Skip to main page content

• HOME
• Current
• Archive
• Feedback
• Subscribe
• Help

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by THASE, M. E. Articles by RUDOLPH, R. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by THASE, M. E. Articles by RUDOLPH, R. L.

The British Journal of Psychiatry (2001) 178: 234-241
© 2001 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Remission rates during treatment with venlafaxine or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors

MICHAEL E. THASE, MD

University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Pittsburgh, PA

A. RICHARD ENTSUAH, PhD and RICHARD L. RUDOLPH, MD

Clinical Research and Development, Wyeth-Ayerst Research, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Correspondence: Michael E. Thase, Professor of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, 3811 O'Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2593, USA

Declaration of interest M.E.T. is a paid consultant to Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, the employer of A.R.E. and R.L.R.

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 
Background It had been suggested that the antidepressant venlafaxine, which inhibits reuptake of both serotonin and (at higher doses) noradrenaline, may result in better outcomes than treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

Aims To compare remission rates during treatment with SSRIs or venlafaxine.

Method Data from eight comparable randomised, double-blind studies of major depressive disorder were pooled to compare remission rates (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score 7) during treatment with venlafaxine (n=851), SSRIs (fluoxetine, paroxetine, fluvoxamine; n=748) or placebo (four studies; n=446).

Results Remission rates were: venlafaxine, 45% (382/851); SSRIs, 35% (260/748); placebo, 25% (110/446) (P < 0.001; odds ratio for remission is 1.50 (1.3-1.9), favouring venlafaxine v. SSRIs). The difference between venlafaxine and the SSRIs was significant at week 2, whereas the difference between SSRIs and placebo reached significance at week 4. Results were not dependent on any one study or the definition of remission.

Conclusions Remission rates were significantly higher with venlafaxine than with an SSRI.

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 
The more commonly used measure of antidepressant efficacy in clinical trials has been a 50% reduction from baseline total scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) (Prien et al, 1991; Depression Guideline Panel, 1993). A more stringent measure of antidepressant efficacy is the ability to induce remission, a clinical state characterised by minimal residual symptoms (e.g. 17-item HRSD total scores of 7; Frank et al, 1991). Patients treated to full remission are less likely to relapse (Thase et al, 1992; Fava et al, 1996) and have more normal psychosocial and vocational functioning (Miller et al, 1998) when compared with incompletely remitted patients. This report presents the results of a pooled analysis of remission rates comparing venlafaxine and three selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs): fluoxetine, paroxetine and fluvoxamine. It includes original data from 2045 patients with depression, drawn from eight related randomised controlled trials. We undertook this analysis to test the hypothesis that patients treated with venlafaxine, a serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) (Muth et al, 1986), are significantly more likely to achieve remission than those treated with SSRIs.

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 
This analysis included data from the patients with depression who participated in the eight double-blind, randomised clinical trials comparing venlafaxine and SSRIs conducted by the Clinical Research and Development department at Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories during the development of the immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (XR) formulations of venlafaxine. Results from four of these studies have been published (Clerc et al, 1994; Dierick et al, 1996; Silverstone et al, 1998; Rudolph & Feiger, 1999). Results from two studies have been presented as posters and published in abstract form (Salinas et al, 1997; Rudolph et al, 1998a). The remaining two studies are unpublished (Studies 347 and 349; data on file, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Philadelphia, PA). The doses employed were: venlafaxine IR, 75-375 mg/day; venlafaxine XR, 75-225 mg/day; fluoxetine, 20-80 mg/day; paroxetine, 20-40 mg/day; and fluvoxamine, 100-200 mg/day. Four studies included a placebo control group (Salinas et al, 1997; Rudolph et al, 1998a; Silverstone et al, 1998; Rudolph & Feiger, 1999). Each study was approved by the ethics committees of the participating sites and conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments. All patients provided written informed consent. Table 1 summarises the study characteristics.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

Table 1 Studies pooled for analysis of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression remission (n=8)

Patients
Patients could be enrolled if they were at least 18 years old and met the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM; American Psychiatric Association, 1987, 1994) for major depression (DSM-III-R) or major depressive disorder (DSM-IV) for at least 1 month. There were 68 in-patients (one study, Clerc et al, 1994) and 1977 out-patients; all patients had minimum scores of either 20 on the HRSD₂₁ (Hamilton, 1960) or 25 on the Montgomery-sberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; Montgomery & sberg, 1979) at both pre-study and baseline (study day -1), with no greater than a 20% decrease in severity between pre-study and baseline evaluations.

Patients with clinically significant cardiovascular, renal or hepatic disease, seizure disorders, a recent history of alcohol or drug misuse or clinically significant abnormalities on baseline physical examination, electrocardiogram (ECG) or laboratory tests were excluded from participation. Patients who were hypersensitive to the study drugs or had used any investigational or antipsychotic drug within 30 days, a monoamine oxidase inhibitor within 14 days or other antidepressant, anxiolytic, sedative-hypnotic or non-psychopharmacological drugs with psychotropic effects within 7 days of double-blind treatment also were excluded. Chloral hydrate (maximum 2000 mg) or temazepam (20 mg; one study) were permitted as hypnotics. Table 2 summarises the socio-demographic and pre-treatment clinical characteristics of the pooled study groups.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

Table 2 Baseline characteristics of intent-to-treat patients (pooled studies, n=2045)

Study drugs
Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with venlafaxine (n=865), an SSRI (fluoxetine, n=563; paroxetine, n=160; or fluvoxamine, n=34) or placebo (four studies only, n=450) during the double-blind treatment period at the daily dosages shown in Table 1.

