Controlled comparison of nefazodone and amitriptyline in major depressive inpatients.

Nefazodone, a phenylpiperazine antidepressant, exhibits novel dual activity on serotonin (5-HT) neurons; it binds to 5-HT2 receptors and inhibits 5-HT reuptake. Flexible doses of nefazodone (100-400 mg/day) and amitriptyline (50-200 mg/day) were compared in 106 major depressive inpatients in a 6-week double-blind study. Results showed significant superiority of amitriptyline over nefazodone on all rating instruments: Montgomery and Asberg depression rating scale (P < 0.0001), Hamilton depression scale (P < 0.0006), Clinical Global Impressions (P < 0.0001) and Patient Global Assessment (P < 0.01). A total of 65% of patients under amitriptyline and 56% of patients under nefazodone reported adverse events during the study, with significantly more dry mouth in the amitriptyline group (39% versus 11%, P = 0.001). Modal daily doses within the last treatment week reached 242 mg with nefazodone and 124 mg with amitriptyline. The lower efficacy of nefazodone, which contradicts comparative trials with imipramine in US patients, is discussed with regard to the dose of nefazodone, probably below the optimal therapeutic range for melancholic patients, and to the clinical differences between the patient samples.

Controlled comparison of milnacipran and fluoxetine in major depression.

The efficacy and the tolerance of milnacipran (100 mg/day), a second generation antidepressant which equipotently inhibits both noradrenaline and serotonin reuptake, was compared to fluoxetine (20 mg/day), a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, in two parallel groups of, respectively, 97 and 93 major depressive outpatients. The duration of the study was 6 weeks, with assessments every 2 weeks by means of the Montgomery and Asberg depression scale (MADRS), the Hamilton depression scale, the clinical global impressions (CGI), and a checklist of symptoms and side-effects. Results showed significant superiority of fluoxetine over milnacipran on most rating instruments: MADRS (P = 0.01) including five individual items, Hamilton depression scale (P = 0.002) including ten individual items, CGI of severity (P = 0.01) and therapeutical index (P = 0.002). On visual analogue scales assessing the clinical profile of the compounds, fluoxetine was rated as exhibiting more psychostimulating activity than milnacipran (P = 0.0008). The tolerance of the two antidepressants was very similar, with the exception of symptoms of dizziness which were more frequently reported with milnacipran (P = 0.01). These differences in efficacy favoring fluoxetine could result from the selection of a dose of milnacipran below the optimal therapeutic dose for this type of psychiatric patients or to the administration of the compounds in single daily intakes, whereas milnacipran possesses a plasma elimination half-life of only 7 h.

Interest of a loading dose of milnacipran in endogenous depressive inpatients. Comparison with the standard regimen and with fluvoxamine.

A multicenter controlled study was designed to test the hypothesis that a loading dose of an antidepressant could shorten the latency of its clinical efficacy. Three parallel groups of about 40 endogenous depressive inpatients received either a loading dose of milnacipran (300 mg daily for 2 weeks and 150 mg daily during the 2 following weeks), the standard regimen of milnacipran in severe depression (200 mg daily for 4 weeks), or fluvoxamine (200 mg daily for 4 weeks). The duration of the study was 4 weeks, with assessments at baseline and after 4, 9, 14, 21, and 28 days of therapy by means of Montgomery and Asberg depression scale (MADS), the Hamilton depression scale, the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI), and a checklist of symptoms and side-effects. Results showed very similar evolution in the 3 treatment groups. In addition, the level of side-effects did not exhibit significant differences among the treatment groups, except for excitement-nervousness and akathisia which were more frequently reported with fluvoxamine. These results do not support the usefulness of a loading dose of an antidepressant such as milnacipran. They demonstrate however that milnacipran can be given at a 300 mg daily dose from the very first day of treatment with an excellent tolerance.

Controlled comparison of two doses of milnacipran (F 2207) and amitriptyline in major depressive inpatients.

A multicenter study compared the antidepressant efficacy and the tolerance of two doses of milnacipran (50 mg and 100 mg/day) and amitriptyline (150 mg/day) in three parallel groups of 45 major depressive inpatients defined by Research Diagnostic Criteria. After a wash-out period of 4-7 days on placebo with lorazepam and/or nitrazepam if necessary, patients were randomly assigned to a daily dose of milnacipran 50 mg, milnacipran 100 mg or amitriptyline 150 mg reached on the 5th day and then stable over a 4-week period, with weekly assessments by means of the Montgomery and Asberg depression scale, the Hamilton depression scale, the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) and the Target Emergent Signs and Symptoms. Results showed significant superiority of both milnacipran 100 mg/day and amitriptyline over milnacipran 50 mg/day at the end of the treatment period. However, amitriptyline induced a nonsignificant trend toward more rapid improvement after 2 weeks of treatment, mainly based on items related to insomnia, supporting more sedative properties of amitriptyline as compared to milnacipran. Anticholinergic side-effects were significantly lower with milnacipran than with amitriptyline, explaining why milnacipran 100 mg exhibited at the end of the treatment period, a nonsignificantly better efficacy index on the CGI. Moreover, in contrast to milnacipran, amitriptyline was responsible for a significant decrease in blood pressure and a significant weight gain.

The influence of intravenous anaesthetics on enflurane-induced central nervous system seizure activity.

This study assesses the effects of agents commonly used in anaesthesia on enflurane-induced seizure threshold and on established seizure activity, during steady state enflurane anaesthesia. EEG seizure activity was monitored in cats from chronic cortical and subcortical recording sites. Diazepam, thiopentone, methohexitone and ketamine all enhanced established EEG seizure challenge. This latter effect was most evident under conditions of lowered PaCO2. The effects of these intravenous agents on established enflurane seizure patterns exceeded in duration the expected EEG effect of the agent when used alone. The limited number of experiments, however, precluded statistical verification of our findings. The similarities between centrencephalic minor motor seizures and enflurane seizure pattern in terms of EEG and convulsive expression, including drug response, are noted.