Müller Thomas J, Künzi Arnaud, Heitlinger Ellen, Krämer Bernd, von Känel Roland, Hättenschwiler Josef, Hilpert Matthias, Imboden Christian, Holsboer-Trachsler Edith, Hatzinger Martin, Kasper Siegfried, Bandelow Borwin, Seifritz Erich
Private Clinic Meiringen, Meiringen, 3860, Switzerland.
University Hospital of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2025 Aug 11. doi: 10.1007/s00406-025-02082-0.
Anti-anxiety medications' side effects and dependency risks necessitate thorough consideration of their efficacy and acceptability when making treatment decisions.
A systematic review and Network Meta-Analysis (NMA) was conducted using three databases from 1980 to 2020, focusing on adults diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) or any relevant diagnostic classification of anxiety disorder or those for whom Hamilton Anxiety (HAM-A) data is available, and including any comparator (placebo and/or active comparator treatments). The primary outcomes were efficacy (mean difference in change from baseline in HAM-A total score) and acceptability (study discontinuations for any cause). This study is registered with Open Science Framework (OSF) database.
Analysis of 100 trials involving 28,637 participants showed that most active drugs were more effective than placebo in reducing anxiety. Notably, silexan was the only phytopharmaceutical included in the NMA. Clomipramine had the highest efficacy and vortioxetine the least. However, in terms of acceptability, clomipramine led to the most study discontinuations, while clobazam had the lowest discontinuation rate, indicating that efficacy and acceptability do not always align. Notably, silexan was both highly effective and as acceptable as a placebo. Only four treatments showed fewer adverse events than placebo (diazepam, agomelatine, clobazam, and silexan).
This network meta-analysis provides a unique comparison of the efficacy and acceptability of anxiolytics. It represents one of the most comprehensive evidence bases available to guide the first choice of treatment for anxiety disorders in adults.
抗焦虑药物的副作用和依赖风险使得在做出治疗决策时必须充分考虑其疗效和可接受性。
使用1980年至2020年的三个数据库进行了一项系统评价和网状Meta分析,重点关注被诊断为广泛性焦虑症(GAD)或任何相关焦虑症诊断分类的成年人,或有汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAM - A)数据的成年人,并纳入任何对照药物(安慰剂和/或活性对照治疗)。主要结局为疗效(HAM - A总分从基线变化的均值差)和可接受性(因任何原因导致的研究中断)。本研究已在开放科学框架(OSF)数据库注册。
对涉及28637名参与者的100项试验的分析表明,大多数活性药物在减轻焦虑方面比安慰剂更有效。值得注意的是,西乐葆是网状Meta分析中唯一纳入的植物药。氯米帕明疗效最高,伏硫西汀最低。然而,在可接受性方面,氯米帕明导致的研究中断最多,而氯巴占的中断率最低,这表明疗效和可接受性并不总是一致的。值得注意的是,西乐葆既高效又与安慰剂一样可接受。只有四种治疗的不良事件比安慰剂少(地西泮、阿戈美拉汀、氯巴占和西乐葆)。
这项网状Meta分析提供了抗焦虑药疗效和可接受性的独特比较。它代表了可用于指导成人焦虑症首选治疗的最全面的证据基础之一。