Drug Class Review: Second-Generation Antidepressants: Final Update 5 Report [Internet]

Review
Portland (OR): Oregon Health & Science University; 2011 Mar.

Excerpt

Purpose: We compared the effectiveness and harms of second-generation antidepressants in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), dysthymia, subsyndromal depression, seasonal affective disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, panic disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, social anxiety disorder, and premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

Data Sources: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts until September 2010. For additional data we also hand searched reference lists, US Food and Drug Administration medical and statistical reviews and dossiers submitted by pharmaceutical companies.

Review Methods: Study selection, data abstraction, validity assessment, grading the strength of the evidence, and data synthesis were all carried out according to standard Drug Effectiveness Review Project review methods.

Results and Conclusions: Overall, we found no substantial differences in comparative efficacy and effectiveness of second-generation antidepressants for the treatment of depressive or anxiety disorders. Differences exist in the incidence of specific adverse events and the onset of action. Except for MDD, the evidence is limited to few direct comparisons for most indications. No head-to-head evidence is available for MDD in pediatric populations, dysthymia, subsyndromal depression, seasonal affective disorder, and premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

Publication types

  • Review

Grants and funding

Funding: The Drug Effectiveness Review Project, composed of 12 organizations including 11 state Medicaid agencies, and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health commissioned and funded for this report. These organizations selected the topic of the report and had input into its Key Questions. The content and conclusions of the report were entirely determined by the Evidence-based Practice Center researchers. The authors of this report have no financial interest in any company that makes or distributes the products reviewed in this report.