Bandelow Borwin, Baldwin David S, Dolberg Ornah T, Andersen Henning Friis, Stein Dan J
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
J Clin Psychiatry. 2006 Sep;67(9):1428-34. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v67n0914.
Symptom-free remission is a goal for treatment in depression and anxiety disorders, but there is no consensus regarding the threshold for determining remission in individual disorders. We sought to determine these thresholds by comparing, in a post hoc analysis, scores on the Clinical Global Impressions scale (CGI) and disorder-specific symptom severity rating scales from all available studies of the treatment of major depressive disorder, panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and social anxiety disorder with the same medication (escitalopram). We also sought to compare the standardized effect sizes of escitalopram for these 4 psychiatric disorders.
Raw data from all randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, acute treatment studies sponsored by H. Lundbeck A/S (Copenhagen, Denmark) or Forest Laboratories, Inc. (New York, N.Y.), published through March 1, 2004, with patients treated with escitalopram for DSM-IV major depressive disorder (5 studies), panic disorder (1 study), generalized anxiety disorder (4 studies), or social anxiety disorder (2 studies) were compared with regard to the standardized effect sizes of change in CGI score and scores on rating scales that represent the "gold standard" for assessment of these disorders (the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, the Panic and Agoraphobia Scale, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety, and the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale, respectively).
In all indications, treatment with escitalopram showed differences from placebo in treatment effect from 0.32 to 0.59 on the CGI-S and CGI-I and standardized effect sizes from 0.32 to 0.50 on the standard rating scales. There were no significant differences among the different disorders. Moderate to high correlations were found between scores on the CGI and the standard scales. The corresponding standard scale scores for CGI-defined "response" and "remission" were determined.
Comparison of scores on the standard scales and scores on the CGI suggest that the traditional definition of response (i.e., a 50% reduction in a standard scale) may be too conservative.
症状缓解是抑郁症和焦虑症治疗的目标,但对于个体疾病缓解的判定阈值尚无共识。我们试图通过在一项事后分析中比较所有使用相同药物(艾司西酞普兰)治疗重度抑郁症、恐慌症、广泛性焦虑症和社交焦虑症的现有研究中临床总体印象量表(CGI)得分和特定疾病症状严重程度评定量表得分,来确定这些阈值。我们还试图比较艾司西酞普兰对这4种精神疾病的标准化效应大小。
对由H. Lundbeck A/S(丹麦哥本哈根)或Forest Laboratories, Inc.(纽约州纽约市)赞助的、截至2004年3月1日发表的所有随机、双盲、安慰剂对照急性治疗研究的原始数据进行比较,这些研究中的患者使用艾司西酞普兰治疗DSM-IV重度抑郁症(5项研究)、恐慌症(1项研究)、广泛性焦虑症(4项研究)或社交焦虑症(2项研究),比较CGI得分变化的标准化效应大小以及代表这些疾病评估“金标准”的评定量表得分(分别为蒙哥马利-阿斯伯格抑郁评定量表、恐慌和广场恐怖症量表、汉密尔顿焦虑评定量表和利博维茨社交焦虑量表)。
在所有适应症中,艾司西酞普兰治疗在CGI-S和CGI-I上的治疗效果与安慰剂相比差异为0.32至0.59,在标准评定量表上的标准化效应大小为0.32至0.50。不同疾病之间无显著差异。CGI得分与标准量表得分之间存在中度至高相关性。确定了CGI定义的“反应”和“缓解”对应的标准量表得分。
标准量表得分与CGI得分的比较表明,反应的传统定义(即标准量表上降低50%)可能过于保守。