amitriptyline in mild depression: a general practice placebo-controlled trial. A randomized, within-patient, cross-over, placebo-controlled trial on the efficacy and tolerability of the tricyclic antidepressants chlorimipramine and nortriptyline in central pain. Randomized, controlled trial of amitriptyline versus placebo for adolescents with "treatment-resistant" major depression. Cognitive behavior therapy, relaxation training, and tricyclic antidepressant medication in the treatment of depression. A double-blind trial of maprotiline (Ludiomil) and amitriptyline in depressed outpatients. Changes in weight during treatment for depression. [Clinical study of electro-acupuncture on 133 patients with depression in comparison with tricyclic amitriptyline]. A randomized, controlled trial of amitriptyline in the acute treatment of adolescent major depression. A double-blind comparative study of alprazolam and dothiepin hydrochloride in the treatment of anxiety associated with depression. Effect of antidepressant drug counselling and information leaflets on adherence to drug treatment in primary care: randomised controlled trial. Reduced REM latency predicts response to tricyclic medication in depressed outpatients. Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of ethyl-eicosapentanoate in the treatment of bipolar depression and rapid cycling bipolar disorder. A double-blind, randomised comparison of fluvoxamine with dothiepin in the treatment of depression in elderly patients. Cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy. Singly and together in the treatment of depression. [Lofepramine: a comparative clinical study with amitriptyline]. The DOSE study: a clinical trial to examine efficacy and dose response of exercise as treatment for depression. Treatment of minor depression in older adults: a pilot study comparing sertraline and exercise. A comparison of dothiepin versus placebo in the treatment of pain in rheumatoid arthritis and the association of pain with depression. Which tricyclic for depressed outpatients, imipramine pamoate or amitriptyline? Comparison of the tolerability and efficacy of citalopram and amitriptyline in elderly depressed patients treated in general practice. Maprotiline-a double-blind study of a new tetracyclic antidepressant in severe depression. Efficacy of ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid in bipolar depression: randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study. Management of depression in rheumatoid arthritis: a combined pharmacologic and cognitive-behavioral approach. Improvement in mood, physical symptoms, and function with nortriptyline for depression in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Treatment of major depression with metyrapone and hydrocortisone. Double-blind comparison of fluoxetine and nortriptyline in the treatment of moderate to severe major depression. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of citalopram for the treatment of major depression in children and adolescents. Pharmacologic treatment of major depression for elderly patients in residential care settings. Oxidative damage and major depression: the potential antioxidant action of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors. Thyroid functioning during treatment for depression.
The efficacy of low doses (10 to 20 mg daily) of doxepin in the treatment of depressive disorders in elderly inpatients was assessed by a double-blind study in 24 patients. The patients were treated for a three-week period to test for an early response. The Hamilton Depression Scale and the Geriatric Depression Scale were used to quantify symptoms of depression. The patients treated with doxepin had a significantly greater reduction in depressive symptoms than did those who received a placebo. No side effects were found and there were no major differences in the degree of physical dependency between the doxepin and placebo groups. A depressive disorder is a common occurrence among elderly inpatients and the effectiveness of low dose doxepin therapy without demonstrable side effects argues for the active treatment for this condition. To assess whether tricyclic antidepressants are useful in patients with a serious physical disorder who develop symptoms of major depression, 42 medically ill outpatients who met RDC criteria for endogenous major depression and had a Raskin depression score of at least 7 were studied. The patients were randomly assigned to a 6-week trial of trimipramine or placebo under double-blind conditions. In the placebo group, depressive symptoms improved when the physical disorder improved; in the trimipramine group, improvement was seen in the depressive symptoms even when there was no concomitant improvement in physical condition. The clinical efficacy of oral clomipramine and amitriptyline treatment (50--125 mg/day) was compared over a period of 2 months in 72 depressive patients visiting a psychiatric out-patient clinic. Both drugs were equally effective as measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. According to a nurse's independent evaluation of 13 items the two drugs were equipotent in relieving depressive symptoms and no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups were found in the global evaluation by the investigator and the patient. A trend in favour of clomipramine was, however, seen in several parameters. The declines in the Hamilton Rating Scale scores and the nurse's evaluation scores were highly significant during the first 2 weeks of treatment (P less than 0.001) in both groups and the scores continued to decrease during the 2nd month of the study. The most common unwanted effects were dryness of the mouth and fatigue. The frequency of side effects was 51% in the clomipramine group and 43% in the amitriptyline group. The side effects were generally mild and transient and called for discontinuation of treatment in only one case in each group. Depressed patients in general practice were included in a double-blind placebo-controlled six-week trial of amitriptyline (median dose 125 mg). The patients were relatively mildly ill and satisfied diagnostic criteria for depression and treatment with antidepressants in routine practice. Amitriptyline was found to be considerably superior to placebo after six weeks and significantly so as early as two weeks after the start of treatment. The effects of the antidepressant were on the core symptoms of depression, and were apparent in all but the most mildly ill patients. The findings suggest that tricyclic antidepressants are of considerable therapeutic benefit to depressed patients in general practice. The objectives of this study were (1) to develop an individualized tricyclic audiovisual education program and (2) to compare the program's effectiveness with that of traditional education. The program is designed to increase short-term and long-term knowledge about tricyclic antidepressants and depression. The patient's dose was stabilized, and then a pretest was given. If the patient was in the study group, he received the seven-minute slide-tape program and a posttest within 72 hours. The control group received the posttest within five days of the pretest. Both groups were given knowledge tests at approximately four weeks. Statistical analysis of the data from this small study group revealed significance at the 95% confidence level for the following statement: the study group showed a greater increase in factual short-term and long-term knowledge about its tricyclic therapy as shown by differences in pretest, posttest, and scores of tests at four weeks. This study demonstrates an effective standardized alternative to traditional education which can be used to educate the majority of patients about tricyclic antidepressants and depression with a minimum time investment. General practice depressives were treated for 6 weeks with amitriptyline or placebo in a controlled trial. Overall, drug was found strongly superior to placebo. Interactions were examined between drug effects and a number of variables, principally reflecting demographic characteristics, history of illness, severity of illness, and endogenous depression separately in symptoms and stress. Only in the area of severity were significant interactions found. Amitriptyline was superior to placebo in probable or definite major depression on the Research Diagnostic Criteria, but not in minor depression. It was also superior to placebo in subjects with initial scores on the Hamilton Depression Scale of 13-15, and 16 or more, but not with lower scores. Findings indicate that tricyclic antidepressants are of considerable benefit in relatively mild depressions, except in the mildest range. Antidepressant drugs are increasingly used in the management of chronic pain. They are mainly prescribed for cancer-related pain and central pain, e.g. phantom or stump pain, post-herpetic neuropathy. However, no controlled clinical trials have validated their in either pathology. Thus, physicians still do not know whether antidepressants are really effective and which might be best. It is still debated whether the effect of antidepressants in the management of chronic pain is limited to the amelioration of frequently concomitant depression or extends to pain itself. To verify both the analgesic effect of tricyclic antidepressants, and the possible relationship between their antidepressant effect and the relief of central pain, we carried out a randomized, within-patient (cross-over) placebo-controlled study in patients suffering from central pain. The results clearly indicate the better analgesic effect of tricyclic antidepressants over placebo (p less than 0.0001). Within the antidepressants tested, chlorimipramine, a blocker of serotonin reuptake, is significantly more effective (p less than 0.0001) than notriptyline, a blocker of noradrenaline reuptake. Finally, the antinociceptive effect is independent of the effects of the two drugs on the symptoms of depression. To assess the response to a serotonergic/noradrenergic tricyclic antidepressant, amitriptyline (AMI), in a group of adolescents with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD).
                Twenty-seven depressed adolescents admitted to a state hospital underwent a 10-week randomized, controlled trial with a flexible dose of AMI or placebo.
                There were no differences between patients taking AMI (n = 13) and placebo (n = 14). Both treatment groups showed approximately 70% to 80% improvement on the clinical outcome measurements, and 65% to 70% showed functional improvement. At the end of the protocol, 30% of patients still fulfilled criteria for MDD and had impaired functioning. Patients taking AMI experienced significantly more dry mouth and tachycardia. The final AMI dose was 173.1 mg/day +/- 56.3 mg/day; blood levels were 226.2 ng/mL +/- 80.8 ng/mL.
