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 .
Citalopram versus fluoxetine: a double‐blind, controlled, multicentre, phase III trial in patients with unipolar major depression treated in general practice
& NA ; Two selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) , citalopram and fluoxetine , both at a daily dose of 20 mg , were compared in patients with unipolar major depression treated in general practice . This was a multicentre , double‐blind , r and omized trial carried out in France . The duration of treatment was 8 weeks . Patients were assessed by means of the Montgomery‐Åsberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) , the 17 items Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAMD ) and the investigator 's Clinical Global Impressions ( CGI ) . Observed and spontaneously reported adverse events were also recorded . A total of 357 patients of both sexes , aged between 21 and 73 years , entered the double‐blind phase of the trial . A clear reduction of both the MADRS and the HAMD mean total scores was observed in both treatment groups with no statistically significant differences between treatments . Apart from back pain recorded more frequently in the citalopram group , no significant difference was found between the two treatment groups with regard to adverse events , and both citalopram and fluoxetine were considered to be well tolerated . It was concluded that citalopram was as effective as fluoxetine in the treatment of unipolar major depression . Citalopram showed an earlier onset of recovery than fluoxetine
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 .