Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy , tolerability and acceptability .
Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics , reboxetine and venlafaxine , however , it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram .
BACKGROUND Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode .
Systematic review s have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants .
Citalopram , one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) introduced in the market , is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics , heterocyclics , other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .
Prospective, multicentre, randomized, double-blind study of the efficacy of escitalopram versus citalopram in outpatient treatment of major depressive disorder
Pre- clinical studies , active-control clinical trials and meta-analyses indicate that escitalopram ( S-citalopram ) might be more effective than citalopram , the racemic mixture of S- and R-citalopram . The present study aim ed to confirm the superior efficacy of escitalopram over citalopram . A double-blind , r and omized clinical trial was performed in which general practitioners and psychiatrists compared fixed doses of escitalopram ( 20 mg/day ) with citalopram ( 40 mg/day ) over 8 weeks in out patients with major depressive disorder ( MDD ) [ baseline Montgomery – Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) score ≥30 ] . Primary efficacy parameter was change from baseline to last assessment in the MADRS total score . Out of 138 ( aged 44.1±10.9 years ; initial MADRS score 36.3±4.8 ) and 142 ( aged 46.2±11.1 years ; initial MADRS score 35.7±4.4 ) evaluable patients who were r and omized to escitalopram and citalopram  , respectively , six and 15 withdrew prematurely  ( P=0.05 ) . The MADRS score decreased more in the escitalopram than in the citalopram arm ( –22.4±12.9 versus –20.3±12.7 ; P<0.05 ) . There were more treatment responders with escitalopram ( 76.1 % ) than with citalopram ( 61.3 % , P<0.01 ) . Adjusted remitter rates were 56.1 % and 43.6 % , respectively ( P<0.05 ) . Tolerability was similar in both groups . This r and omized double-blind trial confirms that escitalopram has a superior effect to citalopram in MDD
Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy , tolerability and acceptability .
Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics , reboxetine and venlafaxine , however , it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram .
BACKGROUND Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode .
Systematic review s have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants .
Citalopram , one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) introduced in the market , is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics , heterocyclics , other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .