Trial reportCNS drugs2005
Comparison of the effects of mirtazapine and fluoxetine in severely depressed patients.
Trial report in CNS drugs, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysing psychosocial difficulties in depression: a content comparison between systematic literature review and patient perspective.BioMed research international · 2014Pooled it
- Fluoxetine versus other types of pharmacotherapy for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Mirtazapine versus other antidepressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Differential effects of venlafaxine in the treatment of major depressive disorder according to baseline severity.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2009Pooled it
- Comparative risk for harms of second-generation antidepressants : a systematic review and meta-analysis.Drug safety · 2008Pooled it
- Pre-treatment insomnia as a predictor of single and combination antidepressant outcomes: a CO-MED report.Journal of affective disorders · 2015Trial
- Receptor occupancy of mirtazapine determined by PET in healthy volunteers.Psychopharmacology · 2007Trial
- Mental health status among non-medical college students returning to school during the COVID-19 pandemic in Zhanjiang city: A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The severity of psychiatric disorders.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2018Article
- Antidepressant effects of Kai-Xin-San in fluoxetine-resistant depression rats.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2017Article
- Common Medications Which Lead to Unintended Alterations in Weight Gain or Organ Lipotoxicity.Current gastroenterology reports · 2016Review
- Network Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of New Generation Antidepressants.CNS drugs · 2015Review
- Improvement in self-reported quality of life with cognitive therapy for recurrent major depressive disorder.Journal of affective disorders · 2014Article
- A review of therapeutic uses of mirtazapine in psychiatric and medical conditions.The primary care companion for CNS disorders · 2013Article
- How should primary care doctors select which antidepressants to administer?Current psychiatry reports · 2012Review
- Mirtazapine: a review of its use in major depression and other psychiatric disorders.CNS drugs · 2009Review
- Insomnia in patients with depression: some pathophysiological and treatment considerations.CNS drugs · 2009Review
- Toward achieving optimal response: understanding and managing antidepressant side effects.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDepression is a major global problem associated with large medical, sociological and economic burdens. Mirtazapine (Remeron, Organon NV, The Netherlands) is an antidepressant with a unique mechanism of action that has similar or superior efficacy to TCAs and SSRIs in moderate-to-severe depression. However, this agent has not yet been tested in patients with severe depression alone.
objectiveTo compare the antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of mirtazapine and fluoxetine and their effects on anxiety and quality of life in patients with severe depression (> or = 25 points on the first 17 items of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS-17]).
methodsIn this double-blind study, 297 severely depressed patients were randomised to receive mirtazapine 15-60 mg/day (n = 147) or fluoxetine 20-40 mg/day (n = 152) for 8 weeks. 294 subjects were actually treated and 292 included in the intent-to-treat population. Symptom severity was measured by the HDRS-17, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) rating scale. Quality of life was self-assessed by patients using the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire and the Quality of Life, Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire. Adverse events were recorded throughout the study.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were noted between the two groups in change from baseline HDRS-17 score at any time point; both treatments were associated with large (approximately 15 points) decreases by study end. However, more mirtazapine-treated patients tended to exhibit a > or = 50% decrease in HDRS score (significant at day 7; 9.0% vs 0.7%, p = 0.002). Significant differences in favour of mirtazapine were also observed at day 14 for changes in MADRS scores (-10.9 vs -8.5, p = 0.006) and the proportion of patients with > or = 50% decrease in MADRS score (21.4% vs 10.9%, p = 0.031). On the CGI, the proportion of 'much/very much improved' patients tended to be greater with mirtazapine (significant at day 7; 9.7% vs 3.4%, p = 0.032). No significant between-group differences were observed for the majority of quality-of-life measures. However, mirtazapine produced significantly better improvements on 'sleeping assessment 1' (14.9 +/- 5.2 vs 13.7 +/- 5.4, p = 0.028) and 'sleeping assessment 2' (p = 0.013) than fluoxetine. Both agents were generally well tolerated but mirtazapine-treated patients experienced a mean weight gain of 0.8 +/- 2.7 kg compared with a mean decrease in weight of 0.4 +/- 2.1 kg for fluoxetine-treated patients (p < 0.001).
conclusionsMirtazapine is as effective and well tolerated as fluoxetine in the treatment of patients with severe depression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.