Efficacy and safety assessments
The HRSD, MADRS and Clinical Global Impression — Severity of Illness (CGI-S) (National Institute of Mental Health, 1985) were performed at study day -1, prior to double-blind therapy. These measures (along with the CGI improvement score) were reassessed on study days 7, 14, 21, 28, 42 and, if available, 56. Remission was defined as a total score of 7 on the first 17 items of the HRSD (Frank et al, 1991).

Safety and tolerability were evaluated on the basis of adverse events that were recorded throughout the study evaluation period and changes that occurred in the physical examination, vital signs, 12-lead ECG recordings and clinical laboratory tests during treatment. For this report, only the proportions of patients withdrawn from double-blind therapy because of side-effects and lack of efficacy were compared.

Statistical analyses
The analyses were performed on data from a modified intent-to-treat sample, which included all patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one HRSD evaluation during therapy. Remission rates were calculated using the last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) method, which allowed the inclusion of patients who were withdrawn early. Pairwise comparisons of remission rates were made with Fisher's exact test. All tests of hypotheses were two-sided. Results of statistical analyses were considered significant when P was 0.05. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for differences in remission rates between groups were calculated for the pooled data at each interval. The odds ratios for remission with a 95% CI (Rothman, 1986) were also calculated for venlafaxine or an SSRI v. placebo and for venlafaxine v. the SSRIs. Homogeneity of the odds ratios across studies was tested with the Breslow—Day test (Breslow & Day, 1980).

Analyses of various subgroups were performed to corroborate the overall findings, including studies using the extended-release or immediate-release formulations, active-controlled studies, placebo-controlled studies, the single inpatient study, the seven out-patient studies and studies utilising fluoxetine v. those using other SSRIs. Additional analyses compared alternative definitions of remission to ensure the robustness of the findings. The following additional definitions were examined: HRSD₂₁ 7, HRSD₂₁ 8, HRSD₂₁ 10, HRSD₁₇ 10 plus CGI=1, MADRS <10, and 50% decrease from baseline HRSD₂₁ scores. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was performed by removing each individual study from the pooled analysis, one at a time (Thase et al, 1997).

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 
Among the 2117 patients enrolled, 2045 (96.6%) were included in the intent-to-treat analyses of venlafaxine IR and venlafaxine XR (n=851), the SSRIs (n=748) and placebo (n=446). Results from one investigational site (27 patients in total) were excluded prior to the analysis because the validity of the data could not be verified. The treatment groups had similar characteristics at baseline (see Table 2). However, patients enrolled in the four placebo-controlled studies were significantly less severely depressed than those enrolled in the other studies.

Final remission rates were 45% for venlafaxine (382/851), 35% for the SSRIs (260/748) and 25% for placebo (110/446). The differences for venlafaxine v. SSRIs, venlafaxine v. placebo and SSRIs v. placebo were highly statistically significant (P <0.001 for all comparisons).

Week-by-week comparisons are illustrated in Fig. 1. Venlafaxine was statistically significantly more effective than the SSRIs from week 2 onwards and versus placebo from week 3 onwards. The SSRI group had a significantly higher remission rate than the placebo group from week 4 onwards.

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]

Fig. 1 Remission rates (HRSD17 score 7 ± 95% Cl) for pooled studies comparing venlafaxine (black bar), SSRI (grey bar) and placebo (white bar) treatments: *P 0.05, venlafaxine v. SSRI; P 0.05, venlafaxine v. placebo; P 0.05, SSRI v. placebo; P <0.001, SSRI v. placebo; ¶P <0.001, venlafaxine v. SSRI; ||P <0.001, venlafaxine v. placebo. HRSD17, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

The results of the eight individual studies are summarised in Table 3. Odds ratios for remission ranged from 1.0 to 3.5, with an overall odds ratio of 1.5 (95% CI 1.3-1.9). Thus, there was a 50% greater chance of remission during venlafaxine treatment than during SSRI treatment. Testing for homogeneity of the odds ratios revealed no significant difference (²=8.63, d.f.=7, P=0.28). The sensitivity analysis similarly found that the significant difference between venlafaxine and the SSRIs was not dependent on any one study.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

Table 3 Remission rates (%) and odds ratios for comparison of intent-to-treat 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17) remission by treatment1

Figure 2 illustrates the results for various subgroup comparisons. The differences between venlafaxine and the SSRIs were statistically significant for all but one of the subgroup analyses. The comparison of venlafaxine and SSRI that included only the four studies that were not placebocontrolled was not statistically significant (P=0.055).

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]

Fig. 2 Remission rates (HRSD17 score 7; ± 95% Cl) in different study types: *P=0.0009 (XR studies), P=0.003 (immediate-release studies) and P=0.0003 (placebo studies) (white bar), venlafaxine (black bar) v. SSRI (grey bar); P < 0.001 (XR studies) and P < 0.0001 (immediate-release studies, placebo studies), venlafaxine v. placebo (white bar); P=0.028 (immediate-release studies, placebo studies), SSRI v. placebo; P=0.055, venlafaxine v. SSRI; ¶P=0.026 (in-patient study), venlafaxine v. SSRI; ||P=0.002 (out-patient studies), venlafaxine v. SSRI. HRSD17, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; XR, venlafaxine extended-release formulation; IR, venlafaxine immediate-release (conventional) formulation; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

Figure 3 summarises the results according to multiple alternative outcome criteria. Regardless of the definition used, venlafaxine was significantly more effective than the SSRIs, and the SSRIs were significantly more effective than placebo.

View larger version (23K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]

Fig. 3 Final on-therapy remission rates (mean, 95% Cl) with different definitions of remission: *P < 0.001, SSRI (grey bar) v. placebo (white bar); P < 0.001, venlafaxine (black bar) v. SSRI; P < 0.001, venlafaxine v. placebo; P=0.023, venlafaxine v. SSRI; ¶P=0.014, venlafaxine v. SSRI. HRSD, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; MADRS, Montgomery—sberg Depression Rating Scale; CGI, Clinical Global Impression scale.

In total, 83 (9%) patients were withdrawn from venlafaxine therapy because of side-effects, compared with 57 (7%) SSRI-treated patients and 10 (2%) patients given placebo (Fisher's exact test, P=0.001, venlafaxine v. placebo and SSRI v. placebo; the venlafaxine v. SSRI comparison was not significant, P=0.185). A total of 33/895 (4%) of the venlafaxine-treated patients were withdrawn because of lack of efficacy, compared with 46/769 (6%) of patients given an SSRI and 63/453 (14%) of patients given placebo (Fisher's exact test, P=0.037, venlafaxine v. SSRI; P=0.001, venlafaxine v. placebo; P=0.001, SSRI v. placebo).

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 
Are all antidepressants equally effective?
It is often stated that the various different classes of antidepressant medication are equally effective (American Psychiatric Association, 1993; Depression Guideline Panel, 1993). However, the methods used to conduct randomised clinical trials render them relatively insensitive to possible differences between active antidepressants (Thase, 1999). Studies seldom compare groups larger than 120 patients, which does not afford the statistical power to detect modest but still clinically meaningful differences. In addition, multi-site trials may have relatively lower statistical power because of greater patient heterogeneity and lower reliability of diagnoses or dependent measures (Thase, 1999). Moreover, the composition of study groups can have a marked influence on the apparent efficacy of a treatment (Quitkin et al, 1993; Thase et al, 1997).

Meta-analysis provides useful alternative methods to compare active treatments. For example, meta-analyses comparing tricyclic antidepressants and SSRIs found differences in subgroup comparisons not apparent in qualitative reviews (Anderson & Tomenson, 1994; Edwards & Anderson, 1999). However, because the statistical power of a conventional meta-analysis is determined by the number of studies included, a large number of comparative trials must be available. For comparisons between newer antidepressants, meeting this requirement is often difficult. A second type of meta-analysis, using the data of individual patients participating in a series of related clinical trials, permits powerful comparisons to be made with a much smaller number of studies. Such pooled analyses have been used to document the efficacy of monoamine oxidase inhibitors in the treatment of atypical depression (Quitkin et al, 1993), to examine the association between fluoxetine and suicidality (Beasley et al, 1991), to examine the effects of venlafaxine treatment on blood pressure (Thase, 1998) and to compare psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy (Thase et al, 1997; DeRubeis et al, 1999).

The clinical significance of the magnitude of the differences between venlafaxine and the SSRIs warrants comment. In a conventional antidepressant clinical trial, the size of the study groups is such that statistically significant effects parallel relatively large differences in response rates (i.e. 20-25%) that are clearly clinically significant. An analysis of pooled data from an extremely large group of patients, by contrast, would have the statistical power to detect differences in remission rates so small that they would be considered trivial by most (i.e. 3-5%). The difference in remission rates observed in our pooled analysis is roughly halfway between these extremes. Given the high prevalence of depression and the staggering associated illness burden, a 10% advantage in remission rates could have substantial public health implications, particularly if costs and tolerability are comparable. From another perspective, we observed that venlafaxine-treated patients had a 50% greater chance of attaining remission than patients treated with an SSRI. In terms of the number of patients needed to treat to realise a difference, ten patients would need to be treated with venlafaxine in order to obtain one extra case of remission when compared with the SSRIs. When considered together, these various indicators point to a clinically meaningful difference.

Relationships to pharmacological mechanisms
It is proposed that the greater efficacy of venlafaxine is the result of reuptake inhibition of both serotonin and noradrenaline. Of course, reuptake inhibition is not essential to therapeutic action and it is possible that medications that potently and selectively affect either serotonergic or noradrenergic neurotransmission may initiate cascades of intracellular events that ultimately modulate the same changes in gene activity (Duman et al, 1997). Nevertheless, several previous studies found clomipramine, another potent dual reuptake inhibitor, to have a significant advantage relative to SSRIs (see Anderson & Tomenson, 1994). It appears that relatively higher doses of venlafaxine may be necessary to achieve significant noradrenergic effects, as inferred from in vitro (Muth et al, 1986; Owens et al, 2000), animal (Redrobe et al, 1998) and human (Thase, 1998; Harvey et al, 2000) studies. Consistent with this, there is a clear dose—response relationship for venlafaxine (Rudolph et al, 1998b) and patients who fail to benefit from 75 mg/day often respond to higher doses (Dierick et al, 1996; Costa e Silva, 1998; Diaz-Martinez et al, 1998; Mehtonen et al, 2000). Therefore, it is likely that the difference in efficacy between venlafaxine and SSRIs is dose dependent. Unfortunately, the flexible dose schedules utilised in five of the studies included in our meta-analysis precluded a valid examination of dose—response relationships. Research using modern molecular biological techniques would help to confirm that the greater antidepressant efficacy of venlafaxine is directly linked to a dual reuptake—inhibitory mechanism of action.

Review of other comparative studies
The most important limitation of a pooled analysis is that the results can be biased by selection of a non-representative group of studies. Our data set included all eight comparative studies conducted by the Wyeth—Ayerst Clinical Research and Development department; no studies were excluded. However, there are at least 12 other studies comparing venlafaxine and SSRIs for treatment of non-psychotic depression. Among these, three recently completed studies (double-blind, placebo- and fluoxetine-controlled trials in out-patients with melancholia, in-patients with melancholia or elderly patients) could not be included because data analyses were not complete. The remaining nine published studies were not included because we did not have access to the original data sets (see Table 4).

