Cargando…

Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons

BACKGROUND: Data comparing duloxetine with existing antidepressant treatments is limited. A comparison of duloxetine with fluoxetine has been performed but no comparison with venlafaxine, the other antidepressant in the same therapeutic class with a significant market share, has been undertaken. In...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eckert, Laurent, Lançon, Christophe
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1552056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16867188
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-6-30
_version_ 1782129336059428864
author Eckert, Laurent
Lançon, Christophe
author_facet Eckert, Laurent
Lançon, Christophe
author_sort Eckert, Laurent
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Data comparing duloxetine with existing antidepressant treatments is limited. A comparison of duloxetine with fluoxetine has been performed but no comparison with venlafaxine, the other antidepressant in the same therapeutic class with a significant market share, has been undertaken. In the absence of relevant data to assess the place that duloxetine should occupy in the therapeutic arsenal, indirect comparisons are the most rigorous way to go. We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy of duloxetine, fluoxetine and venlafaxine versus placebo in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), and performed indirect comparisons through meta-regressions. METHODS: The bibliography of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research and the CENTRAL, Medline, and Embase databases were interrogated using advanced search strategies based on a combination of text and index terms. The search focused on randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials involving adult patients treated for acute phase Major Depressive Disorder. All outcomes were derived to take account for varying placebo responses throughout studies. Primary outcome was treatment efficacy as measured by Hedge's g effect size. Secondary outcomes were response and dropout rates as measured by log odds ratios. Meta-regressions were run to indirectly compare the drugs. Sensitivity analysis, assessing the influence of individual studies over the results, and the influence of patients' characteristics were run. RESULTS: 22 studies involving fluoxetine, 9 involving duloxetine and 8 involving venlafaxine were selected. Using indirect comparison methodology, estimated effect sizes for efficacy compared with duloxetine were 0.11 [-0.14;0.36] for fluoxetine and 0.22 [0.06;0.38] for venlafaxine. Response log odds ratios were -0.21 [-0.44;0.03], 0.70 [0.26;1.14]. Dropout log odds ratios were -0.02 [-0.33;0.29], 0.21 [-0.13;0.55]. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were consistent. CONCLUSION: Fluoxetine was not statistically different in either tolerability or efficacy when compared with duloxetine. Venlafaxine was significantly superior to duloxetine in all analyses except dropout rate. In the absence of relevant data from head-to-head comparison trials, results suggest that venlafaxine is superior compared with duloxetine and that duloxetine does not differentiate from fluoxetine.
format Text
id pubmed-1552056
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-15520562006-08-23 Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons Eckert, Laurent Lançon, Christophe BMC Psychiatry Research Article BACKGROUND: Data comparing duloxetine with existing antidepressant treatments is limited. A comparison of duloxetine with fluoxetine has been performed but no comparison with venlafaxine, the other antidepressant in the same therapeutic class with a significant market share, has been undertaken. In the absence of relevant data to assess the place that duloxetine should occupy in the therapeutic arsenal, indirect comparisons are the most rigorous way to go. We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy of duloxetine, fluoxetine and venlafaxine versus placebo in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), and performed indirect comparisons through meta-regressions. METHODS: The bibliography of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research and the CENTRAL, Medline, and Embase databases were interrogated using advanced search strategies based on a combination of text and index terms. The search focused on randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials involving adult patients treated for acute phase Major Depressive Disorder. All outcomes were derived to take account for varying placebo responses throughout studies. Primary outcome was treatment efficacy as measured by Hedge's g effect size. Secondary outcomes were response and dropout rates as measured by log odds ratios. Meta-regressions were run to indirectly compare the drugs. Sensitivity analysis, assessing the influence of individual studies over the results, and the influence of patients' characteristics were run. RESULTS: 22 studies involving fluoxetine, 9 involving duloxetine and 8 involving venlafaxine were selected. Using indirect comparison methodology, estimated effect sizes for efficacy compared with duloxetine were 0.11 [-0.14;0.36] for fluoxetine and 0.22 [0.06;0.38] for venlafaxine. Response log odds ratios were -0.21 [-0.44;0.03], 0.70 [0.26;1.14]. Dropout log odds ratios were -0.02 [-0.33;0.29], 0.21 [-0.13;0.55]. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were consistent. CONCLUSION: Fluoxetine was not statistically different in either tolerability or efficacy when compared with duloxetine. Venlafaxine was significantly superior to duloxetine in all analyses except dropout rate. In the absence of relevant data from head-to-head comparison trials, results suggest that venlafaxine is superior compared with duloxetine and that duloxetine does not differentiate from fluoxetine. BioMed Central 2006-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC1552056/ /pubmed/16867188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-6-30 Text en Copyright © 2006 Eckert and Lançon; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Eckert, Laurent
Lançon, Christophe
Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
title Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
title_full Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
title_fullStr Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
title_full_unstemmed Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
title_short Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
title_sort duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1552056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16867188
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-6-30
work_keys_str_mv AT eckertlaurent duloxetinecomparedwithfluoxetineandvenlafaxineuseofmetaregressionanalysisforindirectcomparisons
AT lanconchristophe duloxetinecomparedwithfluoxetineandvenlafaxineuseofmetaregressionanalysisforindirectcomparisons