Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20238342›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Fluvoxamine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.

Ichiro M Omori, Norio Watanabe, Atsuo Nakagawa, Andrea Cipriani, Corrado Barbui, Hugh McGuire, Rachel Churchill, Toshi A Furukawa

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 211 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Paroxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  4. Efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in depression in adults: a systematic review.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2014
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Fluoxetine versus other types of pharmacotherapy for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Duloxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  9. Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  10. Mirtazapine versus other antidepressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  11. Sertraline versus other antidepressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  12. Milnacipran versus other antidepressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  13. Escitalopram versus other antidepressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Ichiro M OmoriDepartment of Psychiatry & Cognitive-Behavioral Medicine, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Japan, 467-8601.
Norio Watanabe
Atsuo Nakagawa
Andrea Cipriani
Corrado Barbui
Hugh McGuire
Rachel Churchill
Toshi A Furukawa
University of Verona · ITCentre for Mental Health · GBKeio University Hospital · JPKyoto University · JPNagoya City University · JPToyokawa City Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFluvoxamine, one of the oldest selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), is prescribed to patients with major depression in many countries. Several studies have previously reviewed the efficacy and tolerability of fluvoxamine for the treatment of major depression. However, these reviews are now outdated.

objectivesOur objective is to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability and side effect profile of fluvoxamine for major depression in comparison with other anti-depressive agents, including tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs, SNRIs, other newer agents and other conventional psychotropic drugs. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register. Trial databases and ongoing trial registers in North America, Europe, Japan and Australia, were handsearched for randomised controlled trials. We checked reference lists of the articles included in the review, previous systematic reviews and major textbooks of affective disorder for published reports and citations of unpublished research. The date of last search was 31 August 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials, published in any language, that compared fluvoxamine with any other active antidepressants in the acute phase treatment of major depression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors inspected citations and abstracts, obtained papers, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We analysed dichotomous data using odds ratios (ORs) and continuous data using the standardised mean difference (SMD). A random effects model was used to combine studies. MAIN

resultsA total of 54 randomised controlled trials (n = 5122) were included. No strong evidence was found to indicate that fluvoxamine was either superior or inferior to other antidepressants regarding response, remission and tolerability. However, differing side effect profiles were evident, especially with regard to gastrointestinal side effects of fluvoxamine when compared to other antidepressants. For example, fluvoxamine was generally associated with a higher incidence of vomiting/nausea (versus imipramine, OR 2.23, CI 1.59 to 3.14; versus clomipramine, OR 2.13, CI 1.06 to 4.27; versus amitriptyline, OR 2.86, CI 1.31 to 2.63). AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe found no strong evidence that fluvoxamine was either superior or inferior to any other antidepressants in terms of efficacy and tolerability in the acute phase treatment of depression. However, differing side effect profiles were evident. Based on these findings, we conclude that clinicians should focus on practical or clinically relevant considerations, including these differences in side effect profiles.

Indexed as

Antidepressive Agents, Second-GenerationAntidepressive Agents, TricyclicDepressionFluvoxamineHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsAntidepressive Agents, Second-GenerationAntidepressive Agents, TricyclicFluvoxamineSelective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID20238342
PMCPMC4171125
OpenAlexW4210997607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.