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]

Table 4 Summary of intent-to-treat remission rates of nine venlafaxine—SSRI comparative studies of non-psychotic depression not included in pooled analysis

It is possible that the inclusion of these additional trials would have affected the findings of the current pooled analysis. We therefore conducted a qualitative review of the nine published studies. Two studies found no evidence of differences in response or remission rates (Tylee et al, 1997; McPartlin et al, 1998). These studies were conducted in primary care clinics and compared the minimum therapeutic dosages of venlafaxine (75 mg/day) and fluoxetine (20 mg/day) (Tylee et al, 1997) or paroxetine (20 mg/day) (McPartlin et al, 1998).

Two studies reported non-significant differences (Diaz-Martinez et al, 1998; Alves et al, 1999). Diaz-Martinez et al (1998) reported that 41% of 70 patients treated with venlafaxine (75-150 mg/day) remitted during an open-label but randomised 8-week trial, as compared with 36% of 75 patients treated with fluoxetine (20-40 mg/day). The difference was 30% (i.e. 50% v. 20%) among those who received either 150 mg/day of venlafaxine (n=18) or 40 mg/day of fluoxetine (n=15). However, this numerically large difference was not statistically significant (P=0.07) in such a small subsample. Alves et al (1999) found a 19% difference (30% v. 11%) in remission rates favouring venlafaxine (75-150 mg/day) over fluoxetine (20-40 mg/day), which again was not statistically significant in a relatively small study (n=87).

Two studies reported inconsistent findings, with significant results favouring venlafaxine over fluoxetine using a global definition of remission but not according to the final HRSD score (see Table 4). Costa e Silva (1998) observed remission rates of 58% for venlafaxine (75-150 mg/day) and 35% for fluoxetine (20-40 mg/day) using a CGI numeric score of 1 to define remission, although 60% of the patients in each group remitted when an HRSD score of 7 was the criterion. Tzanakaki et al (2000) similarly found that the groups were comparable using an HRSD criterion (<7) but significantly different according to the CGI definition (see Table 4).

The three remaining studies found significant differences favouring venlafaxine; these studies all utilised maximum doses of 150 mg/day. Ballús et al (2000) observed remission rates of 59% for venlafaxine (75-150 mg/day) and 31% for paroxetine (20-40 mg/day). Mehtonen et al (2000), defining remission as a score of <10 on the 21-item version of the HRSD, reported rates of 68% for venlafaxine (75-150 mg/day) and 45% for sertraline (50-100 mg/day) among completers at week 8. Poirier & Boyer (1999) enrolled only patients who had failed to respond to at least two previous trials of antidepressants. About 75% had not responded to a prior course of SSRI therapy. They found a 19% advantage (37% v. 18%) in remission rates in favour of venlafaxine (200-300 mg/day) relative to paroxetine (20-40 mg/day).

Although these studies used various durations of treatment and definitions of remission, two conclusions are evident. First, there is no evidence that venlafaxine is more effective than the SSRIs at minimum therapeutic doses. Second, among the studies that permitted a venlafaxine dosage of 150 mg/day, there was a 14.4% average difference (range 5-23%) in remission rates favouring venlafaxine. It appears that the results of our pooled analysis would not have changed if we could have included these studies.

Other limitations
The generalisability of the results of a group of controlled clinical trials, like those of the individual studies, is limited by the exclusion of patients with more complex conditions, such as significant psychiatric and medical comorbidities. Although this lessens the relevance of these results to clinical practice, there is no reason to suspect that this exclusivity favours venlafaxine over the SSRIs. Other potential shortcomings of pooled analyses include problems with the reliability of dependent measures and the possibility that the results may be influenced by the data from one or two particularly large studies. We found significant differences between SSRIs and placebo, however, which indicates that the ‘assay sensitivity’ (Leber, 1991) of the pooled analysis was, at the least, sufficient to overcome measurement error. We also confirmed that the differences were not attributable to any particular study and extended across multiple definitions of remission.

Three more specific limitations can be considered. First, the SSRIs were lumped together as a class. Although there is no evidence that any SSRI is more effective than another, they are not truly interchangeable and some patients respond poorly to one SSRI but well to another (Edwards & Anderson, 1999). In this respect, our pooled analysis included a disproportionate number of patients treated with fluoxetine. The studies listed in Table 4 provide a broader range of comparisons and, in aggregate, yielded similar results. Nevertheless, among the 17 comparative studies included in the pooled analysis or summarised in Table 4, there is only one study each utilising fluvoxamine or sertraline and, to date, there are no studies of citalopram.

Second, all of the studies were short term. It is possible that a longer treatment period could have resulted in comparable remission rates.

Third, none of the studies used in the pooled analysis excluded patients who had failed to respond to other SSRIs. Because several SSRIs were already widely available when these studies were conducted, it is possible that the advantage observed for venlafaxine was delimited to a subgroup of patients who had previously failed trials of other SSRIs (see, for example, Poirier & Boyer, 1999).

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

• Patients treated with venlafaxine had a 10% greater chance of remission than those treated with SSRIs (45% v. 35%).
  
• Onset of remission occurred 1-2 weeks earlier for venlafaxine-treated patients.
  
• Doses of 150 mg/day venlafaxine may be necessary to maximise the likelihood of remission.
  

LIMITATIONS

• Results of meta-analysis may be affected by the quality of the individual studies.
  
• Generalisability is limited by the exclusivity of clinical trial enrolment.
  
• There is not a sufficient number of studies to compare venlafaxine with specific SSRIs other than fluoxetine.
  

