Citalopram versus fluoxetine: a double-blind, controlled, multicentre, phase III trial in patients with unipolar major depression treated in general practice.

Two selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), citalopram and fluoxetine, both at a daily dose of 20 mg, were compared in patients with unipolar major depression treated in general practice. This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomized trial carried out in France. The duration of treatment was 8 weeks. Patients were assessed by means of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the 17 items Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and the investigator's Clinical Global Impressions (CGI), Observed and spontaneously reported adverse events were also recorded. A total of 357 patients of both sexes, aged between 21 and 73 years, entered the double-blind phase of the trial. A clear reduction of both the MADRS and the HAMD mean total scores was observed in both treatment groups with no statistically significant differences between treatments. Apart from back pain recorded more frequently in the citalopram group, no significant difference was found between the two treatment groups with regard to adverse events, and both citalopram and fluoxetine were considered to be well tolerated. It was concluded that citalopram was as effective as fluoxetine in the treatment of unipolar major depression. Citalopram showed an earlier onset of recovery than fluoxetine.

[Tolerability of tianeptine in 170 patients with depression treated during one year]. / Acceptabilité de la tianeptine chez 170 patients déprimés traités un an.

Tianeptine, a new antidepressant, has a tricyclic molecular structure. Its main biochemical activity consists of an increase in the reuptake of 5 HT both in men and animals, after acute and chronic administration. Tianeptine demonstrated its antidepressive clinical efficacy in several double-blind versus reference drug trials. A multicentre open trial, including depressed patients enabled us to evaluate the safety of tianeptine and to control the maintenance of the therapeutic efficacy in the course of its long-term prescription. Depressed patients included showed a major depressive episode, single (296.22) or recurrent (296.32) without melancholia or psychotic features, or a dysthymic disorder (300.40), according to DSM III criteria. A minimum MADRS score of a least 25, and the informed consent of the patients were required. The dose of tianeptine was 3 tablets per day (12.5 mg/tablet) with the possibility of increasing to 4 or decreasing to 2 tablets per day, depending on the symptomatology. Therapeutic efficacy was evaluated by item 1 and 2 of the Global Clinical Impression (CGI), the Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) and the Hopkins Symptom Check-List (HSCL). Clinical and paraclinical safety were evaluated by CGI item 3, standardized ratings of patients' complaints (CHESS 84), interruption for side effects, evaluation of blood pressure, weight, biological parameters, EKGs. This intermediate evaluation concerns the first 170 depressed patients treated over a one-year period as well as the total group of patients included (n = 447).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[Citalopram. An open study of a highly selective serotonin-uptake inhibitor administered by infusion to depressive patients]. / Citalopram. Etude ouverte d'un inhibiteur très sélectif du captage de la sérotonine, administré en perfusion à des patients déprimés.

In an open, clinical trial comprising a total of 49 depressed in-patients, a new selective 5-HT uptake inhibitor citalopram was administered by intravenous infusion in doses of 20-60 mg once daily for per 3 weeks. The therapeutic effect was assessed globally and by means of the CPRS subscale for depression (MADRS). About 40 per cent of the patients showed a complete response whereas about 25 per cent showed a partial response. Side effects which were rated globally and recorded according to a check-list were generally mild and infrequent. The side-effects most frequently observed were tremor, drowsiness, and dizziness which occurred in about 15 per cent of the patients.' Three patients were withdrawn prematurely because of nausea and one because of a skin rash. Cardiovascular recordings were normal except for one patient, who developed a hypertension which may have been related to the test drug. No pathological laboratory values were detected during the trial period. The authors conclude that intravenously administered citalopram is well suited for the treatment of depressed patients.