                No significant differences were found between AMI and placebo, in part because of the high placebo response rate. Although both treatment groups showed substantial response, at the end of treatment a substantial proportion of patients still had MDD of subsyndromal symptoms of depression. This and other studies of tricyclic antidepressants question the use of this medication as first-line treatment for youths with MDD. Outcomes of seven treatment trials comparing cognitive behavioral therapy to treatment with tricyclic antidepressant medication in major depressive disorder have been quite similar to one another. This led us to question whether treatment outcome in time-limited studies reflected a unique effect of cognitive behavioral therapy. To test the uniqueness hypothesis, relaxation training, a nonpharmacologic, noncognitive treatment, was chosen as a comparison for cognitive behavioral therapy as well as drug therapy. Treatment duration was 16 weeks. The sample of 37 patients treated for major depressive disorder was less depressed than those previously studied. For both cognitive behavioral therapy and relaxation training, outcome of depression was superior to that of tricyclic antidepressant medication by endpoint analysis. The posttreatment scores on the Beck Depression Inventory of 82% of the group receiving cognitive behavioral therapy improved to a Beck Depression Inventory score < or = 9 which was not significantly greater than that for the group receiving relaxation training (73%), so a unique effect was not demonstrated for cognitive behavioral therapy. The outcome for tricyclic antidepressant medication (29% improved to criteria) was significantly worse than that for cognitive behavioral therapy. The patient's pretreatment initial expectancy was not predictive. The results of a double-blind trial of a tetracyclic antidepressant, maprotiline (Ludiomil) and a conventional tricyclic, amitriptyline (Elavil), in 67 ambulatory depressives are reported. Hamilton's Rating Scale for Depression was the main outcome criterion. No statistically significant differences were found between the drugs in onset of action, efficacy, side effects or predictors of response. Patients on either drug showed a significant reduction in symptoms after 1 week of treatment and at the end of the trial. Both drugs were tolerated well. A review of double-blind comparisons of maprotiline and tricyclic antidepressants, spanning 13 countries, and including over 900 patients, both ambulatory and inpatient, shows essentially similar results. The main outcome criterion in all these studies was manifest psychopathology assessed on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression by the treating physician. The absence of additional types of outcome criteria or assessment techniques, which may have detected differences in motor activity or drive as originally postulated, may have obscured results which were expected to be subtle. Changes in appetite and weight were examined in a group of 47 carefully diagnosed primary depressives who were treated in a random design with either placebo (N = 17) or amitryptyline (N = 30) over a 35-day protocol. While the amitriptyline treated group as a whole showed a greater gain in weight than did the placebo group (4.5 vs. 0.5 lb, p less than 0.05), no differential effects could be demonstrated between drug responders and nonresponders. Likewise, while a consistent relationship between the self-report of decreased appetite and final weight change was noted in the placebo group, no simple relationship between final weight change and self-reported changes in appetite were apparent in the drug-treated patients. There was, however, a relationship between the report of decreased appetite and clinical severity of depression in the drug nonresponder subgroup despite significant weight gain during the protocol. Thus, weight change during this study period did not appear to show a simple relationship to corresponding clinical change. The clinical lore that has supported the notion that increased appetite and weight gain in patients being treated with tricyclic antidepressants are "good" signs cannot be confirmed by our findings. nan To determine amitriptyline's (AMI) efficacy in the acute treatment of adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD).
                Subjects aged 12 through 17 years meeting Research Diagnostic Criteria for MDD, diagnosed with the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children (K-SADS), participated in a 2-week placebo-washout followed by an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-design, placebo-controlled trial of AMI, 5 mg/kg per day. The K-SADS nine-item scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and the Clinical Global Impressions rating scale were used as outcome measures.
                Thirty-one subjects were randomized (18 AMI, 13 placebo). Twenty-two subjects were study completers (12 AMI, 10 placebo). AMI's efficacy was suggested by the Clinical Global Impressions but not the K-SADS-derived data. Perhaps the primary limitation of the current study is its small sample size.
