Suppr超能文献

伏硫西汀用于成人抑郁症治疗。

Vortioxetine for depression in adults.

作者信息

Koesters Markus, Ostuzzi Giovanni, Guaiana Giuseppe, Breilmann Johanna, Barbui Corrado

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry II, Ulm University, Ludwig-Heilmeyer-Str. 2, Guenzburg, Germany, D-89312.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 5;7(7):CD011520. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011520.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder is a common mental disorder affecting a person's mind, behaviour and body. It is expressed as a variety of symptoms and is associated with substantial impairment. Despite a range of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options, there is still room for improvement of the pharmacological treatment of depression in terms of efficacy and tolerability. The latest available antidepressant is vortioxetine. It is assumed that vortioxetine's antidepressant action is related to a direct modulation of serotonergic receptor activity and inhibition of the serotonin transporter. The mechanism of action is not fully understood, but it is claimed to be novel. Vortioxetine was placed in the category of "Other" antidepressants and may therefore provide an alternative to existing antidepressant drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and acceptability of vortioxetine compared with placebo and other antidepressant drugs in the treatment of acute depression in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane's Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialised Register to May 2016 without applying any restrictions to date, language or publication status. We checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, regulatory agency reports and trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy, tolerability, or both of vortioxetine versus placebo or any other antidepressant agent in the treatment of acute depression in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies and extracted data. We extracted data on study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability. We analysed intention-to-treat (ITT) data only and used risk ratios (RR) as effect sizes for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analyses used random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (7746 participants) in this review. Seven studies were placebo controlled; eight studies compared vortioxetine to serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). We were unable to identify any study that compared vortioxetine to antidepressant drugs from other classes, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).Vortioxetine may be more effective than placebo across the three efficacy outcomes: response (Mantel-Haenszel RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.49; 14 studies, 6220 participants), remission (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.53; 14 studies, 6220 participants) and depressive symptoms measured using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Scale (MADRS) (score range: 0 to 34; higher score means worse outcome: MD -2.94, 95% CI -4.07 to -1.80; 14 studies, 5566 participants). The quality of the evidence was low for response and remission and very low for depressive symptoms. We found no evidence of a difference in total dropout rates (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.19; 14 studies, 6220 participants). More participants discontinued vortioxetine than placebo because of adverse effects (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81; 14 studies, 6220 participants) but fewer discontinued due to inefficacy (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.90, P = 0.02; 14 studies, 6220 participants). The quality of the evidence for dropouts was moderate.The subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not reveal factors that significantly influenced the results.In comparison with other antidepressants, very low-quality evidence from eight studies showed no clinically significant difference between vortioxetine and SNRIs as a class for response (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 3159 participants) or remission (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 3155 participants). There was a small difference favouring SNRIs for depressive symptom scores on the MADRS (MD 1.52, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.53; 8 studies, 2807 participants). Very low quality evidence from eight studies (3159 participants) showed no significant differences between vortioxetine and the SNRIs as a class for total dropout rates (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.08), dropouts due to adverse events (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.08) and dropouts due to inefficacy (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.30).Against individual antidepressants, analyses suggested that vortioxetine may be less effective than duloxetine in terms of response rates (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94; 6 studies, 2392 participants) and depressive symptoms scores on the MADRS scale (MD 1.99, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.83; 6 studies; 2106 participants). Against venlafaxine, meta-analysis of two studies found no statistically significant differences (response: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.25; 767 participants; depressive symptom scores: MD 0.02, 95% CI -2.49 to 2.54; 701 participants). In terms of number of participants reporting at least one adverse effect (tolerability), vortioxetine was better than the SNRIs as a class (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.94; 8 studies, 3134 participants) and duloxetine (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.95; 6 studies; 2376 participants). However, the sensitivity analysis casts some doubts on this result, as only two studies used comparable dosing.We judged none of the studies to have a high risk of bias for any domain, but we rated all studies to have an unclear risk of bias of selective reporting and other biases.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The place of vortioxetine in the treatment of acute depression is unclear. Our analyses showed vortioxetine may be more effective than placebo in terms of response, remission and depressive symptoms, but the clinical relevance of these effects is uncertain. Furthermore, the quality of evidence to support these findings was generally low. In comparison to SNRIs, we found no advantage for vortioxetine. Vortioxetine was less effective than duloxetine, but fewer people reported adverse effects when treated with vortioxetine compared to duloxetine. However, these findings are uncertain and not well supported by evidence. A major limitation of the current evidence is the lack of comparisons with the SSRIs, which are usually recommended as first-line treatments for acute depression. Studies with direct comparisons to SSRIs are needed to address this gap and may be supplemented by network meta-analyses to define the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of depression.

