A controlled trial of adinazolam versus desipramine in geriatric depression.

Thirty outpatients between the ages of 60 and 85 with DSM-III Major Depression entered an 8 week randomized, double-blind comparison of desipramine and adinazolam mesylate, a triazolobenzodiazepine derivative. Outcome was assessed on several measures including the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Montgomery-Asberg Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impressions (CGI), the 35-item Self-Rating Symptom Scale, and Carroll Depression Scale. Patients in both groups demonstrated a highly significant decrease in average HDRS scores (p less than 0.001) over the course of the study. Adinazolam was associated with significantly greater reduction in average HDRS scores by the third day. Repeated measures analysis of variance showed a significantly greater reduction in HDRS scores for adinazolam over the course of the study. The study medications were associated with distinct patterns of adverse reactions. Desipramine more often produced dry mouth, constipation and nervousness, while adinazolam was more likely to cause drowsiness and lightheadedness. Three of these elderly patients, all of whom were taking desipramine reported at least one fall during the study. Adinazolam may be a promising agent in the treatment of depression in the elderly.

A placebo-controlled inpatient comparison of fluvoxamine maleate and imipramine in major depression.

Fluvoxamine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, was investigated in a 6-week double-blind study among severely ill inpatients with DSM-III major depression. All but 1 patient also fulfilled criteria for melancholia. Following a 3-day placebo wash-out patients were randomly assigned to fluvoxamine, imipramine or placebo. Sixty of 81 patients completed at least 2 weeks following wash-out and were evaluated for efficacy. Analysis of covariance (controlling for baseline scores) showed significant (p less than 0.05) differences on CGI severity and BPRS total and a similar trend (p = 0.08) on the Hamilton Depression Scale. Fluvoxamine was superior (p less than or equal to 0.02) to both placebo and imipramine on these measures. Fluvoxamine's most common adverse effects were nausea and agitation. The number of fluvoxamine patients withdrawn for side-effects was less than imipramine and not significantly different than placebo. Fluvoxamine was not associated with significant changes in vital signs, ECG or laboratory tests. The results therefore indicate that fluvoxamine is a safe and highly effective treatment for hospitalized patients with major depression.

A double-blind comparison of fluoxetine, imipramine and placebo in outpatients with major depression.

Fluoxetine is the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant to be marketed in the U.S. In this double-blind trial fluoxetine was compared with imipramine and placebo among 198 outpatients with DSM-III major depression, of whom 145 completed at least 2 weeks of active treatment and were evaluated for efficacy. Significantly fewer patients in each active drug group terminated early due to lack of efficacy compared to placebo. Both imipramine and fluoxetine were significantly superior to placebo on most measures. There were no consistently significant differences between the two active drugs although a trend favored imipramine on a number of measures. Fluoxetine was generally well tolerated. Significantly more imipramine than placebo patients terminated early due to side-effects while the fluoxetine-placebo difference was not significant. The results support previous studies which suggest fluoxetine's superior side-effect profile and the approximate antidepressant equivalence of fluoxetine and TCAs.

A double blind comparison of lofepramine, imipramine and placebo in patients with depression.

The results of double blind trial in which 139 patients with primary depression were randomly assigned to either lofepramine (46), imipramine (48), or placebo (45) are discussed. After treatment with either active drug, lofepramine or imipramine, the clinical outcome was significantly greater than with placebo. No significant differences were found in clinical responses between lofepramine and imipramine. With regard to reported side effects, however, a statistically significant lower number of severe and/or moderate side effects were reported for the lofepramine group than for the imipramine group. In particular, for severe and/or moderate occurrences of dry mouth, the statistically significant lower incidence in favor of lofepramine is by almost a factor of 3 (8 lofepramine vs 21 imipramine patients).