                No definitive recommendation can be made regarding the efficacy of tricyclic antidepressants in the treatment of adolescent MDD. One hundred patients with mixed symptoms of anxiety and depression were enrolled into a prospective, multi-centre, randomized, double-blind study comparing the response to, and the side-effects of, alprazolam and dothiepin hydrochloride over 4 weeks of treatment. Mean daily doses were 2.33 mg alprazolam and 115 mg dothiepin. Data on 96 patients were evaluated for tolerance, and data for 85 patients were analyzed for therapeutic response. In each case, the groups were similar in numbers, mean ages and sex ratios. Both groups experienced satisfactory responses to therapy, with highly statistically significant changes (p less than 0.001) in the means of all efficacy measures within each group. No statistical difference was demonstrated in favour of either treatment group. Both dothiepin and alprazolam exhibited a similar profile of mild minor side-effects, but more patients suffered moderate to severe reactions to dothiepin, leading to a greater drop-out rate in the dothiepin-treated group. It is concluded that, as both treatments produced equally satisfactory responses in this study, alprazolam should be considered for the treatment of anxiety associated with depression in patients for whom tricyclic antidepressant drugs are either contra-indicated or poorly tolerated. To evaluate two different methods of improving adherence to antidepressant drugs.
                Factorial randomised controlled single blind trial of treatment leaflet, drug counselling, both, or treatment as usual.
                Primary care in Wessex
                250 patients starting treatment with tricyclic antidepressants.
                Adherence to drug treatment (by confidential self report and electronic monitor); depressive symptoms and health status.
                66 (63%) patients continued with drugs to 12 weeks in the counselled group compared with 42 (39%) of those who did not receiving counselling (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.6 to 4.8; number needed to treat=4). Treatment leaflets had no significant effect on adherence. No differences in depressive symptoms were found between treatment groups overall, although a significant improvement was found in patients with major depressive disorder receiving drug doses of at least 75 mg (depression score 4 (SD 3.7) counselling v 5.9 (SD 5.0) no counselling, P=0.038).
                Counselling about drug treatment significantly improved adherence, but clinical benefit was seen only in patients with major depressive disorder receiving doses >/=75 mg. Further research is required to evaluate the effect of this approach in combination with appropriate targeting of treatment and advice about dosage. Forty-two outpatients with major depressive disorder entered a double-blind, randomized trial of either desipramine or amitriptyline for a minimum of 6 weeks. Pretreatment polysomnographic and clinical measures were used to predict response. Response was defined as a 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score less than or equal to 9 at the end of treatment. There was a 61.1% response rate for patients treated with amitriptyline and a 66.7% response rate for patients treated with desipramine. Reduced REM latency (2-night mean less than or equal to 65.0 min) predicted a positive response to these tricyclic antidepressants. REM latency did not differentiate between desipramine or amitriptyline responders. More patients with reduced REM latency (80%) responded to treatment compared with patients with nonreduced REM latency (50%). The 80% response rate in reduced REM latency depressed patients confirms our previous findings in a mixed inpatient and outpatient sample. Contrary to our hypothesis, in this sample, endogenous depression was not associated with a good response to tricyclic medication. The results of pilot trials suggest that omega-3 fatty acids may have efficacy in the treatment of mood symptoms in bipolar disorder.
                We conducted a 4-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, adjunctive trial of ethyl-eicosapentanoate (EPA) 6 g/day in the treatment of bipolar depression and rapid cycling bipolar disorder. Subjects were receiving mood-stabilizing medications at therapeutic doses or plasma concentrations. The measures of efficacy were early study discontinuation, changes from baseline in depressive symptoms (Inventory for Depressive Symptomology total score) and in manic symptoms (Young Mania Rating Scale total score), and manic exacerbations ("switches"). We also measured side effects and bleeding time, a biomarker of drug action.
                Overall, there were no significant differences on any outcome measure between the EPA and placebo groups.
