Conclusion Fluoxetine was not statistically different in either tolerability or efficacy when compared with duloxetine .
Venlafaxine was significantly superior to duloxetine in all analyses except dropout rate .
In the absence of relevant data from head-to-head comparison trials , results suggest that venlafaxine is superior compared with duloxetine and that duloxetine does not differentiate from fluoxetine
Background Data comparing duloxetine with existing antidepressant treatments is limited .
A comparison of duloxetine with fluoxetine has been performed but no comparison with venlafaxine , the other antidepressant in the same therapeutic class with a significant market share , has been undertaken .
In the absence of relevant data to assess the place that duloxetine should occupy in the therapeutic arsenal , indirect comparisons are the most rigorous way to go .
We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy of duloxetine , fluoxetine and venlafaxine versus placebo in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder ( MDD ) , and performed indirect comparisons through meta-regressions .
Comparison of venlafaxine and imipramine in the acute treatment of major depression in outpatients.
BACKGROUND Venlafaxine is a new phenylethylamine antidepressant that exhibits monoamine reuptake inhibition . The current study evaluates the efficacy of venlafaxine compared to that of imipramine in out patients suffering from major depression of moderate-to-marked severity . METHOD We conducted a double-blind , placebo-controlled , 6-week treatment study of 224 out patients who met DSM-III-R criteria for major depression , and who had a score of at least 20 on the 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( HAM-D ) .  Dosage was flexible and administered on a three-times-a-day schedule , with a mean maximum daily dose of 182 mg for venlafaxine and 176 mg for imipramine . RESULTS For patients completing 6 weeks of treatment with venlafaxine , the HAM-D total score improved by 16.6 + /- 4.9 points . Improvement at 6 weeks was 13.6 + /- 6.3 points for patients treated with imipramine and 10.6 + /- 7.8 points for patients treated with placebo ( p < .05 for active drug vs. placebo ) . Ninety percent of venlafaxine completers were rated as " much " or " very much " improved on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale , compared to 79 % treated with imipramine and 53 % treated with placebo ( p < .05 ) . An endpoint analysis , where the last scores of patients who dropped out were carried forward to subsequent visits , showed significant efficacy only for venlafaxine and not imipramine , probably because of the higher attrition for the latter drug . Overall , both venlafaxine and imipramine were well-tolerated , with venlafaxine having a somewhat lower attrition rate due to adverse effects than imipramine ( 16 % vs. 25 % ) . CONCLUSION These results , together with those of previously reported studies , suggest that venlafaxine has antidepressant efficacy comparable to that provided by available antidepressants
Conclusion Fluoxetine was not statistically different in either tolerability or efficacy when compared with duloxetine .
Venlafaxine was significantly superior to duloxetine in all analyses except dropout rate .
In the absence of relevant data from head-to-head comparison trials , results suggest that venlafaxine is superior compared with duloxetine and that duloxetine does not differentiate from fluoxetine
Background Data comparing duloxetine with existing antidepressant treatments is limited .
A comparison of duloxetine with fluoxetine has been performed but no comparison with venlafaxine , the other antidepressant in the same therapeutic class with a significant market share , has been undertaken .
In the absence of relevant data to assess the place that duloxetine should occupy in the therapeutic arsenal , indirect comparisons are the most rigorous way to go .
We conducted a systematic review of the efficacy of duloxetine , fluoxetine and venlafaxine versus placebo in the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder ( MDD ) , and performed indirect comparisons through meta-regressions .