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHOD RESULTS DISCUSSION Clinical Implications and... REFERENCES

 

1. Alves, C., for the Venlafaxine Study Group (1999) Efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in outpatients with major depression. Primary Care Psychiatry, 5, 57 -63.
2. American Psychiatric Association (1987) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edn, revised) DSM-III-R). Washington, DC: APA.
3. American Psychiatric Association (1993) Practice guideline for major depressive disorder in adults. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150 (suppl. 4), 1 -26.[Medline]
4. American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn) (DSM-IV). Washington, DC: APA.
5. Anderson, I. M. & Tomenson, B. M. (1994) The efficacy of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors in depression: a meta-analysis of studies against tricyclic antidepressants. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 8, 238 -249.[CrossRef]
6. Ballús, C., Quiros, G., de Flores, T., et al (2000) The efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine and paroxetine in outpatients with depressive disorder or dysthymia. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 15, 43 -48.[Medline]
7. Beasley, C. M., Jr., Dornseif, B. E., Bosomworth, J. C., et al (1991) Fluoxetine and suicide: a meta-analysis of controlled trials of treatment for depression. British Medical Journal, 303, 685 -692.
8. Breslow, N. E. & Day, N. E. (1980) Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume I. The Analysis of Case-Control Studies. Lyons: IARC Scientific Publications.
9. Clerc, G. E., Ruimy, P., Verdeau-Paillès, J., et al (1994) A double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in patients hospitalized for major depression and melancholia. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 9, 139-143.[Medline]
10. Costa e Silva, J. (1998) Randomized, double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in outpatients with major depression. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59, 352 -357.[Medline]
11. Depression Guideline Panel (1993) Depression in Primary Care. Volume 2. Treatment of Major Depression. Clinical Practice Guideline No. 5, AHCPR Publication No. 93-0551. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research.
12. DeRubeis, R. J., Gelfand, L. A., Tang, T. Z., et al (1999) Medication versus cognitive behavior therapy for severely depressed outpatients: meta-analysis of four randomized comparisons. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 1007 -1013.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Diaz-Martinez, A., Benassinni, O., Ontiveros, A., et al (1998) A randomized, open-label comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in depressed outpatients. Clinical Therapeutics, 20, 467 -476.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Dierick, M., Ravizza, L., Realini, R., et al (1996) A double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine for treatment of major depression in outpatients. Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 20, 57 -71.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Duman, R. S., Heninger, G. R. & Nestler, E. J. (1997) A molecular and cellular theory of depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 597 -606.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Edwards, J. G. & Anderson, I. (1999) Systematic review and guide to selection of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Drugs, 54, 507 -533.
17. Fava, G. A., Grandi, S., Zielezny, M., et al (1996) Four-year outcome for cognitive behavioral treatment of residual symptoms in major depression. American Journal of Psychiatry, 153, 945 -947.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Frank, E., Prien, R. F., Jarrett, R. B., et al (1991) Conceptualization and rationale for consensus definitions of terms in major depressive disorder. Remission, recovery, relapse, and recurrence. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 851 -855.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Hamilton, M. (1960) A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 23, 56 -62.
20. Harvey, A. T., Rudolph, R. L. & Preskorn, S. H. (2000) Evidence of the dual mechanisms of action of venlafaxine. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57, 503 -509.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Leber, P. (1991) Is there an alternative to the randomized controlled trial? Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 27, 3 -8.[Medline]
22. McPartlin, G. M., Reynolds, A., Anderson, C., et al (1998) A comparison of once-daily venlafaxine XR and paroxetine in depressed outpatients treated in general practice. Primary Care Psychiatry, 4, 127-132.
23. Mehtonen, O.-P., Behnke, K., Søgaard, J., et al (2000) Randomized, double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and sertraline in outpatients with major depression. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 61, 95 -100.[Medline]
24. Miller, I. W., Keitner, G. I., Schatzberg, A. F., et al (1998) The treatment of chronic depression. Part 3: psychosocial functioning before and after treatment with sertraline or imipramine. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59, 608 -619.[Medline]
25. Montgomery, S. A. & sberg, M. (1979) A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. British Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 382 -389.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Muth, E. A., Haskins, J. T., Moyer, J. A., et al (1986) Antidepressant biochemical profile of the novel bicyclic compound Wy-45,030, an ethyl cyclohexanol derivative. Biochemical Pharmacology, 35, 4493 -4497.[CrossRef][Medline]
27. National Institute of Mental Health (1985) Clinical Global Impressions. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 21, 839 -843.
28. Owens, M. J., Morgan, W. N., Plott, S. J., et al (1997) Neurotransmitter receptor transporter binding profile of antidepressants and their metabolites. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 283, 1305 -1322.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Poirier, M.-F. & Boyer, P. (1999) Venlafaxine and paroxetine in treatment-resistant depression. Double-blind, randomised comparison. British Journal of Psychiatry, 175, 12-16.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Prien, R. F., Carpenter, L. L. & Kupfer, D. J. (1991) The definition and operational criteria for treatment outcome of major depressive disorder: a review of the current research literature. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 796 -800.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Quitkin, F. M., Stewart, J. W., McGrath, P. J., et al (1993) Columbia atypical depression. A subgroup of depressives with better response to MAOI than to tricyclic antidepressants or placebo. British Journal of Psychiatry, 163 (suppl. 21), 30 -34.
32. Redrobe, J. P., Bourin, M., Colombel, M. C., et al (1998) Dose-dependent noradrenergic and serotonergic properties of venlafaxine in animal models indicative of antidepressant activity. Psychopharmacology, 138, 1-8.[CrossRef][Medline]
33. Rothman, K. J. (1986) Modern Epidemiology. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co.
34. Rudolph, R. L. & Feiger, A. D. (1999) A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of once-daily venlafaxine extended release (XR) and fluoxetine for the treatment of depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 56, 171 -181.[CrossRef][Medline]
35. Rudolph, R. L., Entsuah, R., Aguiar, L., et al (1998a) Early onset of antidepressant activity of venlafaxine compared with placebo and fluoxetine in outpatients in a double-blind study. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 8 (suppl. 2), S142 .
36. Rudolph, R. L., Fabre, L. F., Feighner, J. P., et al (1998b) A randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-response trial of venlafaxine hydrochloride in the treatment of major depression. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59, 116 -122.[Medline]
37. Salinas, E., for the Venlafaxine XR 367 Study Group (1997) Once-daily extended release (XR) venlafaxine versus paroxetine in outpatients with major depression. Biological Psychiatry, 42 (suppl. 1), 244S .[CrossRef]
38. Silverstone, P. H., Ravindran, A., for the Venlafaxine XR 360 Study Group (1999) Once-daily venlafaxine extended release (XR) compared with fluoxetine in outpatients with depression and anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 60, 22-28.
39. Thase, M. E. (1998) Effects of venlafaxine on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of original data from 3744 depressed patients. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59, 502 -508.[Medline]
40. Thase, M. E. (1999) How should efficacy be evaluated in randomized clinical trials of treatments for depression? Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 60 (suppl. 4), 23 -32.
41. Thase, M. E., Simons, A. D., McGeary, J., et al (1992) Relapse after cognitive behavior therapy of depression: potential implications for longer courses of treatment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 149, 1046 -1052.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
42. Thase, M. E., Greenhouse, J. B., Frank, E., et al (1997) Treatment of major depression with psychotherapy or psychotherapy-pharmacotherapy combinations. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54, 1009 -1015.
43. Tylee, A., Beaumont, G., Bowden, M. W., et al (1997) A double-blind, randomized, 12-week comparison study of the safety and efficacy of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in moderate to severe major depression in general practice. Primary Care Psychiatry, 3, 51 -58.
44. Tzanakaki, M., Guazzelli, M., Nimatoudis, I., et al (2000) Increased remission rates with venlafaxine compared with fluoxetine in hospitalized patients with major depression and melancholia. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 15, 29 -34.[Medline]