摘要

背景

重度抑郁症是一种常见的精神障碍,会影响人的思维、行为和身体。它表现为多种症状,并伴有严重的功能损害。尽管有一系列药物和非药物治疗选择,但抑郁症的药物治疗在疗效和耐受性方面仍有改进空间。最新的抗抑郁药是伏硫西汀。据推测,伏硫西汀的抗抑郁作用与直接调节血清素能受体活性和抑制血清素转运体有关。其作用机制尚未完全了解,但据称是新颖的。伏硫西汀被归类为“其他”抗抑郁药,因此可能为现有抗抑郁药提供替代选择。

目的

评估伏硫西汀与安慰剂及其他抗抑郁药相比,在治疗成人急性抑郁症方面的疗效和可接受性。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane抑郁症、焦虑症和神经症综述小组的专业注册库,截至2016年5月,对日期、语言或出版状态未作任何限制。我们检查了相关研究和综述的参考文献列表、监管机构报告和试验数据库。

选择标准

我们纳入了比较伏硫西汀与安慰剂或任何其他抗抑郁药在治疗成人急性抑郁症方面的疗效、耐受性或两者的随机对照试验。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者独立选择研究并提取数据。我们提取了关于研究特征、参与者特征、干预细节以及疗效、可接受性和耐受性方面的结局指标的数据。我们仅分析意向性治疗(ITT)数据,并使用风险比(RR)作为二分数据的效应量,使用平均差(MD)作为连续数据的效应量,均带有95%置信区间(CI)。荟萃分析使用随机效应模型。

主要结果

我们在本综述中纳入了15项研究(7746名参与者)。7项研究为安慰剂对照;8项研究将伏硫西汀与血清素 - 去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(SNRIs)进行了比较。我们未能找到任何将伏硫西汀与其他类别的抗抑郁药(如选择性血清素再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs))进行比较的研究。在三个疗效结局方面,伏硫西汀可能比安慰剂更有效:反应(Mantel - Haenszel RR 1.35,95% CI 1.22至1.49;14项研究,6220名参与者)、缓解(RR 1.32,95% CI 1.15至1.53;14项研究,6220名参与者)以及使用蒙哥马利 - 阿斯伯格抑郁量表(MADRS)测量的抑郁症状(评分范围:0至34;分数越高结果越差:MD -2.94,95% CI -4.07至 -1.80;14项研究,5566名参与者)。反应和缓解的证据质量低,抑郁症状的证据质量极低。我们没有发现总退出率存在差异的证据(RR 1.05,95% CI 0.93至1.19;14项研究,6220名参与者)。因不良反应而停用伏硫西汀的参与者比停用安慰剂的更多(RR 1.41,95% CI 1.09至1.81;14项研究,6220名参与者),但因无效而停用的较少(RR 0.56,9% CI 0.34至0.90,P = 0.02;14项研究,6220名参与者)。退出率的证据质量为中等。亚组分析和敏感性分析未揭示显著影响结果的因素。与其他抗抑郁药相比,八项研究的极低质量证据表明,伏硫西汀与SNRIs作为一个类别在反应(RR 0.91,95% CI 0.82至1.00;3159名参与者)或缓解(RR 0.89,95% CI 0.77至1.03;3155名参与者)方面没有临床显著差异。在MADRS抑郁症状评分上,SNRIs有略微优势(MD 1.52,95% CI 0.50至2.53;8项研究,2807名参与者)。八项研究(3159名参与者)的极低质量证据表明伏硫西汀与SNRIs作为一个类别在总退出率(RR 0.89,95% CI 0.73至1.08)、因不良事件导致的退出率(RR 0.74,95% CI 0.51至1.08)和因无效导致的退出率(RR 1.5Q,95% CI 0.70至3.30)方面没有显著差异。与个别抗抑郁药相比,分析表明伏硫西汀在反应率(RR 0.86,95% CI 0.79至0.94;6项研究,2392名参与者)和MADRS量表上抑郁症状评分(MD 1.99,95% CI 1.15至2.83;6项研究;2106名参与者)方面可能不如度洛西汀有效。与文拉法辛相比,两项研究的荟萃分析未发现统计学显著差异(反应:RR 1.03,95% CI 0.85至1.25;767名参与者;抑郁症状评分:MD 0.02,95% CI -2.49至2.54;701名参与者)。在报告至少一种不良反应的参与者数量(耐受性)方面,伏硫西汀优于SNRIs作为一个类别(RR 0.90,95% CI 0.86至0.94;8项研究,3134名参与者)和度洛西汀(RR 0.89,95% CI 0.84至0.95;6项研究;2376名参与者)。然而,敏感性分析对这一结果提出了一些疑问,因为只有两项研究使用了可比剂量。我们判断没有一项研究在任何领域存在高偏倚风险,但我们将所有研究的选择性报告和其他偏倚风险评为不明确。