                This study did not find overall evidence of efficacy for adjunctive treatment with EPA 6 g/day in outpatients with bipolar depression or rapid cycling bipolar disorder. The efficacy and tolerability of the selective 5-HT reuptake inhibitor fluvoxamine were compared with the tricyclic dothiepin in 52 elderly (age greater than 64 years) hospital patients in a multi-centre double-blind randomised trial. Patients met DSM-III criteria for 'major depressive episode' and scored greater than 29 on the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) after a one-week placebo baseline. Active treatment was for six weeks. The dosage of both drugs was 50 mg nocte for three days, 100 mg nocte for the remainder of the first week, thereafter increasing to a maximum of 200 mg/day according to response/tolerance. MADRS scores improved by 63.5% with fluvoxamine and 60.0% with dothiepin; there were no significant differences between treatments at any assessment. Nausea, dizziness, headache, somnolence and constipation in both groups, plus dry mouth and asthenia in the dothiepin group were more frequent than single reports. Two patients in each group discontinued treatment owing to unwanted effects. There were no clinically significant changes in haematological, biochemical or cardiovascular parameters. Eight-seven moderately to severely depressed psychiatric outpatients were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of cognitive therapy (CT) (n = 24), pharmacotherapy (n = 24), CT plus pharmacotherapy (n = 22), or CT plus active placebo (n = 17). Seventy patients completed the treatment protocol. Seventeen dropped out before the end of the treatment period. Patients who completed treatment showed significant improvement in mean scores on two common measures of severity of depression (the Beck Depression Inventory and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) between evaluation and termination. Improvement did not differ as a function of the different treatment modalities. Inclusion of dropout patients' end-point scores did not alter these results. Treatment gains in all groups were maintained at one-month follow-up assessment. A portion of this study replicated an earlier study. While the results were not identical, they indicated that either CT or antidepressant drug treatment can be effective in treating outpatients with primary, nonbipolar depression of moderate or greater severity. Combining treatments did not lead either to additive effects or negative interactions. Lofepramine, a new tricycle antidepressant, is compared with amitriptyline in a double-blind study. A brief pharmacological description of the drug is made emphasizing its low toxicity and anticholinergic peripheral effects, high plasmatic concentration levels and good tolerance and elimination in comparison with some other known tricycle antidepressants. Sixty depressive outpatients of a Mental Health Service in Lima, 5 male and 55 female, aging 16 to 65, 29 endogenous and 31 neurotic were studied with both drugs in a equimolar dosage. Through the chi square test, no statistical significance was found in maximal therapeutic response, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, type of depression, and side-effects xerostomy which is lesser with lofepramine. A discussion of these results is made and it is concluded that in the present study lofepramine compared with amitriptyline has a similar therapeutic effect. Though not statistically significant, lofepramine seems to be better for neurotic depression and patients sensitive to anticholinergic side-effects. The Depression Outcomes Study of Exercise (DOSE) was a randomized clinical trial to determine whether exercise is an efficacious treatment for mild to moderate major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults ages 20 to 45 years. The specific hypotheses under investigation were (1) active exercise is an efficacious monotherapy for mild to moderate levels of MDD, and (2) there is a dose-response relation between the exercise amount and reduction in depressive symptoms. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) collected weekly over 12 weeks. Secondary outcome measures were the Inventory of Depressive Symptoms (clinician and self-report), HRSD scores at 24 weeks, cardiorespiratory fitness, self-efficacy, and quality of life. Eighty men and women who were diagnosed with a Structured Clinical Interview for Depression and who had mild (HRSD 12-16) to moderate (HRSD 17-25) MDD were randomized to one of five doses of exercise: 7.0 kcal/kg/week in 3 days/week; 7.0 kcal/kg/week in 5 days/week; 17.5 kcal/kg/week in 3 days/week; 17.5 kcal/kg/week in 5 days/week; or 3 days/week of stretching and flexibility exercises for 15 to 20 min/session. Participants exercised under supervision in our laboratory over the course of 12 weeks. Symptoms of depression were measured weekly by trained clinical raters blinded to the participant's treatment assignment. The design of the study restricted participant characteristics to mild to moderate MDD and controlled exercise features to permit the evaluation of exercise as a sole treatment for depression. This study is the first to examine dose-response effects of exercise in participants diagnosed with MDD.
                Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. The purpose of this study was to conduct a pilot clinical trial to test the feasibility and efficacy of an exercise program and anti-depressant treatment compared with usual care in improving the emotional and physical functioning of older adults with minor depression. Participants were 37 older adults with minor depression who were randomized to exercise, sertraline, or usual care; 32 participants completed the 16-week study. Outcomes included measures of both emotional (clinician and self-report) and physical (observed and self-report) functioning. There were trends for the superiority of the exercise and sertraline conditions over usual care in improving SF-36 mental health scores and clinician-rated depression scores. Individuals in the exercise condition showed greater improvements in physical functioning than individuals in the usual care condition. Both sertraline and exercise show promise as treatments for late-life minor depression. However, exercise has the added benefit of improving physical functioning as well. The effectiveness of dothiepin (a tricyclic anti-depressant) at a dose of 75 mg given orally at night was compared with placebo for 4 weeks in alleviating pain in 60 patients with classical or definite active rheumatoid arthritis. Patients were classified as either 'depressed' or 'not depressed'. The week before, during and 2 weeks after the study, 600 mg ibuprofen was given orally three times daily to all patients. Compared with placebo, dothiepin produced a significant reduction in daytime pain by the end of the treatment period. The Hamilton rating scale in 'depressed' patients was significantly improved in patients given dothiepin. The Cassano-Castrogiovanni self-evaluation rating scale in both 'depressed' and 'not depressed' patients showed a tendency (not significant) to be improved following dothiepin treatment compared with placebo. These results suggest that patients with rheumatoid arthritis may experience an increase in pain symptoms due to an alteration of mood. Therapy with tricyclic anti-depressants, such as dothiepin, therefore, may determine an improvement of pain indexes besides having an anti-depressant effect. Fifty-seven neurotically depressed outpatients with sleep disturbance were randomly assigned to treatment with either imipramine pamoate or amitriptyline given in a single dose at bedtime in a double-blind study for four weeks. The results indicate that both imipramine pamoate and amitriptyline are equally effective in treating neurotic depression. The clinical lore that imipramine is more effective for retarded depression and amitriptyline for anxious, agitated depression was not supported by this study. Of special interest is the fact that the imipramine pamoate group had significantly earlier rising times, and a trend toward better quality of sleep. The side effect profiles of the two drugs were also remarkably similar in this population though more patients complained of side effects on amitriptyline than on imipramine. The enhanced sensitivity of the elderly to the side effects produced by tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), and the frequency and type of adverse events, have made the treatment of depression in this group difficult. The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been reported to produce significantly fewer undesirable side effects and display better tolerance than TCAs. We compared the therapeutic actions and side effects produced by citalopram, the most selective SSRI available, with amitriptyline in a group of elderly patients (aged 65 and older) diagnosed with major depression. In a double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, multicenter comparison of citalopram (20 or 40 mg/day) and amitriptyline (50 or 100 mg/day), patients who did not respond to placebo during a 1-week single-blind phase were randomly assigned to receive citalopram or amitriptyline for 8 weeks. Efficacy measures included the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), and Clinical Global Impressions. Both drug treatments produced equivalent time-related declines in severity of depression, so that by 8 weeks slightly more than 50% of the patients in each group experienced marked recovery, defined as MADRS scores < or = 12. Amitriptyline produced a greater overall incidence of adverse events, including a significantly higher (P < 0.001) percentage of patients reporting dry mouth (34% vs. 7%), as well as a significantly higher (P < 0.02) incidence of somnolence. Constipation and fatigue also occurred more frequently in the amitriptyline than in the citalopram group. For only one event (nausea) did the citalopram group report a significantly greater (P = 0.012) incidence (12.8% vs. 4.8%). On the basis of these results, it was concluded that citalopram is as effective an antidepressant as amitriptyline in the treatment of the depressed elderly. Because of its low incidence and low magnitude of side effects, citalopram seems especially useful in private practice. A double-blind study was carried out comparing the antidepressant properties of maptotiline (a new tetracyclic antidepressant) and amitriptyline. Twenty-one hospitalized severely depressed patients, selected on the basis of clinical and psychometric criteria, completed the trial period of 28 days. The new drug was found to have an order of effectiveness similar to that of amitriptyline and both drugs were effective in agitated as well as retarded forms of depression. For both, the "day of effect", intended as the timing of sharp clinical improvement, tended to occur during the second week of treatment. Both drugs were well tolerated by most patients but one of the maprotiline patients presented a generalized rash which resolved after discontinuation of the drug. In conclusion, maprotiline is seen as an interesting addition to the group of major antidepressant drugs. Epidemiological and clinical studies suggest that increased intake of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) alleviates unipolar depression.