Received for publication January 31, 2000. Revision received August 10, 2000. Accepted for publication August 14, 2000.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Ghanbari, M. El Mansari, and P. Blier Electrophysiological effects of the co-administration of escitalopram and bupropion on rat serotonin and norepinephrine neurons J Psychopharmacol, January 1, 2010; 24(1): 39 - 50. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Barbui, A. Cipriani, T. A Furukawa, G. Salanti, J. P T Higgins, R. Churchill, N. Watanabe, A. Nakagawa, I. M Omori, and J. R Geddes Making the best use of available evidence: the case of new generation antidepressants: A response to: Are all antidepressants equal? Evid. Based Ment. Health, November 1, 2009; 12(4): 101 - 104. [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. S. Alexopoulos, C. F. Reynolds III, M. L. Bruce, I. R. Katz, P. J. Raue, B. H. Mulsant, D. W. Oslin, T. Ten Have, and The PROSPECT Group Reducing Suicidal Ideation and Depression in Older Primary Care Patients: 24-Month Outcomes of the PROSPECT Study Am J Psychiatry, August 1, 2009; 166(8): 882 - 890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. van den Broek, P. Mulder, E van Os, T. Birkenhager, E Pluijms, and J. Bruijn Efficacy of venlafaxine compared with tricyclic antidepressants in depressive disorder: a meta-analysis J Psychopharmacol, August 1, 2009; 23(6): 708 - 713. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V Peritogiannis, K Antoniou, V Mouka, V Mavreas, and T. Hyphantis Duloxetine-induced hypomania: case report and brief review of the literature on SNRIs-induced mood switching J Psychopharmacol, July 1, 2009; 23(5): 592 - 596. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Huezo-Diaz, R. Uher, R. Smith, M. Rietschel, N. Henigsberg, A. Marusic, O. Mors, W. Maier, J. Hauser, D. Souery, et al. Moderation of antidepressant response by the serotonin transporter gene The British Journal of Psychiatry, July 1, 2009; 195(1): 30 - 38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Gartlehner, B. N. Gaynes, R. A. Hansen, P. Thieda, A. DeVeaugh-Geiss, E. E. Krebs, C. G. Moore, L. Morgan, and K. N. Lohr Comparative Benefits and Harms of Second-Generation Antidepressants: Background Paper for the American College of Physicians Ann Intern Med, November 18, 2008; 149(10): 734 - 750. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Papakostas, C. Homberger, and M. Fava A meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing mirtazapine with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of major depressive disorder J Psychopharmacol, November 1, 2008; 22(8): 843 - 848. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. A Sopko Jr, M. J Ehret, and M. Grgas Desvenlafaxine: Another "Me Too" Drug? Ann. Pharmacother., October 1, 2008; 42(10): 1439 - 1446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Vanoli, C. Lane, C. Harrison, N. Steen, and A. Young Adequacy of venlafaxine dose prescribing in major depression and hospital resources implications J Psychopharmacol, June 1, 2008; 22(4): 434 - 440. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Anderson, I. Ferrier, R. Baldwin, P. Cowen, L Howard, G Lewis, K Matthews, R. McAllister-Williams, R. Peveler, J Scott, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: A revision of the 2000 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines J Psychopharmacol, June 1, 2008; 22(4): 343 - 396. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Gareri, P. De Fazio, L. Gallelli, S. De Fazio, A. Davoli, G. Seminara, A. Cotroneo, and G. De Sarro Venlafaxine-Propafenone Interaction Resulting in Hallucinations and Psychomotor Agitation Ann. Pharmacother., March 1, 2008; 42(3): 434 - 438. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Brent, G. Emslie, G. Clarke, K. D. Wagner, J. R. Asarnow, M. Keller, B. Vitiello, L. Ritz, S. Iyengar, K. Abebe, et al. Switching to Another SSRI or to Venlafaxine With or Without Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Adolescents With SSRI-Resistant Depression: The TORDIA Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA, February 27, 2008; 299(8): 901 - 913. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Nutt, K. Demyttenaere, Z. Janka, T. Aarre, M. Bourin, P. L. Canonico, J. L. Carrasco, and S. Stahl The other face of depression, reduced positive affect: the role of catecholamines in causation and cure J Psychopharmacol, July 1, 2007; 21(5): 461 - 471. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. H. Kennedy, J. Z. Konarski, Z. V. Segal, M. A. Lau, P. J. Bieling, R. S. McIntyre, and H. S. Mayberg Differences in Brain Glucose Metabolism Between Responders to CBT and Venlafaxine in a 16-Week Randomized Controlled Trial Am J Psychiatry, May 1, 2007; 164(5): 778 - 788. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				References PsychiatryOnline CME, May 1, 2007; 2007(1): 2 - 2. [Full Text]

