Suppr超能文献

难治性抑郁症临床试验中奥氮平/氟西汀联合用药的综合分析。

An integrated analysis of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination in clinical trials of treatment-resistant depression.

作者信息

Trivedi Madhukar H, Thase Michael E, Osuntokun Olawale, Henley David B, Case Michael, Watson Susan B, Campbell Giedra M, Corya Sara A

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX 75390-9119, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Psychiatry. 2009 Mar;70(3):387-96. doi: 10.4088/jcp.08m04064. Epub 2009 Mar 10.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) versus olanzapine or fluoxetine monotherapy across all clinical trials of treatment-resistant depression sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company.

METHOD

Efficacy and safety data from 1146 patients with a history of nonresponse during the current depressive episode who subsequently exhibited nonresponse during a 6- to 8-week antidepressant open-label lead-in phase and were randomly assigned to OFC (N = 462), fluoxetine (N = 342), or olanzapine (N = 342) for double-blind treatment were analyzed. All patients had a diagnosis of major depressive disorder as defined by DSM-III or DSM-IV criteria. The dates in which the trials were conducted ranged from May 1997 to July 2005.

RESULTS

After 8 weeks, OFC patients demonstrated significantly greater Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale improvement (mean change = -13.0) than fluoxetine (-8.6, p < .001) or olanzapine (-8.2, p < .001) patients, via a mixed-effects model repeated-measures analysis. Remission rates were 25.5% for OFC, 17.3% (p = .006) for fluoxetine, and 14.0% (p < .001) for olanzapine. Adverse events in >or= 10% of OFC patients were weight gain, increased appetite, dry mouth, somnolence, fatigue, headache, and peripheral edema. Random glucose mean change (mg/dL) was +7.92 for the OFC group, +1.62 for the fluoxetine group (p = .020), and +9.91 for the olanzapine group (p = .485). Random cholesterol mean change (mg/dL) was +12.4 for OFC, +2.3 for fluoxetine (p < .001), and +3.1 for olanzapine (p < .001); incidence of treatment-emergent increase from normal to high cholesterol (baseline < 200 mg/dL and >or= 240 subsequently) was significantly higher for the OFC group (10.2%) than for the fluoxetine group (3.1%, p = .017) but not the olanzapine group (8.0%, p = .569). Mean weight change (kg) was +4.42 for OFC, -0.15 for fluoxetine (p < .001), and +4.63 for olanzapine (p = .381), with 40.4% of OFC patients gaining >or= 7% body weight (vs. olanzapine: 42.9%, p = .515; fluoxetine: 2.3%, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Results of this analysis showed that OFC-treated patients experienced significantly improved depressive symptoms compared with olanzapine- or fluoxetine-treated patients following failure of 2 or more antidepressants within the current depressive episode. Safety results for OFC were generally consistent with those for its component monotherapies. The total cholesterol increase associated with OFC was more pronounced than with olanzapine alone.

摘要

目的

在礼来公司赞助的所有难治性抑郁症临床试验中,评估奥氮平/氟西汀联合用药(OFC)与奥氮平或氟西汀单药治疗的疗效。

方法

分析了1146例在当前抑郁发作期间无反应史、随后在6至8周的抗抑郁药开放标签导入期无反应且被随机分配接受OFC(N = 462)、氟西汀(N = 342)或奥氮平(N = 342)双盲治疗的患者的疗效和安全性数据。所有患者均符合DSM-III或DSM-IV标准定义的重度抑郁症诊断。试验进行的日期范围为1997年5月至2005年7月。

结果

8周后,通过混合效应模型重复测量分析,OFC组患者的蒙哥马利-阿斯伯格抑郁评定量表改善程度(平均变化=-13.0)显著大于氟西汀组(-8.6,p <.001)或奥氮平组(-8.2,p <.001)。OFC组的缓解率为25.5%,氟西汀组为17.3%(p =.006),奥氮平组为14.0%(p <.001)。OFC组中≥10%患者出现的不良事件有体重增加、食欲增加、口干、嗜睡、疲劳、头痛和外周水肿。OFC组随机血糖平均变化(mg/dL)为+7.92,氟西汀组为+1.62(p =.020),奥氮平组为+9.91(p =.485)。OFC组随机胆固醇平均变化(mg/dL)为+12.4,氟西汀组为+2.3(p <.001),奥氮平组为+3.1(p <.001);OFC组治疗后胆固醇从正常升高到高水平(基线<200 mg/dL且随后≥240)的发生率显著高于氟西汀组(3.1%,p =.017)但高于奥氮平组(8.0%,p =.569)。OFC组平均体重变化(kg)为+4.42,氟西汀组为-0.15(p <.001),奥氮平组为+4.63(p =.381),40.4%的OFC组患者体重增加≥7%(与奥氮平组相比:42.9%,p =.515;与氟西汀组相比:2.3%,p <.001)。

结论

该分析结果表明,在当前抑郁发作中使用2种或更多种抗抑郁药治疗失败后,与接受奥氮平或氟西汀治疗的患者相比,接受OFC治疗的患者抑郁症状有显著改善。OFC的安全性结果与其单组分单药治疗的结果总体一致。与OFC相关的总胆固醇升高比单独使用奥氮平更明显。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验