Suppr超能文献

在成人抑郁症急性期治疗中,与其他抗抑郁药类别相比,随机对照试验中描述的米氮平的安全性报告和不良事件概况:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Safety reporting and adverse-event profile of mirtazapine described in randomized controlled trials in comparison with other classes of antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression: systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry and Cognitive-Behavioral Medicine, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Japan.

出版信息

CNS Drugs. 2010 Jan;24(1):35-53. doi: 10.2165/11319480-000000000-00000.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mirtazapine has a unique mechanism of antidepressant action, and thus is thought to have a different profile of adverse events from that of other antidepressants.

OBJECTIVE

To present a methodologically rigorous systematic review of the adverse event profile of mirtazapine and point to possible problems with safety reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the acute-phase treatment of major depression in adults with mirtazapine in comparison with other types of antidepressant.

METHODS

The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register was electronically searched using the following search terms: 'depress*', 'dysthymi*', 'adjustment disorder*', 'mood disorder*', 'affective disorder', 'affective symptoms' and 'mirtazapine'. Pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field were contacted, and the reference lists of the relevant RCTs were checked, for additional data. No language restriction was imposed. Two authors independently assessed the quality of trials for inclusion in the review. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Two authors independently extracted data on adverse events. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The adequacy of safety reporting was assessed by one author. Regarding the adequacy of safety reporting, the qualitative and quantitative parameters of safety reporting were determined. Regression analyses were conducted to assess characteristics of trials influencing safety reporting. The primary and secondary outcomes in the systematic review of the adverse events associated with mirtazapine were defined as the proportion of patients having each of 43 adverse events listed in the modified version of the WHO Adverse Reaction Terminology, and the proportion of patients experiencing at least one adverse event, respectively. Meta-analyses were conducted for these outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs involving 4842 patients were identified as meeting our inclusion criteria. With regard to safety reporting, only two trials and no trials were rated as 'adequate' in terms of the reporting of clinical adverse events and laboratory-determined toxicity, respectively. The proportion of text in the results sections of the study reports devoted to safety reporting was a mean of 22%. No associations were observed between the adequacy of safety reporting and any characteristics of the trials; however, sample size over 100 participants in total and over 50 subjects in a study arm, double blindness and sponsorship by the company marketing mirtazapine were significantly associated with a greater number of reported adverse events in mirtazapine recipients. In terms of individual adverse events, mirtazapine was significantly less likely to cause hypertension or tachycardia (risk ratio [RR] 0.51) and tremor (RR 0.43) than tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). In comparison with selective serotonin uptake inhibitors (SSRIs), mirtazapine was significantly more likely to cause weight gain or increased appetite (RR 3.68), increased salivation (RR 3.66), somnolence (RR 1.62) and fatigue (RR 1.45), but less likely to cause flatulence (RR 0.26), sweating (RR 0.28), sexual dysfunction (RR 0.34), tremor (RR 0.37), nausea or vomiting (RR 0.40), sleep disturbance (RR 0.55) and diarrhoea (RR 0.61). In comparison with the serotonin-noradrenaline (norepinephrine) reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) venlafaxine, mirtazapine was significantly more likely to cause fatigue (RR 2.02), but less likely to cause sleep disturbance (RR 0.03), sweating (RR 0.03) and constipation (RR 0.25). Relative to trazodone, mirtazapine was significantly more likely to cause weight gain or increased appetite (RR 4.00). Approximately 70% of patients treated with mirtazapine experienced at least one adverse event, with no significant difference in comparison with other antidepressants.

CONCLUSIONS

The study confirmed the paucity of adequate safety reporting in trials comparing mirtazapine with other types of antidepressant in the acute-phase treatment of depression in adults. Based on the available evidence, mirtazapine appears to have a unique adverse-event profile. Using these findings, clinicians can inform their patients, not only of the simple frequency of adverse events with mirtazapine, but also of the relative difference in the frequency of adverse events in comparison with that of other antidepressants, to aid pragmatic clinical decisions.

摘要

背景

米氮平具有独特的抗抑郁作用机制,因此被认为与其他抗抑郁药的不良反应谱不同。

目的

本文旨在对米氮平的不良反应进行系统评价,以期指出成人抑郁症急性期治疗中,米氮平与其他类型抗抑郁药相比,在随机对照试验(RCT)中安全性报告可能存在的问题。

方法

使用以下检索词对 Cochrane 协作组抑郁症、焦虑症和神经症对照试验登记库进行电子检索:“depress*”、“dysthymi*”、“adjustment disorder*”、“mood disorder*”、“affective disorder”、“affective symptoms”和“mirtazapine”。联系该领域的制药公司和专家,并查阅相关 RCT 的参考文献,以获取其他数据。未对语言进行限制。两位作者独立评估试验的质量,以纳入本综述。有分歧时,通过协商解决。两位作者独立提取不良反应数据。有分歧时,通过协商解决。由一位作者评估安全性报告的充分性。关于安全性报告的充分性,确定了安全性报告的定性和定量参数。进行回归分析,以评估影响安全性报告的试验特征。系统评价中与米氮平相关的不良反应的主要和次要结局分别定义为在改良的世界卫生组织不良反应术语表中列出的 43 种不良反应中每种不良反应的患者比例,以及至少发生一种不良反应的患者比例。对这些结局进行了荟萃分析。

结果

确定了 25 项 RCT,涉及 4842 名患者,符合我们的纳入标准。关于安全性报告,只有两项试验和没有试验在临床不良反应和实验室确定的毒性报告方面被评为“充分”。研究报告结果部分中专门用于安全性报告的文本平均占 22%。没有观察到安全性报告的充分性与试验的任何特征之间存在关联;然而,总样本量超过 100 名参与者和研究臂中超过 50 名参与者、双盲和米氮平销售公司的赞助与米氮平治疗组报告的不良反应数量增加显著相关。在个别不良反应方面,米氮平引起高血压或心动过速(风险比 [RR] 0.51)和震颤(RR 0.43)的可能性显著低于三环类抗抑郁药(TCAs)。与选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)相比,米氮平引起体重增加或食欲增加(RR 3.68)、流涎(RR 3.66)、嗜睡(RR 1.62)和疲劳(RR 1.45)的可能性显著增加,但引起气胀(RR 0.26)、出汗(RR 0.28)、性功能障碍(RR 0.34)、震颤(RR 0.37)、恶心或呕吐(RR 0.40)、睡眠障碍(RR 0.55)和腹泻(RR 0.61)的可能性显著降低。与去甲肾上腺素(去甲肾上腺素)再摄取抑制剂(SNRI)文拉法辛相比,米氮平引起疲劳(RR 2.02)的可能性显著增加,但引起睡眠障碍(RR 0.03)、出汗(RR 0.03)和便秘(RR 0.25)的可能性显著降低。与曲唑酮相比,米氮平引起体重增加或食欲增加(RR 4.00)的可能性显著增加。大约 70%接受米氮平治疗的患者出现至少一种不良反应,与其他抗抑郁药相比无显著差异。

结论

本研究证实了在成人抑郁症急性期治疗中,米氮平与其他类型抗抑郁药的比较中,安全性报告不足。基于现有证据,米氮平似乎具有独特的不良反应谱。使用这些发现,临床医生可以告知患者,不仅要告知米氮平不良反应的简单频率,还要告知与其他抗抑郁药相比,不良反应频率的相对差异,以帮助进行实际的临床决策。

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