				M. J. Ehret Pharmacogenomics of Antidepressant Medications Journal of Pharmacy Practice, December 1, 2006; 19(6): 342 - 352. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. J. Ehret and B. Chavez A Review of the STAR*D Trial Journal of Pharmacy Practice, December 1, 2006; 19(6): 353 - 360. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. L. Furey and W. C. Drevets Antidepressant efficacy of the antimuscarinic drug scopolamine: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry, October 1, 2006; 63(10): 1121 - 1129. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Davidson, D. Baldwin, D. J. Stein, E. Kuper, I. Benattia, S. Ahmed, R. Pedersen, and J. Musgnung Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder With Venlafaxine Extended Release: A 6-Month Randomized Controlled Trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry, October 1, 2006; 63(10): 1158 - 1165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Taylor and J R. Scott Volte-faceon venlafaxine - reasons and reflections J Psychopharmacol, September 1, 2006; 20(5): 597 - 601. [PDF]

				R. M. Post, L. L. Altshuler, G. S. Leverich, M. A. Frye, W. A. Nolen, R. W. Kupka, T. Suppes, S. McElroy, P. E. Keck, K. D. Denicoff, et al. Mood switch in bipolar depression: comparison of adjunctive venlafaxine, bupropion and sertraline The British Journal of Psychiatry, August 1, 2006; 189(2): 124 - 131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Sussman, S. C. Williams, L. Tebartz van Elst, D. Ebert, B. Hesslinger, A. J. Rush, M. H. Trivedi, S. R. Wisniewski, the STAR*D trial investigators, and D. R. Rubinow Depression--augmentation or switch after initial SSRI treatment. N. Engl. J. Med., June 15, 2006; 354(24): 2611 - 2613. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. E. Alpert Improving depression outcome: new concepts, strategies and technologies J Psychopharmacol, May 1, 2006; 20(3_suppl): 3 - 4. [PDF]

