Bourin M
GIS Médicament, Faculté de Médecine, Nantes, France.
Therapie. 2000 Jan-Feb;55(1):147-53.
Diagnostic criteria and classification are changing. It is no longer acceptable to include patients with a general diagnosis of any anxiety, or neurotic anxiety. Regardless of the reference system used, DSM IV or ICD 10, anxiety disorders are now detailed in separate entities. General anxiety disorder, GAD, which is pivotal for the evaluation of new products, can only be claimed after the elimination of all the others, and is relatively rare. The inclusion of such outpatients is further complicated, as comorbidity is frequently associated with GAD--alcoholism, major depression, dysthymia, personality disorders, somatic disease likely to interfere with patient evaluation--and leads to exclusions, and also because the requested duration for the syndrome, prior to inclusion, is six months, which means six months without psychotropic drugs, including excessive alcohol consumption. As to patient evaluation, the reference scale remains the HAM-A. It should show a score above 20 at baseline. It has been designed to assess the level of anxiety of patients presenting with the diagnosis of anxiety, but not the diagnosis of GAD, and, clearly, in relation to the expected results obtained with BZD, which are still the standard reference drugs. The same is true for the other investigator scales and self-rating scales. Moreover, the criteria defining clinical improvement are still discussed. More generally, clinical testing in comparison with placebo and reference drugs is particularly important for anxiolytic drugs. The optimal dose range should be investigated in phase I, evidence of sedative or disinhibiting effects, and in phase II, defining the minimal active dose. Longer duration of treatment should be scrutinized in phase III, in order to check on long-term efficacy, recurrences and relapses. The effects of drug withdrawal should also be studied: withdrawal syndrome, rebound, recurrence, dependence. It currently looks difficult to market new anxiolytic drugs, and clinical research mainly provides an extension of the indications for antidepressant drugs in anxiety.
诊断标准和分类正在发生变化。将患有任何一般性焦虑症或神经症性焦虑症的患者纳入其中已不再被接受。无论使用何种参考系统,即《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM IV)还是《国际疾病分类》第十版(ICD 10),焦虑症现在都被详细划分到不同的类别中。广泛性焦虑障碍(GAD)对于新产品的评估至关重要,只有在排除所有其他焦虑症之后才能确诊,而且相对罕见。将此类门诊患者纳入研究更为复杂,因为共病情况经常与广泛性焦虑障碍相关——酗酒、重度抑郁症、心境恶劣障碍、人格障碍、可能干扰患者评估的躯体疾病——这会导致一些患者被排除在外,还因为在纳入研究之前,该综合征所需的持续时间为六个月,这意味着六个月内未使用精神药物,包括过量饮酒。至于患者评估,参考量表仍然是汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAM - A)。基线时该量表得分应高于20分。它旨在评估被诊断为焦虑症患者的焦虑程度,但并非用于诊断广泛性焦虑障碍,显然,它是相对于苯二氮䓬类药物(BZD)所获得的预期结果而言的,苯二氮䓬类药物仍是标准参考药物。其他研究者使用的量表和自评量表也是如此。此外,关于定义临床改善的标准仍在讨论中。更普遍地说,与安慰剂和参考药物进行比较的临床试验对于抗焦虑药物尤为重要。最佳剂量范围应在I期进行研究,观察镇静或去抑制作用的证据,在II期确定最小有效剂量。在III期应仔细研究更长疗程的治疗效果,以检查长期疗效、复发和再发情况。还应研究药物撤药的影响:撤药综合征、反跳、复发、依赖性。目前看来,推出新的抗焦虑药物很困难,临床研究主要是在扩大抗抑郁药物在焦虑症方面的适应证。