                To examine the efficacy of EPA in treating depression in bipolar disorder.
                In a12-week, double-blind study individuals with bipolar depression were randomly assigned to adjunctive treatment with placebo (n=26) or with 1 g/day (n=24) or 2 g/day (n=25) of ethyl-EPA. Primary efficacy was assessed by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), with changes in the Young Mania Rating Scale and Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) as secondary outcome measures.
                There was no apparent benefit of 2 g over 1 g ethyl-EPA daily. Significant improvement was noted with ethyl-EPA treatment compared with placebo in the HRSD (P=0.04) and the CGI (P=0.004) scores. Both doses were well tolerated.
                Adjunctive ethyl-EPA is an effective and well-tolerated intervention in bipolar depression. To examine the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral and pharmacologic treatment of depression in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
                Subjects (n = 54) with confirmed diagnoses of both major depression and RA were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 1) cognitive-behavioral/pharmacologic group (CB-PHARM), 2) attention-control/pharmacologic group, or 3) pharmacologic control group. Measures of depression, psychosocial status, health status, pain, and disease activity were collected at baseline, posttreatment (10 weeks), 6-month followup, and 15-month followup. Data were analyzed to compare the treatment effectiveness of the groups; data also were aggregated to examine the effects of antidepressive medication over time. Lastly, a no-treatment control group was defined from a cohort of persons who declined participation.
                Baseline comparisons on demographic and dependent measures revealed a need to assess covariates on age and education; baseline scores on dependent measures also were entered as covariates. Analyses of covariance revealed no statistically significant group differences at postintervention, 6-month followup, or 15-month followup, except higher state and trait anxiety scores for the CB-PHARM group at the 15-month followup. In the longitudinal analyses of the effects of antidepressive medication, significant improvement in psychological status and health status were found at posttreatment, 6-month followup, and 15-month followup, but no significant improvements were shown for pain or disease activity. In addition, the comparison of the aggregated pharmacologic group with a no-treatment group revealed a statistically significant benefit for the 3 groups that received the antidepressive medication.
                In persons with RA, cognitive-behavioral approaches to the management of depression were not found to be additive to antidepressant medication alone, but antidepressant intervention was superior to no treatment. Although recent epidemiologic studies have established that patients with chronic medical illness and depressed mood are more disabled than euthymic patients, detailed data on the benefits and risks of antidepressant treatment in medically high-risk patients have been slow to accumulate. The authors have examined multiple outcome indicators in patients with disabling chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and comorbid depression. Thirty patients completed a 12-week, randomized controlled trial of nortriptyline. Nortriptyline was clearly superior to placebo for treatment of depression. Nortriptyline treatment was accompanied by marked improvements in anxiety, certain respiratory symptoms, overall physical comfort, and day-to-day function; placebo effects were negligible. Physiological measures reflecting pulmonary insufficiency were generally unaffected by treatment. These data provide impetus for renewed efforts to improve recognition and treatment of mood disorders in even severely disabled medical patients. Eight inpatients with Major Depression were treated with metyrapone and hydrocortisone in a balanced order placebo-controlled single-blind cross-over study. The hydrocortisone dose (30 mg daily) was a physiological replacement dose and the metyrapone dose was titrated against plasma cortisol in order to keep cortisol within physiological limits. The treatment resulted in a significant reduction in depressive symptoms. This placebo-controlled study replicates the results of several uncontrolled studies but leaves open for further study the mechanism by which the combined administration of metyrapone and hydrocortisone might exert its antidepressant effect. Depression is an international public health problem. Impairment in social and occupational functioning, increased comorbidity with other psychiatric and medical conditions, and an increased risk of mortality are a few of its consequences. Some psychiatrists have the impression that selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors may not work as well as tricyclic anti-depressants in severe depression and/or melancholia. On the contrary, there is a general belief that selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors are superior to the tricyclic anti-depressants in having fewer side-effects, particularly cardiovascular effects. The objective of this double-blind study was to compare the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine and nortriptyline in patients with moderate to severe major depression.
                A total of 48 adult outpatients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV), forth edition for major depression, based on the structured clinical interview for DSM IV participated in the trial. Patients had a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score of at least 20. In this double-blind, single-center trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive nortriptyline 150 mg/day (group 1) or fluoxetine 60 mg/day (group 2) for 6-weeks. The outcome of the two groups was assessed using Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, a side-effect checklist and a regular ECG assessment.
                The results suggest that the efficacy of nortriptyline is superior to fluoxetine in this group of major depressed patients. No significant differences were observed between dropout rates in the two groups but anti-cholinergic side-effects were significantly more frequent with nortriptyline than with fluoxetine but there was no significant difference in cardiovascular effects in particular QTc prolongation.
                The results of the current study suggest that nortriptyline was more effective than fluoxetine in the treatment of moderate to severe depression. A larger study is warranted. Open-label trials with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor citalopram suggest that this agent is effective and safe for the treatment of depressive symptoms in children and adolescents. The current study investigated the efficacy and safety of citalopram compared with placebo in the treatment of pediatric patients with major depression.
                An 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the safety and efficacy of citalopram with placebo in the treatment of children (ages 7-11) and adolescents (ages 12-17) with major depressive disorder. Diagnosis was established with the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version. Patients (N=174) were treated initially with placebo or 20 mg/day of citalopram, with an option to increase the dose to 40 mg/day at week 4 if clinically indicated. The primary outcome measure was score on the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised; the response criterion was defined as a score of < or =28.
                The overall mean citalopram dose was approximately 24 mg/day. Mean Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised scores decreased significantly more from baseline in the citalopram treatment group than in the placebo treatment group, beginning at week 1 and continuing at every observation point to the end of the study (effect size=2.9). The difference in response rate at week 8 between placebo (24%) and citalopram (36%) also was statistically significant. Citalopram treatment was well tolerated. Rates of discontinuation due to adverse events were comparable in the placebo and citalopram groups (5.9% versus 5.6%, respectively). Rhinitis, nausea, and abdominal pain were the only adverse events to occur with a frequency exceeding 10% in either treatment group.
                In this population of children and adolescents, treatment with citalopram reduced depressive symptoms to a significantly greater extent than placebo treatment and was well tolerated. A significant drug-placebo difference was found in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of nortriptyline for treatment of major depression among frail elderly patients living in an institutional setting. This finding confirms the validity of the DSM-III-R diagnosis of major depression and establishes the need for specific psychiatric services for the chronically ill elderly living in nursing homes and congregate housing facilities. The incidence of adverse events requiring early termination of treatment was 34%, demonstrating the vulnerability of these patients and their need for careful monitoring during treatment. High levels of self-care disability and low levels of serum albumin were both associated with decreased therapeutic responses, demonstrating the need for further research on psychopathology in these settings. There is evidence of derangement of oxidant and antioxidant defense systems in depression. The present study examined the effects of fluoxetine and citalopram, standard selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, on lipid peroxidation, superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and ascorbic acid concentrations. For this, a prospective open-labeled, randomized design was utilized. Patients with major depression (n = 62) were compared with age- and sex-matched healthy volunteers (n = 40). There was a significant increase in serum SOD, serum MDA and decrease in plasma ascorbic acid levels in patients of major depression as compared to control subjects. The trend reversed significantly after treatment with fluoxetine and citalopram. Results indicate a greater reduction in oxidative stress with citalopram than fluoxetine. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) score also improved with fluoxetine and citalopram treatment. These findings indicate that major depression is associated with increased levels of serum SOD, serum MDA and decreased levels of plasma ascorbic acid. Treatment with fluoxetine and citalopram reversed these biochemical parameters. This study can be used as a predictor of drug response by fluoxetine and citalopram in major depression. Thirty-nine unipolar depressed patients were treated, after a washout period of seven days in a double blind study with either moclobemide, placebo or amitriptyline, for 42 days. The psychopathological assessment and HRSD were done on seven day intervals and thyroid analysis was done on 14 day intervals. At the end of therapy, the levels of T4 and fT4 decreased significantly in the responders if amitriptyline was used, and non-significantly if placebo or moclobemide were used. The T4 and fT4 values of the non-responders increased non-significantly. The weight change was minimal and non-significant.
Treatment of depression in adults with low dose tricyclics is justified. However, more rigorous studies are needed to definitively establish the relative benefits and harms of varying dosages.