作者结论

伏硫西汀在治疗急性抑郁症中的地位尚不清楚。我们的分析表明,伏硫西汀在反应、缓解和抑郁症状方面可能比安慰剂更有效,但这些效果的临床相关性尚不确定。此外,支持这些发现的证据质量普遍较低。与SNRIs相比,我们未发现伏硫西汀有优势。伏硫西汀比度洛西汀效果差,但与度洛西汀相比,接受伏硫西汀治疗时报告不良反应的人数较少。然而,这些发现尚不确定且证据支持不足。当前证据的一个主要局限性是缺乏与通常被推荐为急性抑郁症一线治疗药物的SSRIs的比较。需要进行与SSRIs直接比较的研究来填补这一空白,并且可以通过网状荟萃分析来补充,以确定伏硫西汀在抑郁症治疗中的作用。

相似文献

1
Vortioxetine for depression in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 5;7(7):CD011520. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011520.pub2.
2
Pharmacological treatments in panic disorder in adults: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 28;11(11):CD012729. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012729.pub3.
3
New generation antidepressants for depression in children and adolescents: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 May 24;5(5):CD013674. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013674.pub2.
4
Antidepressants for depression in adults with HIV infection.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 22;1(1):CD008525. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008525.pub3.
5
Antidepressants versus placebo for panic disorder in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 5;4(4):CD010676. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010676.pub2.
6
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4.
7
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 22;12(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2.
8
Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 23;4(4):CD011006. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006.pub3.
9
Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Oct 19;10(10):CD012859. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012859.pub2.
10
Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 28;2(2):CD010292. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010292.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Recent Advances in the Psychopharmacology of Major Depressive Disorder.
BJPsych Adv. 2023 Mar;29(2):117-130. doi: 10.1192/bja.2022.14. Epub 2022 Apr 4.
3
Depression and anxiety in multiple sclerosis. Review of a fatal combination.
J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2024 Aug;131(8):847-869. doi: 10.1007/s00702-024-02792-0. Epub 2024 Jun 13.
4
SSRIs in the Treatment of Depression: A Pharmacological CUL-DE-SAC?
Curr Top Behav Neurosci. 2024;66:1-19. doi: 10.1007/7854_2023_447.
5
Depression and Pseudodementia: Decoding the Intricate Bonds in an Italian Outpatient Setting.
Brain Sci. 2023 Aug 13;13(8):1200. doi: 10.3390/brainsci13081200.
6
and Its Utility in Psychiatric Disorders.
Molecules. 2023 Jul 10;28(14):5314. doi: 10.3390/molecules28145314.
8
Real-world pharmacological treatment of patients with postpartum depression in China from 2016 to 2020: A cross-sectional analysis.
Saudi Pharm J. 2022 Oct;30(10):1418-1425. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2022.07.002. Epub 2022 Jul 19.

本文引用的文献

2
Differential interaction with the serotonin system by S-ketamine, vortioxetine, and fluoxetine in a genetic rat model of depression.
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2016 Jul;233(14):2813-25. doi: 10.1007/s00213-016-4327-5. Epub 2016 May 28.
3
A meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials of vortioxetine for the treatment of major depressive disorder in adults.
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2016 Jun;26(6):979-93. doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2016.03.007. Epub 2016 Mar 25.

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