Observational studyScientific reports2025
Effectiveness and safety of escitalopram treatment personalized based on therapeutic drug monitoring of drug plasma concentration: a prospective cohort study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05210140 (Utility of Plasma Drug Level Monitoring and CYP2C19 Genotyping in Dose Personalization of Escitalopram), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Utility of Plasma Drug Level Monitoring and CYP2C19 Genotyping in Dose Personalization of Escitalopram
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This is the first prospective study aiming to quantify the effectiveness and safety of escitalopram monotherapy initiation where therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was used to achieve the therapeutic reference range (TRR) of plasma concentration. PsyCise-E (NCT05210140) was a hospital-based study conducted in Belgrade, Serbia, involving 92 outpatients with a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score higher than 13. The primary endpoint was the relative reduction in HAM-D score from baseline to week eight, with dose personalization based on TDM four weeks after treatment initiation. Patients were categorized into groups: (1) unadjusted (they achieved TRR at 10 mg/day), (2) adjusted (their dose was adjusted to achieve TRR) and (3) inadequate (they did not reach TRR). Safety was assessed by the occurrence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and QTc interval prolongation. Most patients required a dose escalation beyond 10 mg/day (71/92), and most patients achieved TRR after eight weeks (79/92). The 55% (95% CI: 47-64) reduction in HAM-D scores did not correlate with escitalopram plasma concentrations and did not differ between groups; however, response and remission rates were significantly higher in patients who achieved TRR by week four. The incidence of ADRs (47/92) increased by 3.2% (0.1-6.3) per ng/ml escitalopram, with no significant differences between the groups. QTc prolongation of 5.5 ms (1.8-9.3) did not correlate with plasma concentration and did not differ between groups. While TDM-guided dosing likely only marginally improved escitalopram effectiveness, it increased treatment safety as TDM-guided dose escalation did not lead to ADRs or QTc prolongation.
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.