				C. DeBattista Augmentation and combination strategies for depression J Psychopharmacol, May 1, 2006; 20(3_suppl): 11 - 18. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. G. PERAHIA, I. GILABERTE, F. WANG, C. G. WILTSE, S. A. HUCKINS, J. W. CLEMENS, S. A. MONTGOMERY, A. L. MONTEJO, and M. J. DETKE Duloxetine in the prevention of relapse of major depressive disorder: Double-blind placebo-controlled study The British Journal of Psychiatry, April 1, 2006; 188(4): 346 - 353. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. J. Rush, M. H. Trivedi, S. R. Wisniewski, J. W. Stewart, A. A. Nierenberg, M. E. Thase, L. Ritz, M. M. Biggs, D. Warden, J. F. Luther, et al. Bupropion-SR, sertraline, or venlafaxine-XR after failure of SSRIs for depression. N. Engl. J. Med., March 23, 2006; 354(12): 1231 - 1242. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Botts Moving beyond balance for a better antidepressant Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., December 1, 2005; 62(23): 2479 - 2479. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. D. Westanmo, J. Gayken, and R. Haight Duloxetine: A balanced and selective norepinephrine- and serotonin-reuptake inhibitor Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., December 1, 2005; 62(23): 2481 - 2490. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M. Vis, M. van Baardewijk, and T. R Einarson Duloxetine and Venlafaxine-XR in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials Ann. Pharmacother., November 1, 2005; 39(11): 1798 - 1807. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. J. Mann The medical management of depression. N. Engl. J. Med., October 27, 2005; 353(17): 1819 - 1834. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. A. Hansen, G. Gartlehner, K. N. Lohr, B. N. Gaynes, and T. S. Carey Efficacy and Safety of Second-Generation Antidepressants in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder Ann Intern Med, September 20, 2005; 143(6): 415 - 426. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. P. Fleck and E. Horwath Pharmacologic Management of Difficult-to-Treat Depression in Clinical Practice Psychiatr Serv, August 1, 2005; 56(8): 1005 - 1011. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Chou and M. Helfand Challenges in Systematic Reviews That Assess Treatment Harms Ann Intern Med, June 21, 2005; 142(12_Part_2): 1090 - 1099. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. S. Alexopoulos, I. R. Katz, M. L. Bruce, M. Heo, T. T. Have, P. Raue, H. R. Bogner, H. C. Schulberg, B. H. Mulsant, C. F. Reynolds III, et al. Remission in Depressed Geriatric Primary Care Patients: A Report From the PROSPECT Study Am J Psychiatry, April 1, 2005; 162(4): 718 - 724. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. A. Nierenberg, P. Eidelman, Y. Wu, and M. Joseph Depression: An Update for the Clinician Focus, January 1, 2005; 3(1): 3 - 12. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. J. Fochtmann and A. J. Gelenberg Guideline Watch: Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Patients With Major Depressive Disorder, 2nd Edition Focus, January 1, 2005; 3(1): 34 - 42. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. D. Jindal and M. E. Thase Integrating Psychotherapy and Pharmacotherapy to Improve Outcomes Among Patients With Mood Disorders Focus, January 1, 2005; 3(1): 114 - 121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. B. Nemeroff, C. M. Heim, M. E. Thase, D. N. Klein, A. J. Rush, A. F. Schatzberg, P. T. Ninan, J. P. McCullough Jr., P. M. Weiss, D. L. Dunner, et al. Differential Responses to Psychotherapy Versus Pharmacotherapy in Patients With Chronic Forms of Major Depression and Childhood Trauma Focus, January 1, 2005; 3(1): 131 - 135. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. P. Devanand, N. Juszczak, M. S. Nobler, N. Turret, L. Fitzsimons, H. A. Sackeim, and S. P. Roose An Open Treatment Trial of Venlafaxine for Elderly Patients With Dysthymic Disorder J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol, December 1, 2004; 17(4): 219 - 224. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. A. Pirraglia, A. B. Rosen, R. C. Hermann, N. V. Olchanski, and P. Neumann Cost-Utility Analysis Studies of Depression Management: A Systematic Review Am J Psychiatry, December 1, 2004; 161(12): 2155 - 2162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. K. Corey-Lisle, R. Nash, P. Stang, and R. Swindle Response, Partial Response, and Nonresponse in Primary Care Treatment of Depression Arch Intern Med, June 14, 2004; 164(11): 1197 - 1204. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Trick, N. Stanley, U. Rigney, and I. Hindmarch A Double-Blind, Randomized, 26-Week Study Comparing the Cognitive and Psychomotor Effects and Efficacy of 75 mg (37.5 mg b.i.d.) Venlafaxine and 75 mg (25 mg Mane, 50 mg Nocte) Dothiepin in Elderly Patients with Moderate Major Depression Being Treated in General Practice J Psychopharmacol, June 1, 2004; 18(2): 205 - 214. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. H. Meyer, A. A. Wilson, S. Sagrati, D. Hussey, A. Carella, W. Z. Potter, N. Ginovart, E. P. Spencer, A. Cheok, and S. Houle Serotonin Transporter Occupancy of Five Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors at Different Doses: An [11C]DASB Positron Emission Tomography Study Am J Psychiatry, May 1, 2004; 161(5): 826 - 835. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Kavirajan Venlafaxine and SSRI remission data revisited The British Journal of Psychiatry, May 1, 2004; 184(5): 452 - 453. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Healy Shaping the Intimate:: Influences on the Experience of Everyday Nerves Social Studies of Science, April 1, 2004; 34(2): 219 - 245. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. B. Nemeroff, C. M. Heim, M. E. Thase, D. N. Klein, A. J. Rush, A. F. Schatzberg, P. T. Ninan, J. P. McCullough Jr., P. M. Weiss, D. L. Dunner, et al. Differential responses to psychotherapy versus pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic forms of major depression and childhood trauma PNAS, November 25, 2003; 100(24): 14293 - 14296. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. D. Jindal and M. E. Thase Integration of Care: Integrating Psychotherapy and Pharmacotherapy to Improve Outcomes Among Patients With Mood Disorders Psychiatr Serv, November 1, 2003; 54(11): 1484 - 1490. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. M. Anderson Drug treatment of depression: reflections on the evidence Adv. Psychiatr. Treat., January 1, 2003; 9(1): 11 - 20. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. D. Hollon, M. E. Thase, and J. C. Markowitz Treatment and Prevention of Depression Psychological Science in the Public Interest, November 1, 2002; 3(2): 39 - 77. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. L. Gilmor, M. J. Owens, and C. B. Nemeroff Inhibition of Norepinephrine Uptake in Patients With Major Depression Treated With Paroxetine Am J Psychiatry, October 1, 2002; 159(10): 1702 - 1710. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. E. Beyer, S. Boikess, B. Luo, and L. A. Dawson Comparison of the effects of antidepressants on norepinephrine and serotonin concentrations in the rat frontal cortex: an in-vivo microdialysis study J Psychopharmacol, July 1, 2002; 16(4): 297 - 304. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. SMITH, C. DEMPSTER, J. GLANVILLE, N. FREEMANTLE, and I. ANDERSON Efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine compared with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and other antidepressants: a meta-analysis The British Journal of Psychiatry, May 1, 2002; 180(5): 396 - 404. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. C. Wright, M. E. Thase, G. Jackson, T. Brown, J. Butler, P. Cowen, C. Freeman, H. Freeman, L. Gask, G. Kassianos, et al. Conflict of interest and the British Journal of Psychiatry Author's reply Response from Neurolink Editor's response The British Journal of Psychiatry, January 1, 2002; 180(1): 82 - 83. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. C. Shelton and A. J. Tomarken Can Recovery From Depression Be Achieved? Psychiatr Serv, November 1, 2001; 52(11): 1469 - 1478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Warner Quality of evidence in meta-analysis The British Journal of Psychiatry, July 1, 2001; 179 (1): 79 - 79. [Full Text]

				R. Abrams, P. M. Doraiswamy, A. C. Scates, and H. A. Sackeim Relapse of Depression After Electroconvulsive Therapy JAMA, June 27, 2001; 285(24): 3087 - 3089. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Curing Depression: Is Venlafaxine Best? Journal Watch Women's Health, April 17, 2001; 2001(417): 7 - 7. [Full Text]

				Remission of Depression Greater on Venlafaxine than SSRIs Journal Watch Psychiatry, March 22, 2001; 2001(322): 8 - 8. [Full Text]

				I. M Anderson Meta-analytical studies on new antidepressants Br. Med. Bull., March 1, 2001; 57(1): 161 - 178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by THASE, M. E. Articles by RUDOLPH, R. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by THASE, M. E. Articles by RUDOLPH, R. L.