Suppr超能文献

重度抑郁症患者的早期转换策略:一项双盲、随机研究。

Early switch strategy in patients with major depressive disorder: a double-blind, randomized study.

机构信息

Clinical Research Physician Neuroscience, Medical Department, Eli Lilly and Company, Madrid, Spain.

出版信息

J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012 Aug;32(4):479-86. doi: 10.1097/JCP.0b013e31825d9958.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Antidepressant switch is a commonly used strategy in the absence of an adequate response, but optimum timing is not well established. We compared the efficacy of an early and a conventional antidepressant switch strategy in patients with major depressive disorder.

METHODS

Patients with no or minimal improvement (<30% reduction in baseline 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAMD17] score) after 4 weeks on escitalopram 10 mg/d were randomized to either early switch strategy with duloxetine 60 to 120 mg/d for 12 weeks (arm A) or conventional switch strategy (arm B): 4 further weeks on escitalopram 10 to 20 mg/d; then, in case of nonresponse (response, ≥ 50% reduction in HAMD17), switch to duloxetine 60 to 120 mg/d for 8 weeks, or continued escitalopram in responders. Co-primary end points were time to confirmed response and remission (HAMD17, ≤ 7). Strategies were compared using Kaplan-Meier, logistic regression, and repeated-measures analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven percent (566 of 840) of patients showed no or minimal improvement and were randomized to arm A (282 patients) or arm B (284 patients). No between-strategy differences in time to confirmed response (25% Kaplan-Meier estimates, 3.9 vs 4.0 weeks, P = 0.213) or remission (6.0 vs 7.9 weeks, P = 0.075) were found. Rates of confirmed responders were similar (64.9% vs 64.1%); however, more patients randomized to early switch achieved confirmed remission (43.3% vs 35.6%; P = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Although no differences in the primary end points were found, a higher remission rate was seen with the early switch strategy. Our findings suggest that further investigations to reevaluate the conventional approach to antidepressant switch strategy would be worthwhile.

摘要

目的

在缺乏充分应答的情况下,抗抑郁药转换是一种常用策略,但最佳时机尚未明确。我们比较了在没有应答或应答不足(基线 17 项汉密尔顿抑郁量表[HAMD17]评分降低<30%)的重度抑郁症患者中,早期和常规抗抑郁药转换策略的疗效。

方法

在接受依西酞普兰 10mg/d 治疗 4 周后,无应答或应答不足(HAMD17 评分降低<30%)的患者随机分为早期转换策略组(A 组),即换用度洛西汀 60-120mg/d 治疗 12 周;或常规转换策略组(B 组):依西酞普兰 10-20mg/d 治疗 4 周;如果仍无应答(应答,HAMD17 评分降低≥50%),换用度洛西汀 60-120mg/d 治疗 8 周;或对有应答的患者继续使用依西酞普兰。主要终点是确证应答和缓解时间(HAMD17,≤7)。采用 Kaplan-Meier 分析、logistic 回归分析和重复测量分析比较策略。

结果

840 例患者中有 67%(566 例)无应答或应答不足,被随机分至 A 组(282 例)或 B 组(284 例)。未发现 A 组与 B 组之间的确证应答时间(Kaplan-Meier 估计值,25%,3.9 周 vs. 4.0 周,P=0.213)或缓解时间(6.0 周 vs. 7.9 周,P=0.075)存在差异。确证应答率相似(64.9% vs. 64.1%);然而,更多随机接受早期转换策略的患者确证缓解(43.3% vs. 35.6%;P=0.048)。

结论

虽然主要终点无差异,但早期转换策略的缓解率更高。我们的发现表明,进一步研究重新评估常规抗抑郁药转换策略可能是值得的。

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